WHICH IS THE RIGHT SARAH PALIN BOOK FOR XMAS ?
Kill all Bank Executives
I paged through both of them today in a store and I couldn't tell
which was the real one or the parody ...
Ivan Skavinsky Skavar
Kill all Bank Executives <ban...@whore.org> wrote:
> I paged through both of them today in a store and I couldn't tell
> which was the real one or the parody ...
Are you bragging?
Grumpy AuContraire
heh! More like rambling... Aimlessly!
A lot of strange creatures are residing under the rocks of these groups.
JT
Mike Smith
No, he's just another stupid liar. Neither book is in any store, yet.
And the libtards MUST denigrate Palin every chance they get.
If the libtards do not denigrate and ridicule her, she will be our
next President in a HUGE landslide.
Mike Smith
t
"Mike Smith" <m...@wt.net> wrote in message
news:oe78e59s6pppr3otd...@4ax.com...
funny, in an idiotic sort of way.
Alaskan Beaver Hunter
>> No, he's just another stupid liar. Neither book is in any store, yet.
>>
Are you stalking stores looking for fresh copies just so
you can mastabate to them ? Your copy of her on
Time Magazine cover must be pretty worn out by now.
>> If the libtards do not denigrate and ridicule her,
>>
We don't have to do anything other than hand her a microphone
for an interview .. LOL . oh Gosh .Golly . McFailin ... The quitter that
keeps giving .. to the Democrats ! Mikey is her sole supporter
around here and likely runs the Sarah McQuitter and Moose Killing Fan
Club ... Right Mikey ?
> You ARE funny, in an idiotic sort of way.
>
With GOPers like McFailin and Mikey .. Barry and Friends will be
around through 2024 ... Joe in 2016 !
Go McQuitter ... Run .. Run in 2012 ! Barry will need all the nut
cases he can get for re-election !
Ivan Skavinsky Skavar
Grumpy AuContraire <Grum...@GrumpyvilleNOT.com> wrote:
Palin seems to infuriate these people, but then again, who cares?
Ivan Skavinsky Skavar
Mike Smith <m...@wt.net> wrote:
> On Sat, 24 Oct 2009 21:18:09 -0500, Ivan Skavinsky Skavar
> <Iv...@borscht.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <4ae3b3e0$0$23760$bbae...@news.suddenlink.net>,
> > Kill all Bank Executives <ban...@whore.org> wrote:
> >
> >> I paged through both of them today in a store and I couldn't tell
> >> which was the real one or the parody ...
> >
> >Are you bragging?
>
> No, he's just another stupid liar. Neither book is in any store, yet.
Whoops.
> And the libtards MUST denigrate Palin every chance they get.
> If the libtards do not denigrate and ridicule her, she will be our
> next President in a HUGE landslide.
She brings out the frightened haters who fear strong women.
Mother issues most likely, or the inability to attract a woman. Maybe
repressed homosexuality, since many of them are deeply in love with
Obama.
Ivan Skavinsky Skavar
"t" <too...@gmail.com> wrote:
People who use the term HEEHEE are complete losses.
Aratzio
Skavinsky Skavar <Iv...@borscht.com> got double secret probation for
writing:
Maybe it is the morons that get infuriated because we elites make fun
of their milf for being a moron, just like them.
Aratzio
>She brings out the frightened haters who fear strong women.
She brings out people who laugh at whiney quitters.
PALIN/BACHMANN 2012
Aratzio
>People who use the term HEEHEE are complete losses.
Losses of what?
Because someone used a word whose context you failed to understand
(laughter & humor) that it makes them a "losses". I'll bet you don't
even get the irony of comparing your previous idiocy about haw Palin
"infuriates" and that post that is just another ad hominem.
Ivan Skavinsky Skavar
Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
I find the laughter tinged with a certain nervousness. Most "elites" are
terribly insecure.
Al
Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
Who are in turn mocked for their unusual focus.
Fiftycal
<ban...@whore.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> I paged through both of them today in a store and I couldn't tell
> which was the real one or the parody ...
Really? Gee, are you a mind reader? Sarah's book, NUMERO UNO in
terms of PRE-PRINTING SALES, won't even be out until NOVEMBER 17. Now
get someone to interpret the calender for you and explain the concept
of TIME and you will learn that Nov. 17 is iN THE FUTURE.
Dumb ass.
Aratzio
Smith <m...@wt.net> got double secret probation for writing:
>On Sat, 24 Oct 2009 21:18:09 -0500, Ivan Skavinsky Skavar
><Iv...@borscht.com> wrote:
>
>>In article <4ae3b3e0$0$23760$bbae...@news.suddenlink.net>,
>> Kill all Bank Executives <ban...@whore.org> wrote:
>>
>>> I paged through both of them today in a store and I couldn't tell
>>> which was the real one or the parody ...
>>
>>Are you bragging?
>
>No, he's just another stupid liar. Neither book is in any store, yet.
The irony of getting trolled on USENET and then claiming the person
who trolled you is "stupid".
>
>And the libtards MUST denigrate Palin every chance they get.
Actually, it is pretty much anyone with an IQ above a Rice Crispy that
laughs and points at the Queen Moron of Alaska. That she earns her
denigration by proving just how stupid she is on a weekly basis is
just gravy.
>If the libtards do not denigrate and ridicule her, she will be our
>next President in a HUGE landslide.
PLEASE Dear FSM have her run. She needs a good running mate, I propose
Michelle Bachmann. We deserve to see them run together and watch the
Wingnutz melt down even further as they try to explain why the USA
refuses to elect another Wingnutz moron.
2012 Wingnutz Whines When They Lose, again:
1. It is a commie/socialist/facist/sexist plot
2. Acorn bought the election with their 53 million they squirreled
away over the last 15 years.
3. They want the troops to fail because not getting them killed is
failure.
4. WAAAA THEY WERE MEAN TO US!!!!
5. Orly Taitz has found the real birth certificate!
>
>Mike Smith - Palin Makes Me Horny
Really, dude, TMI.
Aratzio
>In article <qcq8e5ltef44115cf...@4ax.com>,
> Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 09:48:01 -0500, in the land of news.groups, Ivan
>> Skavinsky Skavar <Iv...@borscht.com> got double secret probation for
>> writing:
>>
>> >In article <AoSdnZkGraloIn7X...@giganews.com>,
>> > Grumpy AuContraire <Grum...@GrumpyvilleNOT.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Ivan Skavinsky Skavar wrote:
>> >> > In article <4ae3b3e0$0$23760$bbae...@news.suddenlink.net>,
>> >> > Kill all Bank Executives <ban...@whore.org> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> I paged through both of them today in a store and I couldn't tell
>> >> >> which was the real one or the parody ...
>> >> >
>> >> > Are you bragging?
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> heh! More like rambling... Aimlessly!
>> >>
>> >> A lot of strange creatures are residing under the rocks of these groups.
>> >
>> >
>> >Palin seems to infuriate these people, but then again, who cares?
>>
>> Maybe it is the morons that get infuriated because we elites make fun
>> of their milf for being a moron, just like them.
>
>I find the laughter tinged with a certain nervousness. Most "elites" are
>terribly insecure.
Amazing and highly insular world in which you live. The rose tinting
must be such a solace.
Laughing at someone who quits because if they didn't have the strength
to quit then they would be a quitter is hardly eliteism, you irony
challenged wingnutz.
Aratzio
Fiftycal <n...@abcnnbcbs.com> got double secret probation for writing:
Does getting upset and obvious troll make the troll or the trollee the
dumbass?
Ivan Skavinsky Skavar
Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
It was a tiapo, but HEEHEE is closely associated with pre-pubescent
girls and nervous laughter.
Ivan Skavinsky Skavar
Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
The elites always know where you live.
> Laughing at someone who quits because if they didn't have the strength
> to quit then they would be a quitter is hardly eliteism, you irony
> challenged wingnutz.
Quitting a small-time job to take on a job with greater opportunity and
pay is such a sign of weakness, eh?
Ivan Skavinsky Skavar
Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
Please use English.
George Kerby
On 10/25/09 9:50 AM, in article
Ivan-5A1EFE.0...@news-wc.giganews.com, "Ivan Skavinsky Skavar"
<Iv...@borscht.com> wrote:
> In article <DbydnZ4NZ-7Rz3nX...@giganews.com>,
> "t" <too...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> "Mike Smith" <m...@wt.net> wrote in message
>> news:oe78e59s6pppr3otd...@4ax.com...
>>> On Sat, 24 Oct 2009 21:18:09 -0500, Ivan Skavinsky Skavar
>>> <Iv...@borscht.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In article <4ae3b3e0$0$23760$bbae...@news.suddenlink.net>,
>>>> Kill all Bank Executives <ban...@whore.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I paged through both of them today in a store and I couldn't tell
>>>>> which was the real one or the parody ...
>>>>
>>>> Are you bragging?
>>>
>>> No, he's just another stupid liar. Neither book is in any store, yet.
>>>
>>> And the libtards MUST denigrate Palin every chance they get.
>>> If the libtards do not denigrate and ridicule her, she will be our
>>> next President in a HUGE landslide.
>>>
>> BWAHAHAHA!!!! HEEHEE!! DAMN! Mike you owe me a new keyboard. But, You ARE
>> funny, in an idiotic sort of way.
>
> People who use the term HEEHEE are complete losses.
Well, at least he figured how to write something before he hit 'send' this
time. We must encourage any small steps that Hawkeye completes...
George Kerby
On 10/25/09 10:49 AM, in article
Ivan-C57DAB.1...@news-wc.giganews.com, "Ivan Skavinsky Skavar"
<Iv...@borscht.com> wrote:
Why? No one else does...
Aratzio
<albert.f...@gmail.com> got double secret probation for writing:
What focus do you believe you see? Feel free to take as much white
space as needed to elaborate on your hilarious thesis that laughing at
quitters is "unusual".
Your thesis goes here:
Your ad hominem as you run away from your own words goes here:
Aratzio
>In article <0pq8e55mc29skkf61...@4ax.com>,
> Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 09:50:54 -0500, in the land of news.groups, Ivan
>> Skavinsky Skavar <Iv...@borscht.com> got double secret probation for
>> writing:
>>
>> >People who use the term HEEHEE are complete losses.
>>
>> Losses of what?
>>
>> Because someone used a word whose context you failed to understand
>> (laughter & humor) that it makes them a "losses". I'll bet you don't
>> even get the irony of comparing your previous idiocy about haw Palin
>> "infuriates" and that post that is just another ad hominem.
>
>It was a tiapo, but HEEHEE is closely associated with pre-pubescent
>girls and nervous laughter.
Do you spend a lot of mental effort creating nonsensical ad hominem
comparing perfectly normal USENET conversational methods with the
nervous laughter of pre-pubescent girls?
Here is the hint: You are claiming that a word on a screen reminds you
of the sounds of nervous pre-pubescent girls. People can draw their
own conclusions about where your mind resides.
Kill all Bank Executives
>>> get someone to interpret the calender for you and explain the concept
>>> of TIME and you will learn that Nov. 17 is iN THE FUTURE.
>>>
>>> Dumb ass.
>> Does getting upset and obvious troll make the troll or the trollee the
>> dumbass?
>
> Please use English.
Let me try:
Does being made a fool by a poster who obviously baited you into
showing your stupidity make *you* , "the trollee", a dumbass ?
Answer: You bet-ga ! Golly Gosh.
Bridge to nowhere
> The irony of getting trolled on USENET and then claiming the person
> who trolled you is "stupid".
>
Priceless.
Aratzio
Well, yes, we elites have ID that has our addresses so we, unlike you,
can always find our homes. Of course we still have our homes.
>
>> Laughing at someone who quits because if they didn't have the strength
>> to quit then they would be a quitter is hardly eliteism, you irony
>> challenged wingnutz.
>
>Quitting a small-time job to take on a job with greater opportunity and
>pay is such a sign of weakness, eh?
So you are saying she is a liar, since that was not the reason she
gave for quitting. She quit because she could not handle the media
scrutiny of her constant moronity. Now she hides on Facebook and none
of the Republicans running in the highest profile elections this cycle
want her to campaign for them.
But it is good you realize she is a small timer without the experience
or knowledge to actually play on a larger stage with any hope of
actual credibility.
PALIN/BACHMANN 2012 - Let Stupid and Insane Lead The Way!
Aratzio
Skavinsky Skavar <Iv...@borscht.com> got double secret probation for
writing:
>In article <7vr8e5td8ue2tqvgk...@4ax.com>,
> Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 10:23:35 -0500, in the land of news.groups,
>> Fiftycal <n...@abcnnbcbs.com> got double secret probation for writing:
>>
>> >On Sat, 24 Oct 2009 21:11:36 -0500, Kill all Bank Executives
>> ><ban...@whore.org> wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> I paged through both of them today in a store and I couldn't tell
>> >> which was the real one or the parody ...
>> >
>> >Really? Gee, are you a mind reader? Sarah's book, NUMERO UNO in
>> >terms of PRE-PRINTING SALES, won't even be out until NOVEMBER 17. Now
>> >get someone to interpret the calender for you and explain the concept
>> >of TIME and you will learn that Nov. 17 is iN THE FUTURE.
>> >
>> >Dumb ass.
>>
>> Does getting upset and obvious troll make the troll or the trollee the
>> dumbass?
>
>Please use English.
Let me fix that for the people too stupid to figure it out for
themselves:
"Does getting upset at an obvious troll make the troll or the trollee
the dumbass?"
Do you feel all better now that your reading deficiency is dealt with?
Going to take a stab at the answer this time rather than obfuscating
and hoping you won't have to answer?
Ivan Skavinsky Skavar
Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 10:21:29 -0500, in the land of alt.aratzio, Al
> <albert.f...@gmail.com> got double secret probation for writing:
>
> >In article <6lq8e5h5odcrgrfbo...@4ax.com>,
> > Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 09:50:13 -0500, in the land of news.groups, Ivan
> >> Skavinsky Skavar <Iv...@borscht.com> got double secret probation for
> >> writing:
> >>
> >> >She brings out the frightened haters who fear strong women.
> >>
> >> She brings out people who laugh at whiney quitters.
> >
> >Who are in turn mocked for their unusual focus.
>
> What focus do you believe you see? Feel free to take as much white
> space as needed to elaborate on your hilarious thesis that laughing at
> quitters is "unusual".
>
> Your thesis goes here:
Many people quit jobs for better jobs, and that the elitist TEEHEE folks
never seem to actually discuss particulars of Palin's political
positions as they giggle.
>
> Your ad hominem as you run away from your own words goes here:
I run from no words, eager little fellow, but as you bemoan the horrors
of ad hominem, consider that it is the entirety of your case against
Palin thus far.
Unless, of course, you consider leaving a job for a more lucrative
endeavour as something unusual in the US.
And for my required ad hominy, perhaps you are so aghast and flummoxed
by upward mobility that Palin's ascension causes you to more acutely
recognize your own weakness in that regard.
Of course, that is conjecture on my part, heehee.
Wankatoa
4ax.com:
> On Sat, 24 Oct 2009 21:18:09 -0500, Ivan Skavinsky Skavar
> <Iv...@borscht.com> wrote:
>
>>In article <4ae3b3e0$0$23760$bbae...@news.suddenlink.net>,
>> Kill all Bank Executives <ban...@whore.org> wrote:
>>
>>> I paged through both of them today in a store and I couldn't tell
>>> which was the real one or the parody ...
>>
>>Are you bragging?
>
> No, he's just another stupid liar. Neither book is in any store, yet.
>
> And the libtards MUST denigrate Palin every chance they get.
> If the libtards do not denigrate and ridicule her, she will be our
> next President in a HUGE landslide.
>
> Mike Smith
>
Liberals are scared to death of her.
A strong, intelligent, well-thought of women who's has children with
liberal problems.
No one would have expected the incredible hatred the liberals exposed
themselves with when they went after her unmarried daughter with a special
needs child.
Disgusting.
But it showed the world what we have to deal with here with our own set of
horrors, the liberal traitor press and media. The Dan Rathers and Al
Frankens of sick comedy.
--
Remember:
A fine is a tax for doing wrong
A tax is a fine for doing well.
Death To all Liberals!
Ivan Skavinsky Skavar
Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 10:38:38 -0500, in the land of alt.aratzio, Ivan
> Skavinsky Skavar <Iv...@borscht.com> got double secret probation for
> writing:
>
> >In article <0pq8e55mc29skkf61...@4ax.com>,
> > Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 09:50:54 -0500, in the land of news.groups, Ivan
> >> Skavinsky Skavar <Iv...@borscht.com> got double secret probation for
> >> writing:
> >>
> >> >People who use the term HEEHEE are complete losses.
> >>
> >> Losses of what?
> >>
> >> Because someone used a word whose context you failed to understand
> >> (laughter & humor) that it makes them a "losses". I'll bet you don't
> >> even get the irony of comparing your previous idiocy about haw Palin
> >> "infuriates" and that post that is just another ad hominem.
> >
> >It was a tiapo, but HEEHEE is closely associated with pre-pubescent
> >girls and nervous laughter.
>
> Do you spend a lot of mental effort creating nonsensical ad hominem
> comparing perfectly normal USENET conversational methods with the
> nervous laughter of pre-pubescent girls?
Just an opinion, so not much effort required - but in my experience, the
"perfectly normal" methods of "giggle", "tee-hee" or your preferred
"heehee" reflect a certain youthful and/or feminine utterance, employed
primarily by those with little to say, what some call "boneheads".
> Here is the hint: You are claiming that a word on a screen reminds you
> of the sounds of nervous pre-pubescent girls. People can draw their
> own conclusions about where your mind resides.
Well, I have raised two girls and a boy. All used the internet in their
ute, but only the girls used "giggle" or any variant of "tee-hee" in
their IM's and the like. It's a girl thing.
So it is that experience, and not your suggestion that I am a pedophile,
that has me burdened with this POV.
Aratzio
I've made no case other than she is a moron. So what other case are
you seeing?
Hint: Her statement when she quit said NOTHING about taking another
job. It was a long inchoate whine about how people were being mean to
her and she had to quit so she could show they didn't make her quit.
So either you are calling her a liar and she isn't or she is a liar
and you are wrong.
Or you are just inventing ego soothing beliefs because you cannot
reconcile that Palin is a quitter and has quit every job in her life
when the job actually required her to perform.
>
>Unless, of course, you consider leaving a job for a more lucrative
>endeavour as something unusual in the US.
I consider her past and current public incarnations hilarious and hope
that she believes people like you and people like you send her more
money so she can continue to entertain me with her idiotic maundering.
>
>And for my required ad hominy, perhaps you are so aghast and flummoxed
>by upward mobility that Palin's ascension causes you to more acutely
>recognize your own weakness in that regard.
Um, cupcake,does projecting what you fear work for you in real life?
>
>Of course, that is conjecture on my part, heehee.
No, just delusion.
Aratzio
<Wan...@anonmail.com> got double secret probation for writing:
>Mike Smith <m...@wt.net> scribblednews:oe78e59s6pppr3otdorlor7qai1doi1h6s@
>4ax.com:
>
>> On Sat, 24 Oct 2009 21:18:09 -0500, Ivan Skavinsky Skavar
>> <Iv...@borscht.com> wrote:
>>
>>>In article <4ae3b3e0$0$23760$bbae...@news.suddenlink.net>,
>>> Kill all Bank Executives <ban...@whore.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I paged through both of them today in a store and I couldn't tell
>>>> which was the real one or the parody ...
>>>
>>>Are you bragging?
>>
>> No, he's just another stupid liar. Neither book is in any store, yet.
>>
>> And the libtards MUST denigrate Palin every chance they get.
>> If the libtards do not denigrate and ridicule her, she will be our
>> next President in a HUGE landslide.
>>
>> Mike Smith
>>
>
>
>Liberals are scared to death of her.
Really, got anything but hopes to support that? Unless you can
convince me that people laughing at her idiocy is in actuality fear of
her idiocy.
I'll give you an opportunity to support your beliefs with actual
empirical evidence and not just more mouth breathing talking points:
(Hint: empirical evidence goes here)
>
>A strong, intelligent, well-thought of women who's has children with
>liberal problems.
WOW, delusional too.
>
>No one would have expected the incredible hatred the liberals exposed
>themselves with when they went after her unmarried daughter with a special
>needs child.
Like Andrew Sullivan?
>
>Disgusting.
Yes, her hypocrisy on subjects like abstinance are more than a little
disgusting. And then to have her daughter and illigitimate baby on
tour promoting abstinance was even more disgusting hypocrisy.
>
>But it showed the world what we have to deal with here with our own set of
>horrors, the liberal traitor press and media. The Dan Rathers and Al
>Frankens of sick comedy.
PALIN/BACHMANN 2012 - Strong Women To Set Back Women's Equality!
Ivan Skavinsky Skavar
Kill all Bank Executives <ban...@whore.org> wrote:
Let me try as well. I was not the responder who pointed out that the
books had not been released yet. But I do agree that the books have not
been shipped
If indeed this as a "troll", it was ironic in a way that may have not
occurred to you until this moment, that the statement is an actual
accurate assessment of the intellectual limitations of the leftist - the
inability to differentiate between reality and fantasy.
You know, the type who actually believe "Hope" and "Change" are not only
tangible policy prescriptions, but inherently "good things" in and of
themselves.
In that context, it was the best backfiring troll of the week.
Ivan Skavinsky Skavar
George Kerby <ghost_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
I use it at home only. In public, I try and fit in and assimilate.
Aratzio
My preferred? Really, where did you come up with that? That I
recognize something as not even slightly unusual fails that test. As
for your definition that says much more about you and your thought
process that you could take something so mundane and ascribe it such a
detailed and personal definition.
>
>> Here is the hint: You are claiming that a word on a screen reminds you
>> of the sounds of nervous pre-pubescent girls. People can draw their
>> own conclusions about where your mind resides.
>
>Well, I have raised two girls and a boy. All used the internet in their
>ute, but only the girls used "giggle" or any variant of "tee-hee" in
>their IM's and the like. It's a girl thing.
So you are a complete noob to USENET and don't have any clue as to the
methods of describing emotive content and as such ascribe negative
connotation to decades of online culture via your own parochial and
limited thought process.
So I was right when I said you failed to understand the context.
>
>So it is that experience, and not your suggestion that I am a pedophile,
>that has me burdened with this POV.
Where did I suggest you were a pedophile, that you immediately go to
that does however ascribe certain beliefs. I was ascribing that you
have a mind stuck in pre-pubescense since that was what you were
claiming to know.
Ivan Skavinsky Skavar
Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
With rose-tinted windows, no doubt, and little needle point quotes
hanging on the wall, like "Nutrition Is No A Private Matter"!
> >> Laughing at someone who quits because if they didn't have the strength
> >> to quit then they would be a quitter is hardly eliteism, you irony
> >> challenged wingnutz.
> >
> >Quitting a small-time job to take on a job with greater opportunity and
> >pay is such a sign of weakness, eh?
>
> So you are saying she is a liar, since that was not the reason she
> gave for quitting. She quit because she could not handle the media
> scrutiny of her constant moronity.
I like the way you guys rewrite so well. You make it all sound so...
real!
> Now she hides on Facebook and none
> of the Republicans running in the highest profile elections this cycle
> want her to campaign for them.
Ah! Hides on Facebook, in a best-seller, in op-ed's in national
newspapers - but no matter how much she tries to hide, even her facebook
writings get instant national attention!
And the politicians ho hide from her endorsements, like Doug Hoffman,
get instant financial reward and a bump in the polls. No wonder they
hide!
> But it is good you realize she is a small timer without the experience
> or knowledge to actually play on a larger stage with any hope of
> actual credibility.
But that's what we just elected. Zero management experience, and it's
becoming obvious.
Ivan Skavinsky Skavar
Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 10:49:45 -0500, in the land of alt.aratzio, Ivan
> Skavinsky Skavar <Iv...@borscht.com> got double secret probation for
> writing:
>
> >In article <7vr8e5td8ue2tqvgk...@4ax.com>,
> > Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 10:23:35 -0500, in the land of news.groups,
> >> Fiftycal <n...@abcnnbcbs.com> got double secret probation for writing:
> >>
> >> >On Sat, 24 Oct 2009 21:11:36 -0500, Kill all Bank Executives
> >> ><ban...@whore.org> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> I paged through both of them today in a store and I couldn't tell
> >> >> which was the real one or the parody ...
> >> >
> >> >Really? Gee, are you a mind reader? Sarah's book, NUMERO UNO in
> >> >terms of PRE-PRINTING SALES, won't even be out until NOVEMBER 17. Now
> >> >get someone to interpret the calender for you and explain the concept
> >> >of TIME and you will learn that Nov. 17 is iN THE FUTURE.
> >> >
> >> >Dumb ass.
> >>
> >> Does getting upset and obvious troll make the troll or the trollee the
> >> dumbass?
> >
> >Please use English.
>
>
> Let me fix that for the people too stupid to figure it out for
> themselves:
> "Does getting upset at an obvious troll make the troll or the trollee
> the dumbass?"
I think it actually makes you the dumbasss.
Ivan Skavinsky Skavar
Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
None, so that leads me to believe you are a moron.
> Hint: Her statement when she quit said NOTHING about taking another
> job. It was a long inchoate whine about how people were being mean to
> her and she had to quit so she could show they didn't make her quit.
>
> So either you are calling her a liar and she isn't or she is a liar
> and you are wrong.
>
> Or you are just inventing ego soothing beliefs because you cannot
> reconcile that Palin is a quitter and has quit every job in her life
> when the job actually required her to perform.
That's silly.
Her speech was part ode to Alaska, a listing of accomplishments.
Then an explanation of the effects of the overwhelming media attention
on her abilities to do her job effectively and what it was costing the
state.
Then explanation that her new position in American politics was
incompatible with the job of state governance:
"So I choose, for my State and my family, more "freedom" to progres..."
You know what "progress" means, right? It means forward movement, and
she explained that she was moving on to bigger things.
In truth, it's you *whining* about her speech, in which she *explained*
the rationale behind her decision.
> >Unless, of course, you consider leaving a job for a more lucrative
> >endeavour as something unusual in the US.
>
> I consider her past and current public incarnations hilarious and hope
> that she believes people like you and people like you send her more
> money so she can continue to entertain me with her idiotic maundering.
We'll do that, just for you.
> >And for my required ad hominy, perhaps you are so aghast and flummoxed
> >by upward mobility that Palin's ascension causes you to more acutely
> >recognize your own weakness in that regard.
>
> Um, cupcake,does projecting what you fear work for you in real life?
Are you trying to sound smart?
=
> >
> >Of course, that is conjecture on my part, heehee.
>
> No, just delusion.
No, i explain you, and your whines, which are actually just verbatim
repeats of leftistdogma.
They really don't know what to make of her.
Ivan Skavinsky Skavar
Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 11:36:41 -0500, in the land of alt.aratzio, Ivan
> Skavinsky Skavar <Iv...@borscht.com> got double secret probation for
> >Just an opinion, so not much effort required - but in my experience, the
> >"perfectly normal" methods of "giggle", "tee-hee" or your preferred
> >"heehee" reflect a certain youthful and/or feminine utterance, employed
> >primarily by those with little to say, what some call "boneheads".
>
> My preferred? Really, where did you come up with that?
Your use.
> That I
> recognize something as not even slightly unusual fails that test. As
> for your definition that says much more about you and your thought
> process that you could take something so mundane and ascribe it such a
> detailed and personal definition.
Get used to it, language is full of unintended revelations.
> >> Here is the hint: You are claiming that a word on a screen reminds you
> >> of the sounds of nervous pre-pubescent girls. People can draw their
> >> own conclusions about where your mind resides.
> >
> >Well, I have raised two girls and a boy. All used the internet in their
> >ute, but only the girls used "giggle" or any variant of "tee-hee" in
> >their IM's and the like. It's a girl thing.
>
> So you are a complete noob to USENET and don't have any clue as to the
> methods of describing emotive content and as such ascribe negative
> connotation to decades of online culture via your own parochial and
> limited thought process.
heeheee is girl talk on usenet or any net. Now you know.
>
> So I was right when I said you failed to understand the context.
Now you're twice wrong.
> >So it is that experience, and not your suggestion that I am a pedophile,
> >that has me burdened with this POV.
>
> Where did I suggest you were a pedophile, that you immediately go to
> that does however ascribe certain beliefs. I was ascribing that you
> have a mind stuck in pre-pubescense since that was what you were
> claiming to know.
Perhaps you aren't as good a writer as you have imagined, or perhaps
you're just being coy.
George Kerby
On 10/25/09 11:27 AM, in article Xns9CAF6A7...@69.16.186.50,
"Wankatoa" <Wan...@anonmail.com> wrote:
> Mike Smith <m...@wt.net> scribblednews:oe78e59s6pppr3otdorlor7qai1doi1h6s@
> 4ax.com:
>
>> On Sat, 24 Oct 2009 21:18:09 -0500, Ivan Skavinsky Skavar
>> <Iv...@borscht.com> wrote:
>>
>>> In article <4ae3b3e0$0$23760$bbae...@news.suddenlink.net>,
>>> Kill all Bank Executives <ban...@whore.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I paged through both of them today in a store and I couldn't tell
>>>> which was the real one or the parody ...
>>>
>>> Are you bragging?
>>
>> No, he's just another stupid liar. Neither book is in any store, yet.
>>
>> And the libtards MUST denigrate Palin every chance they get.
>> If the libtards do not denigrate and ridicule her, she will be our
>> next President in a HUGE landslide.
>>
>> Mike Smith
>>
>
>
> Liberals are scared to death of her.
>
> A strong, intelligent, well-thought of women who's has children with
> liberal problems.
>
> No one would have expected the incredible hatred the liberals exposed
> themselves with when they went after her unmarried daughter with a special
> needs child.
>
> Disgusting.
>
"Hypocrite": Another name for today's Liberal.
Aratzio
Wow, your originality is incredible "The rose tinting must be such a
solace." didn't impinge upon you in any way, did it.
In your deficient imagination you can see the hangings on my wall. All
hand made and political in their nature. You have come up with this
fully formed view from the fact I think Palin is a moron and that I
laugh at people who think she is something other than a grifter
politician out only for herself.
So, what am I wearing in this fevered imagination of yours?
>
>> >> Laughing at someone who quits because if they didn't have the strength
>> >> to quit then they would be a quitter is hardly eliteism, you irony
>> >> challenged wingnutz.
>> >
>> >Quitting a small-time job to take on a job with greater opportunity and
>> >pay is such a sign of weakness, eh?
>>
>> So you are saying she is a liar, since that was not the reason she
>> gave for quitting. She quit because she could not handle the media
>> scrutiny of her constant moronity.
>
>I like the way you guys rewrite so well. You make it all sound so...
>real!
I note that you cannot come up with a single quote that supports your
position. Go ahead demonstrate the veracity of your claim, you made
the claim now show your evidence that your claim she quit to "take on
a job with greater opportunity".
We will ignore the fact she was touted as having major league
experience because she was a Governor and in your opinion was working
in the small-times.
>
>> Now she hides on Facebook and none
>> of the Republicans running in the highest profile elections this cycle
>> want her to campaign for them.
>
>Ah! Hides on Facebook, in a best-seller, in op-ed's in national
>newspapers - but no matter how much she tries to hide, even her facebook
>writings get instant national attention!
A best seller she did not write and is being given away free all over
the interwebs. Op-Eds that are rightly derided as being fact free
maundering of a half-wit.
>
>And the politicians ho hide from her endorsements, like Doug Hoffman,
>get instant financial reward and a bump in the polls. No wonder they
>hide!
Has she campaigned for anyone? I didn't say even one word about
endorsement. Politicians have no control over which idiots endorse
them, they only control the politicians that campaign for them.
BTW: Hoffman is not running as a Republican, so how does that non
sequitur of yours address what I wrote?
>
>> But it is good you realize she is a small timer without the experience
>> or knowledge to actually play on a larger stage with any hope of
>> actual credibility.
>
>But that's what we just elected. Zero management experience, and it's
>becoming obvious.
*SNORT*
Ah, the 'I can't address your substantive point on Palin's
"small-time" experience and will play the "It is Obama's fault"' card.
Way to defend your hero Palin.
So make your case, what are the "Palin Policies" that you feel would
be superior to the current administrations supported with actual
evidence that the policies espoused are actual:
Aratzio
Ah, the wingnutz favorite retort:
"I know you are but what am I"
Quite the level of intelligence that is required to miss obvious
trolls, whine about the obvious troll and then pretend that you were
actually smarter that the person that is laughing at you for being
trolled.
Aratzio
>In article <p409e5to9k01hbtve...@4ax.com>,
> Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 11:36:41 -0500, in the land of alt.aratzio, Ivan
>> Skavinsky Skavar <Iv...@borscht.com> got double secret probation for
>
>> >Just an opinion, so not much effort required - but in my experience, the
>> >"perfectly normal" methods of "giggle", "tee-hee" or your preferred
>> >"heehee" reflect a certain youthful and/or feminine utterance, employed
>> >primarily by those with little to say, what some call "boneheads".
>>
>> My preferred? Really, where did you come up with that?
>
>Your use.
I note you snipped all the previous conversation so that you could lie
in support of your lie.
Now, where did I state a preference:
>
>> That I
>> recognize something as not even slightly unusual fails that test. As
>> for your definition that says much more about you and your thought
>> process that you could take something so mundane and ascribe it such a
>> detailed and personal definition.
>
>Get used to it, language is full of unintended revelations.
Really, you think I am not acquainted with wingnutz writing idiocy in
the face of mundane facts? Seriously, you think you are the first
palinbot wingnut to spew "the stupid" on USENET?
>
>
>> >> Here is the hint: You are claiming that a word on a screen reminds you
>> >> of the sounds of nervous pre-pubescent girls. People can draw their
>> >> own conclusions about where your mind resides.
>> >
>> >Well, I have raised two girls and a boy. All used the internet in their
>> >ute, but only the girls used "giggle" or any variant of "tee-hee" in
>> >their IM's and the like. It's a girl thing.
>>
>> So you are a complete noob to USENET and don't have any clue as to the
>> methods of describing emotive content and as such ascribe negative
>> connotation to decades of online culture via your own parochial and
>> limited thought process.
>
>heeheee is girl talk on usenet or any net. Now you know.
So you are a hypocrite incapable of defending his own position. Not
that I am surprised by that either.
So now that the facts are in play, does your initial reaction to a
standard term/phrase seem like less than intelligent within the global
context of USENET?
>
>>
>> So I was right when I said you failed to understand the context.
>
>Now you're twice wrong.
Yet you have failed at every opportunity to demonstrate that your
initial reaction was anything other than the knee jerk reaction of
someone wholly ignorant of USENET and that the declaration was just an
ad hominem in place of factual argument.
Bridge to nowhere
> her unmarried daughter with a special
> needs child.
>
Actually ... McQuitter had the retard. Her underage, teenage daughter
fucked another high school dropout, producing a future Alaskan sled dog
trainer.
> Disgusting.
>
Thank you John McCain for showing us the under belly of Alaskan
political world !
Aratzio
Ah, now we have the proxy "I know you are but what am I".
I keep giving you the opportunity to make your case she is anything
other than a whiny quitter with the IQ of a marble and the best that
you can do is play Pee Wee Herman.
>
>> Hint: Her statement when she quit said NOTHING about taking another
>> job. It was a long inchoate whine about how people were being mean to
>> her and she had to quit so she could show they didn't make her quit.
>>
>> So either you are calling her a liar and she isn't or she is a liar
>> and you are wrong.
>>
>> Or you are just inventing ego soothing beliefs because you cannot
>> reconcile that Palin is a quitter and has quit every job in her life
>> when the job actually required her to perform.
>
>That's silly.
That is fact. Name one job she has not quit. Name one college she did
not quit.
>
>Her speech was part ode to Alaska, a listing of accomplishments.
"I quit" is all of her accomplishment.
>
>Then an explanation of the effects of the overwhelming media attention
>on her abilities to do her job effectively and what it was costing the
>state.
So ethics complaints filed be residents of the State of Alaska are
media driven? Really? You believe that her constant involvement in
ethics complaints BEFORE she was on the national stage is the fault of
the media.
Like Troopergate or the Wasilla Sports Complex?
Wow, how credulous are you?
>
>Then explanation that her new position in American politics was
>incompatible with the job of state governance:
A job she promised to perform when she took the oath of office.
>
>"So I choose, for my State and my family, more "freedom" to progres..."
So because she quit because the job is too hard and there is too much
scutiny.
>
>You know what "progress" means, right? It means forward movement, and
>she explained that she was moving on to bigger things.
She could be dying of cancer and planning on going to heaven. The
satement means absolutely nothing without context to support the
assertion. That you ascribe it greater import than the mouthings of
another grifter politician says little about your critical thinking
skills.
>
>In truth, it's you *whining* about her speech, in which she *explained*
>the rationale behind her decision.
"They are mean to me, I quit" <STOMP>
>
>> >Unless, of course, you consider leaving a job for a more lucrative
>> >endeavour as something unusual in the US.
>>
>> I consider her past and current public incarnations hilarious and hope
>> that she believes people like you and people like you send her more
>> money so she can continue to entertain me with her idiotic maundering.
>
>We'll do that, just for you.
I thank you in advance for the future opportunity to make fun of her,
conservatives, you and all that support her and her ilk.
>
>> >And for my required ad hominy, perhaps you are so aghast and flummoxed
>> >by upward mobility that Palin's ascension causes you to more acutely
>> >recognize your own weakness in that regard.
>>
>> Um, cupcake,does projecting what you fear work for you in real life?
>
>Are you trying to sound smart?
Are you playing stupid, if so, you are winning.
>=
>> >
>> >Of course, that is conjecture on my part, heehee.
>>
>> No, just delusion.
>
>No, i explain you, and your whines, which are actually just verbatim
>repeats of leftistdogma.
I called Shrub a moron based upon his history as the owner of the
Rangers. I was right then too.
>
>They really don't know what to make of her.
Yes, we do. She is a moron and we support her desire to ruin the
republican party and entertain us while she does it. I thought that
was quite obvious.
PALIN/BACHMANN 2012 - When One Lunatic Is Not Enough!
Al
Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
It worked for Obama.
> So, what am I wearing in this fevered imagination of yours?
A sneer?
> >
> >> >> Laughing at someone who quits because if they didn't have the strength
> >> >> to quit then they would be a quitter is hardly eliteism, you irony
> >> >> challenged wingnutz.
> >> >
> >> >Quitting a small-time job to take on a job with greater opportunity and
> >> >pay is such a sign of weakness, eh?
> >>
> >> So you are saying she is a liar, since that was not the reason she
> >> gave for quitting. She quit because she could not handle the media
> >> scrutiny of her constant moronity.
> >
> >I like the way you guys rewrite so well. You make it all sound so...
> >real!
>
> I note that you cannot come up with a single quote that supports your
> position. Go ahead demonstrate the veracity of your claim, you made
> the claim now show your evidence that your claim she quit to "take on
> a job with greater opportunity".
You're to attuned to sound bites:
"And there is such a need to BUILD up and FIGHT for our state and our
country. I choose to FIGHT for it! And I'll work hard for others who
still believe in free enterprise and smaller government; strong national
security for our country and support for our troops; energy
independence; and for those who will protect freedom and equality and
LIFE... I'll work for and campaign for those PROUD to be American, and
those who are INSPIRED by our ideals and won't deride them"
> We will ignore the fact she was touted as having major league
> experience because she was a Governor and in your opinion was working
> in the small-times.
>
> >
> >> Now she hides on Facebook and none
> >> of the Republicans running in the highest profile elections this cycle
> >> want her to campaign for them.
> >
> >Ah! Hides on Facebook, in a best-seller, in op-ed's in national
> >newspapers - but no matter how much she tries to hide, even her facebook
> >writings get instant national attention!
>
> A best seller she did not write and is being given away free all over
> the interwebs. Op-Eds that are rightly derided as being fact free
> maundering of a half-wit.
The aid of a ghostwriter is common, especially among politicians.
Your contention that the book is being given out free is interesting,
where can I get this free book?
And I'm sure you can find people wh will insist, loudly and often that
the woman is an unimportant half-wit, as was reagan, both Bushes and,
well, all conservatives.
> >And the politicians ho hide from her endorsements, like Doug Hoffman,
> >get instant financial reward and a bump in the polls. No wonder they
> >hide!
>
> Has she campaigned for anyone? I didn't say even one word about
> endorsement. Politicians have no control over which idiots endorse
> them, they only control the politicians that campaign for them.
Maybe you could read a paper.
>
> BTW: Hoffman is not running as a Republican, so how does that non
> sequitur of yours address what I wrote?
As she stated, she would endorse *conservative* candidates, not party
candidates. You might have missed that part too.
> >> But it is good you realize she is a small timer without the experience
> >> or knowledge to actually play on a larger stage with any hope of
> >> actual credibility.
> >
> >But that's what we just elected. Zero management experience, and it's
> >becoming obvious.
>
> *SNORT*
> Ah, the 'I can't address your substantive point on Palin's
> "small-time" experience and will play the "It is Obama's fault"' card.
> Way to defend your hero Palin.
You are denigrating someone for lack of executive experience in
governance, which she has, as well as private-enterprise experience.
Given the rather obvious lack of same on Obama's part, it is relevant.
IOW, lack of experience is not a negative, correct?
> So make your case, what are the "Palin Policies" that you feel would
> be superior to the current administrations supported with actual
> evidence that the policies espoused are actual:
That would be another thread, I'm simply addressing your knee-jerk
sheeplike rhetoric which is uncannily common, with few details other
than "she's a kook and she makes me laugh".
Ivan Skavinsky Skavar
Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
No, the reason you are the dumbass in this scenario is your useless
tenaciousness. I could use a different word if you'd prefer.
> Quite the level of intelligence that is required to miss obvious
> trolls, whine about the obvious troll and then pretend that you were
> actually smarter that the person that is laughing at you for being
> trolled.
One problem with your theory. Leftists can com uo wih such bizarre
cognitive tap dances that *anything* hey come up could be classified as
a "troll".
And there's your defense, you get to tell us all which dumbass statement
is or isn't a troll. You can't lose - or a least that's what you believe.
Ivan Skavinsky Skavar
Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 12:53:42 -0500, in the land of alt.aratzio, Ivan
> Skavinsky Skavar <Iv...@borscht.com> got double secret probation for
> writing:
>
> >In article <p409e5to9k01hbtve...@4ax.com>,
> > Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 11:36:41 -0500, in the land of alt.aratzio, Ivan
> >> Skavinsky Skavar <Iv...@borscht.com> got double secret probation for
> >
> >> >Just an opinion, so not much effort required - but in my experience, the
> >> >"perfectly normal" methods of "giggle", "tee-hee" or your preferred
> >> >"heehee" reflect a certain youthful and/or feminine utterance, employed
> >> >primarily by those with little to say, what some call "boneheads".
> >>
> >> My preferred? Really, where did you come up with that?
> >
> >Your use.
>
> I note you snipped all the previous conversation so that you could lie
> in support of your lie.
>
> Now, where did I state a preference:
One of my flaws is I have a hard time telling sycophantic parrots apart,
and it appears another dimwit preferred heeheee.
The confusion came when you defended, so, you now own it.
> >> That I
> >> recognize something as not even slightly unusual fails that test. As
> >> for your definition that says much more about you and your thought
> >> process that you could take something so mundane and ascribe it such a
> >> detailed and personal definition.
> >
> >Get used to it, language is full of unintended revelations.
>
> Really, you think I am not acquainted with wingnutz writing idiocy in
> the face of mundane facts? Seriously, you think you are the first
> palinbot wingnut to spew "the stupid" on USENET?
I'm not even really defending Palin per say, I'm mocking your crude
leftist schtick.
The subject hardly matters, it's a formula. Someone even wrote a book
about it.
> >> >> Here is the hint: You are claiming that a word on a screen reminds you
> >> >> of the sounds of nervous pre-pubescent girls. People can draw their
> >> >> own conclusions about where your mind resides.
> >> >
> >> >Well, I have raised two girls and a boy. All used the internet in their
> >> >ute, but only the girls used "giggle" or any variant of "tee-hee" in
> >> >their IM's and the like. It's a girl thing.
> >>
> >> So you are a complete noob to USENET and don't have any clue as to the
> >> methods of describing emotive content and as such ascribe negative
> >> connotation to decades of online culture via your own parochial and
> >> limited thought process.
> >
> >heeheee is girl talk on usenet or any net. Now you know.
>
> So you are a hypocrite incapable of defending his own position. Not
> that I am surprised by that either.
I patiently explained my position, how I arrived at my position, and how
it applies to you. That you didn't understand is hardly unexpected.
> So now that the facts are in play, does your initial reaction to a
> standard term/phrase seem like less than intelligent within the global
> context of USENET?
My position is the same as it was 5 years ago, 8 years ago, in this
regard.
You have been unconvincing.
> >>
> >> So I was right when I said you failed to understand the context.
> >
> >Now you're twice wrong.
>
> Yet you have failed at every opportunity to demonstrate that your
> initial reaction was anything other than the knee jerk reaction of
> someone wholly ignorant of USENET and that the declaration was just an
> ad hominem in place of factual argument.
If you completely ignored the content of my posts, that would be so,
which leads me to believe you need much simpler language.
Aratzio
<albert.f...@gmail.com> got double secret probation for writing:
What the fuck are you dribbling on about? Go ahead explain how that
statement has fuck all to do with what was written.
>
>> So, what am I wearing in this fevered imagination of yours?
>
>A sneer?
A smirk.
>
>> >
>> >> >> Laughing at someone who quits because if they didn't have the strength
>> >> >> to quit then they would be a quitter is hardly eliteism, you irony
>> >> >> challenged wingnutz.
>> >> >
>> >> >Quitting a small-time job to take on a job with greater opportunity and
>> >> >pay is such a sign of weakness, eh?
>> >>
>> >> So you are saying she is a liar, since that was not the reason she
>> >> gave for quitting. She quit because she could not handle the media
>> >> scrutiny of her constant moronity.
>> >
>> >I like the way you guys rewrite so well. You make it all sound so...
>> >real!
>>
>> I note that you cannot come up with a single quote that supports your
>> position. Go ahead demonstrate the veracity of your claim, you made
>> the claim now show your evidence that your claim she quit to "take on
>> a job with greater opportunity".
>
>You're to attuned to sound bites:
>
>"And there is such a need to BUILD up and FIGHT for our state and our
>country. I choose to FIGHT for it!
"I fight for my state by quitting my state!"
>And I'll work hard for others who
>still believe in free enterprise and smaller government;
And no Republican wants her help.
>strong national
>security for our country and support for our troops; energy
>independence; and for those who will protect freedom and equality and
>LIFE... I'll work for and campaign for those PROUD to be American, and
>those who are INSPIRED by our ideals and won't deride them"
Wow, that didn't support even part of what he wrote. Mouthing
platitudes is evidence she doesn't have the chops to actually perform
the duties that she took an oath to perform.
Where is the evidence she has taken a "job with greeater opportunity"?
>
>
>> We will ignore the fact she was touted as having major league
>> experience because she was a Governor and in your opinion was working
>> in the small-times.
>>
>> >
>> >> Now she hides on Facebook and none
>> >> of the Republicans running in the highest profile elections this cycle
>> >> want her to campaign for them.
>> >
>> >Ah! Hides on Facebook, in a best-seller, in op-ed's in national
>> >newspapers - but no matter how much she tries to hide, even her facebook
>> >writings get instant national attention!
>>
>> A best seller she did not write and is being given away free all over
>> the interwebs. Op-Eds that are rightly derided as being fact free
>> maundering of a half-wit.
>
>The aid of a ghostwriter is common, especially among politicians.
That wasn't a ghostwriter, do at least learn the terms you are using.
She spoke to a someone that can write and the person that can write
wrote the book.
>
>Your contention that the book is being given out free is interesting,
>where can I get this free book?
http://w3.newsmax.com/a/sarahbook/?promo_code=29F5-1
And it is now down to a whole $9.00 on Amazon and it is not even
released. Quite the best seller, goes on remainder before it is
released.
>
>And I'm sure you can find people wh will insist, loudly and often that
>the woman is an unimportant half-wit, as was reagan, both Bushes and,
>well, all conservatives.
No, I actually thought BushI was a pretty bright guy. Unprincipaled
since he was the one that coined the term "Voodoo Economics" to
describe Ronnie Rayguns abortion of an economic policy. Bush2 is a
moron and I knew that before he was even Governor of Texas. He fucked
up the worst team in baseball. Now that took some serious stupid. I
thought little of Reagan when he was Governor and my opinion went down
from there.
>
>> >And the politicians ho hide from her endorsements, like Doug Hoffman,
>> >get instant financial reward and a bump in the polls. No wonder they
>> >hide!
>>
>> Has she campaigned for anyone? I didn't say even one word about
>> endorsement. Politicians have no control over which idiots endorse
>> them, they only control the politicians that campaign for them.
>
>Maybe you could read a paper.
Maybe you could supply proof she is campaigning in VA, NY or NJ:
As I stated, she is not campaigning and has not been asked to
campaign. They especially do not want her in NJ & VA.
Here this is called evidence:
http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2009/07/new_jersey_gop_gubernatorial_c.html
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/10/15/palin-to-campaign-in-texas/
The only place they want her to campaign is in Republican primaries
like Texas. In otherwords they do not want her anywhere near a general
election.
>>
>> BTW: Hoffman is not running as a Republican, so how does that non
>> sequitur of yours address what I wrote?
>
>As she stated, she would endorse *conservative* candidates, not party
>candidates. You might have missed that part too.
So reading comprehension is not a strength. Would you like to take a
stab at the actual question trather than what you believed it said?
>
>
>> >> But it is good you realize she is a small timer without the experience
>> >> or knowledge to actually play on a larger stage with any hope of
>> >> actual credibility.
>> >
>> >But that's what we just elected. Zero management experience, and it's
>> >becoming obvious.
>>
>> *SNORT*
>> Ah, the 'I can't address your substantive point on Palin's
>> "small-time" experience and will play the "It is Obama's fault"' card.
>> Way to defend your hero Palin.
>
>You are denigrating someone for lack of executive experience in
>governance, which she has, as well as private-enterprise experience.
I didn't call her "small-time", IVAN did. So the repeating of the
denigration was his.
>Given the rather obvious lack of same on Obama's part, it is relevant.
Not when the discussion is about Palin. Obama's skills or experience
have nothing to do with Ivan's statement about her lack of big time
experience.
>
>IOW, lack of experience is not a negative, correct?
With Palin, obviously of major import since she lacks the intellectual
capability to overcome her small-time status.
>
>> So make your case, what are the "Palin Policies" that you feel would
>> be superior to the current administrations supported with actual
>> evidence that the policies espoused are actual:
>
>That would be another thread, I'm simply addressing your knee-jerk
>sheeplike rhetoric which is uncannily common, with few details other
>than "she's a kook and she makes me laugh".
In otherwords you can't state even one "palin policy" let alone one
that would stand up against the current administrations policies.
Aratzio
Yes, that is a classic IKYABWAI.
> the reason you are the dumbass in this scenario is your useless
>tenaciousness. I could use a different word if you'd prefer.
Just what the fuck do you think that word salad means? Are you
complaining about someone is responding to and laughing at your
idiotic posts? Or are you whining that you were too stupid to spot the
obvious troll and are now acting out with a full foot stomping
tantrum?
Maybe if only you could have spotted the irony of your response and
the use of "useless tenaciousness".
>
>
>> Quite the level of intelligence that is required to miss obvious
>> trolls, whine about the obvious troll and then pretend that you were
>> actually smarter that the person that is laughing at you for being
>> trolled.
>
>One problem with your theory. Leftists can com uo wih such bizarre
>cognitive tap dances that *anything* hey come up could be classified as
>a "troll".
Neither book has been released, ergo the post is a troll. Even a
dumbass should have figured out that connection and not responded to
the obvious troll by overstating the obvious.
So are you "smarder den a dunbass"?
>
>And there's your defense, you get to tell us all which dumbass statement
>is or isn't a troll. You can't lose - or a least that's what you believe.
Who was it got all upset that someone posted an obvious troll?
Aratzio
>In article <m979e5t0t35mbbblj...@4ax.com>,
> Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 12:53:42 -0500, in the land of alt.aratzio, Ivan
>> Skavinsky Skavar <Iv...@borscht.com> got double secret probation for
>> writing:
>>
>> >In article <p409e5to9k01hbtve...@4ax.com>,
>> > Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 11:36:41 -0500, in the land of alt.aratzio, Ivan
>> >> Skavinsky Skavar <Iv...@borscht.com> got double secret probation for
>> >
>> >> >Just an opinion, so not much effort required - but in my experience, the
>> >> >"perfectly normal" methods of "giggle", "tee-hee" or your preferred
>> >> >"heehee" reflect a certain youthful and/or feminine utterance, employed
>> >> >primarily by those with little to say, what some call "boneheads".
>> >>
>> >> My preferred? Really, where did you come up with that?
>> >
>> >Your use.
>>
>> I note you snipped all the previous conversation so that you could lie
>> in support of your lie.
>>
>> Now, where did I state a preference:
>
>
>One of my flaws is I have a hard time telling sycophantic parrots apart,
>and it appears another dimwit preferred heeheee.
>
>The confusion came when you defended, so, you now own it.
So you can't read and the fact that it took you at least two posts
after I pointed out the fact for you to figure it out and all that is
somehow my fault.
Really, that is your best defense? It is my fault you were an idiot?
>
>> >> That I
>> >> recognize something as not even slightly unusual fails that test. As
>> >> for your definition that says much more about you and your thought
>> >> process that you could take something so mundane and ascribe it such a
>> >> detailed and personal definition.
>> >
>> >Get used to it, language is full of unintended revelations.
>>
>> Really, you think I am not acquainted with wingnutz writing idiocy in
>> the face of mundane facts? Seriously, you think you are the first
>> palinbot wingnut to spew "the stupid" on USENET?
>
>I'm not even really defending Palin per say, I'm mocking your crude
>leftist schtick.
Leftist schtick, really. Fact based argumentation is now a leftist
schtick. The ability to read and follow a conversation on USENET is a
leftist schtick.
Making fun of wingnutz, priceless.
>
>The subject hardly matters, it's a formula. Someone even wrote a book
>about it.
Niccolo Machiavelli?
So do you even have a clue about the irony of your complaints?
>
>> >> >> Here is the hint: You are claiming that a word on a screen reminds you
>> >> >> of the sounds of nervous pre-pubescent girls. People can draw their
>> >> >> own conclusions about where your mind resides.
>> >> >
>> >> >Well, I have raised two girls and a boy. All used the internet in their
>> >> >ute, but only the girls used "giggle" or any variant of "tee-hee" in
>> >> >their IM's and the like. It's a girl thing.
>> >>
>> >> So you are a complete noob to USENET and don't have any clue as to the
>> >> methods of describing emotive content and as such ascribe negative
>> >> connotation to decades of online culture via your own parochial and
>> >> limited thought process.
>> >
>> >heeheee is girl talk on usenet or any net. Now you know.
>>
>> So you are a hypocrite incapable of defending his own position. Not
>> that I am surprised by that either.
>
>I patiently explained my position, how I arrived at my position, and how
>it applies to you. That you didn't understand is hardly unexpected.
I understand perfectly, you have a very rich, very detailed and wholly
delusional world view.
I rather enjoy reading and laughing at your attempts at justifying
your fantasies.
>
>
>> So now that the facts are in play, does your initial reaction to a
>> standard term/phrase seem like less than intelligent within the global
>> context of USENET?
>
>My position is the same as it was 5 years ago, 8 years ago, in this
>regard.
So, you are claiming that you have been on USENET for more than 5
years and still didn't understand a very simple and basic convention?
Do you actively resist learning anything new?
>
>You have been unconvincing.
I wasn't trying to convince you. I was having fun at your expense.
Again, you fail to grasp the most basic concepts of USENET.
>
>> >>
>> >> So I was right when I said you failed to understand the context.
>> >
>> >Now you're twice wrong.
>>
>> Yet you have failed at every opportunity to demonstrate that your
>> initial reaction was anything other than the knee jerk reaction of
>> someone wholly ignorant of USENET and that the declaration was just an
>> ad hominem in place of factual argument.
>
>If you completely ignored the content of my posts, that would be so,
>which leads me to believe you need much simpler language.
Well, maybe you could use something like "useless tenaciousness" to
describe something and I won't laugh at you, this time.
Feel free to use as complex a set of words, terms and phrases as you
feel you can bring to the conversation.
Al
Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 16:02:44 -0500, in the land of alt.aratzio, Al
> <albert.f...@gmail.com> got double secret probation for writing:
> >It worked for Obama.
>
> What the fuck are you dribbling on about? Go ahead explain how that
> statement has fuck all to do with what was written.
>
> >
> >> So, what am I wearing in this fevered imagination of yours?
> >
> >A sneer?
>
> A smirk.
So very different.
> >> I note that you cannot come up with a single quote that supports your
> >> position. Go ahead demonstrate the veracity of your claim, you made
> >> the claim now show your evidence that your claim she quit to "take on
> >> a job with greater opportunity".
> >
> >You're to attuned to sound bites:
> >
> >"And there is such a need to BUILD up and FIGHT for our state and our
> >country. I choose to FIGHT for it!
>
> "I fight for my state by quitting my state!"
She made sense, why should her new circumstances and the attendant
baggage be borne by the citizens of Alaska?
Her "fight" was no longer for Alaska, circumstances vaulted her to a
different responsibility.
She *could* have stayed on Alaska's payroll, while building her national
political future, but she made the right decision, for Alaska.
> >And I'll work hard for others who
> >still believe in free enterprise and smaller government;
>
> And no Republican wants her help.
You asked for quotes, I give you quotes. having lost that battle, you're
now going to tell me what republicans want.
Your political observations are sophomoric at best, your evasions are
indications that you suffer from symptoms of anatidaephobia
Ivan Skavinsky Skavar
Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
>
> Just what the fuck do you think that word salad means?
That you are an unimaginative writer who clears his throat a lot and
uses terms like "To Be Perfectly Honest", and was regularly paddled by
your teachers.
> Are you
> complaining about someone is responding to and laughing at your
> idiotic posts? Or are you whining that you were too stupid to spot the
> obvious troll and are now acting out with a full foot stomping
> tantrum?
None of the above. I'm mocking you.
> Maybe if only you could have spotted the irony of your response and
> the use of "useless tenaciousness".
Think of it in the terms of a toothless chihuahua furiously gumming the
ankle of an interloper.
Al
Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
I admitted my sin, all you people look alike to me.
Aratzio
<albert.f...@gmail.com> got double secret probation for writing:
>In article <tif9e51jeue4fa7fc...@4ax.com>,
> Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 16:02:44 -0500, in the land of alt.aratzio, Al
>> <albert.f...@gmail.com> got double secret probation for writing:
>
>> >It worked for Obama.
>>
>> What the fuck are you dribbling on about? Go ahead explain how that
>> statement has fuck all to do with what was written.
>>
>> >
>> >> So, what am I wearing in this fevered imagination of yours?
>> >
>> >A sneer?
>>
>> A smirk.
>
>So very different.
Yes, they are, your point?
>
>
>> >> I note that you cannot come up with a single quote that supports your
>> >> position. Go ahead demonstrate the veracity of your claim, you made
>> >> the claim now show your evidence that your claim she quit to "take on
>> >> a job with greater opportunity".
>> >
>> >You're to attuned to sound bites:
>> >
>> >"And there is such a need to BUILD up and FIGHT for our state and our
>> >country. I choose to FIGHT for it!
>>
>> "I fight for my state by quitting my state!"
>
>She made sense, why should her new circumstances and the attendant
>baggage be borne by the citizens of Alaska?
Yes, you elected her to do a job. She took an oath to do the job.
Something about responsibility that you do not understand?
>
>Her "fight" was no longer for Alaska, circumstances vaulted her to a
>different responsibility.
So unlike every other Governor in the USA with aspirations to higher
office, she quit.
She quit because she was too weak of mind to handle the pressure of
the big time.
>
>She *could* have stayed on Alaska's payroll, while building her national
>political future, but she made the right decision, for Alaska.
Really, and just what were the costs that you think were going to be
incurred by Alaska. Would there be new people hitred to investigate
all of her ethical lapses?
>
>> >And I'll work hard for others who
>> >still believe in free enterprise and smaller government;
>>
>> And no Republican wants her help.
>
>You asked for quotes, I give you quotes. having lost that battle, you're
>now going to tell me what republicans want.
Lost what battle, deary? Nothing in that quote is evidence of anything
other than maunderings of a half-wit. She never stated she was looking
for an
>
>Your political observations are sophomoric at best, your evasions are
>indications that you suffer from symptoms of anatidaephobia
Actually it is Lorakeets.
And after your declaration of victory above, I'll note your
capitualation on:
#1:
:>The aid of a ghostwriter is common, especially among politicians.
:
:That wasn't a ghostwriter, do at least learn the terms you are using.
:
:She spoke to a someone that can write and the person that can write
:wrote the book.
#2
:>And I'm sure you can find people wh will insist, loudly and often that
:>the woman is an unimportant half-wit, as was reagan, both Bushes and,
:>well, all conservatives.
:
:No, I actually thought BushI was a pretty bright guy. Unprincipaled
:since he was the one that coined the term "Voodoo Economics" to
:describe Ronnie Rayguns abortion of an economic policy. Bush2 is a
:moron and I knew that before he was even Governor of Texas. He fucked
:up the worst team in baseball. Now that took some serious stupid. I
:thought little of Reagan when he was Governor and my opinion went down
:from there.
#3:
:>Maybe you could read a paper.
:
:Maybe you could supply proof she is campaigning in VA, NY or NJ:
:
:As I stated, she is not campaigning and has not been asked to
:campaign. They especially do not want her in NJ & VA.
:
:Here this is called evidence:
:http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2009/07/new_jersey_gop_gubernatorial_c.html
:http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/10/15/palin-to-campaign-in-texas/
:
:The only place they want her to campaign is in Republican primaries
:like Texas. In otherwords they do not want her anywhere near a general
:election.
#4
:>Given the rather obvious lack of same on Obama's part, it is relevant.
:
:Not when the discussion is about Palin. Obama's skills or experience
:have nothing to do with Ivan's statement about her lack of big time
:experience.
:
:>
:>IOW, lack of experience is not a negative, correct?
:
:With Palin, obviously of major import since she lacks the intellectual
:capability to overcome her small-time status.
Well, I could go on but the evidence so sorely lacking from your posts
appears to have caused you to abort your responses.
Aratzio
>In article <0ch9e5tqfee7p95ht...@4ax.com>,
> Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Just what the fuck do you think that word salad means?
>
>That you are an unimaginative writer who clears his throat a lot and
>uses terms like "To Be Perfectly Honest", and was regularly paddled by
>your teachers.
Ah, more of that finely tuned delusion you have shown such a
propensity to write.
I do find it quite hilarious.
>
>> Are you
>> complaining about someone is responding to and laughing at your
>> idiotic posts? Or are you whining that you were too stupid to spot the
>> obvious troll and are now acting out with a full foot stomping
>> tantrum?
>
>None of the above. I'm mocking you.
Really, which explains why you snipped your word salad in hopes that
you could hide that embarrassing brutalization of the English
language.
>
>> Maybe if only you could have spotted the irony of your response and
>> the use of "useless tenaciousness".
>
>Think of it in the terms of a toothless chihuahua furiously gumming the
>ankle of an interloper.
Poor baby, you just can't handle even the most mild of criticisms.
That is just a sad commentary on your whole world outlook.
Aratzio
<albert.f...@gmail.com> got double secret probation for writing:
Typical wingnut, blame every but themselves.
Maybe if you had an education you would not have to blame others for
all the things wrong in your life.
Ivan Skavinsky Skavar
Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
>
> Yes, you elected her to do a job. She took an oath to do the job.
> Something about responsibility that you do not understand?
There is nothing in the oath of office that suggests you can't resign,
try again.
> >Her "fight" was no longer for Alaska, circumstances vaulted her to a
> >different responsibility.
>
> So unlike every other Governor in the USA with aspirations to higher
> office, she quit.
>
> She quit because she was too weak of mind to handle the pressure of
> the big time.
Buts he quit to go from Alaska to the "big time", you make no sense dude.
Ivan Skavinsky Skavar
Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 17:52:20 -0500, in the land of alt.aratzio, Ivan
> Skavinsky Skavar <Iv...@borscht.com> got double secret probation for
> writing:
>
> >In article <0ch9e5tqfee7p95ht...@4ax.com>,
> > Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Just what the fuck do you think that word salad means?
> >
> >That you are an unimaginative writer who clears his throat a lot and
> >uses terms like "To Be Perfectly Honest", and was regularly paddled by
> >your teachers.
>
> Ah, more of that finely tuned delusion you have shown such a
> propensity to write.
Just casual conjecture.
> I do find it quite hilarious.
You insist so, but I sense a tinge of frustration and anger.
> >> Are you
> >> complaining about someone is responding to and laughing at your
> >> idiotic posts? Or are you whining that you were too stupid to spot the
> >> obvious troll and are now acting out with a full foot stomping
> >> tantrum?
> >
> >None of the above. I'm mocking you.
>
> Really, which explains why you snipped your word salad in hopes that
> you could hide that embarrassing brutalization of the English
> language.
Did I snip the crux of your wandering condemnation? Oh my.
> >> Maybe if only you could have spotted the irony of your response and
> >> the use of "useless tenaciousness".
> >
> >Think of it in the terms of a toothless chihuahua furiously gumming the
> >ankle of an interloper.
>
> Poor baby, you just can't handle even the most mild of criticisms.
> That is just a sad commentary on your whole world outlook.
You haven't issued criticisms, that's the crux of your problem, you're
just whining.
Ivan Skavinsky Skavar
Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
Not everyone.
> Maybe if you had an education you would not have to blame others for
> all the things wrong in your life.
Bu I'm not blaming anyone for anything, I'm just mocking you.
Aratzio
Skavinsky Skavar <Iv...@borscht.com> got double secret probation for
writing:
>In article <04n9e51ou48qrkmj8...@4ax.com>,
> Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Yes, you elected her to do a job. She took an oath to do the job.
>> Something about responsibility that you do not understand?
>
>There is nothing in the oath of office that suggests you can't resign,
>try again.
Well there you have it, "it is okay to break your solemn oath to the
people who elect you, just as long as you have a big book deal on the
back side".
There is no responsibility to uphold your word to the people. When the
going gets tough, just quit and claim you are doing it for them and
the morons will believe you.
I do have to admit, her quitting was the best thing for the people of
Alaska. Now they might actually have a competent administration.
>
>> >Her "fight" was no longer for Alaska, circumstances vaulted her to a
>> >different responsibility.
>>
>> So unlike every other Governor in the USA with aspirations to higher
>> office, she quit.
>>
>> She quit because she was too weak of mind to handle the pressure of
>> the big time.
>
>Buts he quit to go from Alaska to the "big time", you make no sense dude.
So she didn't get in the big-time as the candidate for VP? Really?
BTW: You are the one that called Alaska the small-time.
So the other rule is "it is okay to break your solemn oath to the
people that elected you because your state is not important".
Alaskan Beaver Hunter
>that the statement is an actual
> accurate assessment of the intellectual limitations of the leftist - the
> inability to differentiate between reality and fantasy.
>
May I retort.
I do believe the parody of Ms. Ex-Governor McQuitter is likely a lot
more accurate in her bio and clueless endeavors thus far
than the one written by *her*, and the so-called co-authors and
publishers of the mega book deal(s) that follow so many 15 minute claim
to flamers .
What really could a white trash Alaskan trailer park mom have to say
that would fill 300 pg book .. likely rehashed GOP propaganda that
certainly will be blindly regurgitate by the GOPpers who are stupid
enough to buy it as something new and original.
Aratzio
>In article <umn9e512g0p8tu124...@4ax.com>,
> Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 17:52:20 -0500, in the land of alt.aratzio, Ivan
>> Skavinsky Skavar <Iv...@borscht.com> got double secret probation for
>> writing:
>>
>> >In article <0ch9e5tqfee7p95ht...@4ax.com>,
>> > Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Just what the fuck do you think that word salad means?
>> >
>> >That you are an unimaginative writer who clears his throat a lot and
>> >uses terms like "To Be Perfectly Honest", and was regularly paddled by
>> >your teachers.
>>
>> Ah, more of that finely tuned delusion you have shown such a
>> propensity to write.
>
>Just casual conjecture.
Conjecture is a proposition which is presumed to be real, true, or
genuine, mostly based on unsubstantiated grounds.
In otherwords it is all in your mind. You make it up as you go along.
You know, like is said, delusions.
>
>> I do find it quite hilarious.
>
>You insist so, but I sense a tinge of frustration and anger.
I don't doubt you believe that, given your ability to project.
>
>> >> Are you
>> >> complaining about someone is responding to and laughing at your
>> >> idiotic posts? Or are you whining that you were too stupid to spot the
>> >> obvious troll and are now acting out with a full foot stomping
>> >> tantrum?
>> >
>> >None of the above. I'm mocking you.
>>
>> Really, which explains why you snipped your word salad in hopes that
>> you could hide that embarrassing brutalization of the English
>> language.
>
>Did I snip the crux of your wandering condemnation? Oh my.
So why did you hide from your hilarious nonsensical word salad.
Leaving the context intact would have made your non sequitur look like
and even more ridiculous defense.
>
>> >> Maybe if only you could have spotted the irony of your response and
>> >> the use of "useless tenaciousness".
>> >
>> >Think of it in the terms of a toothless chihuahua furiously gumming the
>> >ankle of an interloper.
>>
>> Poor baby, you just can't handle even the most mild of criticisms.
>> That is just a sad commentary on your whole world outlook.
>
>You haven't issued criticisms, that's the crux of your problem, you're
>just whining.
You should have included <STOMP> at the end. It would have given you
the gravitas for which you were going.
Aratzio
Never actually take responsibility for your actions when you can blame
the bullies who were mean to you in 7th grade.
>
>> Maybe if you had an education you would not have to blame others for
>> all the things wrong in your life.
>
>Bu I'm not blaming anyone for anything, I'm just mocking you.
"you now own it."
If you are going to lie, at least snip the proof so it isn't so
obvious you were left with nothing and went with one of the standard
responses you keep on a crib sheet.
Ivan Skavinsky Skavar
Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 18:39:03 -0500, in the land of alt.aratzio, Ivan
> Skavinsky Skavar <Iv...@borscht.com> got double secret probation for
> writing:
>
> >In article <04n9e51ou48qrkmj8...@4ax.com>,
> > Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Yes, you elected her to do a job. She took an oath to do the job.
> >> Something about responsibility that you do not understand?
> >
> >There is nothing in the oath of office that suggests you can't resign,
> >try again.
>
> Well there you have it, "it is okay to break your solemn oath to the
> people who elect you
There is no solemn oath to serve the term. You're arguing about
something that doesn't exist that wasn't violated.
> There is no responsibility to uphold your word to the people. When the
> going gets tough, just quit and claim you are doing it for them and
> the morons will believe you.
>
> I do have to admit, her quitting was the best thing for the people of
> Alaska. Now they might actually have a competent administration.
Palin wasn't fleeing a governance disaster.
> >> >Her "fight" was no longer for Alaska, circumstances vaulted her to a
> >> >different responsibility.
> >>
> >> So unlike every other Governor in the USA with aspirations to higher
> >> office, she quit.
> >>
> >> She quit because she was too weak of mind to handle the pressure of
> >> the big time.
> >
> >Buts he quit to go from Alaska to the "big time", you make no sense dude.
>
> So she didn't get in the big-time as the candidate for VP? Really?
Oh, she should have stopped there.
> BTW: You are the one that called Alaska the small-time.
As I did Chicago. It's all context.
> So the other rule is "it is okay to break your solemn oath to the
> people that elected you because your state is not important".
There is no breaking of solemn oath. If you don't understand that,
nothing will make sense to you.
Aratzio
>In article <hcu9e551689vqfn02...@4ax.com>,
> Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 18:39:03 -0500, in the land of alt.aratzio, Ivan
>> Skavinsky Skavar <Iv...@borscht.com> got double secret probation for
>> writing:
>>
>> >In article <04n9e51ou48qrkmj8...@4ax.com>,
>> > Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Yes, you elected her to do a job. She took an oath to do the job.
>> >> Something about responsibility that you do not understand?
>> >
>> >There is nothing in the oath of office that suggests you can't resign,
>> >try again.
>>
>> Well there you have it, "it is okay to break your solemn oath to the
>> people who elect you
>
>There is no solemn oath to serve the term. You're arguing about
>something that doesn't exist that wasn't violated.
Well here you go, the solemn oath sworn to the people of Alaska when
taking office:
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the
Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of
Alaska, and that I will faithfully discharge my duties as . . . to the
best of my ability."
Note the "solemnly swear" and "faithfully discharge my duties"
See how that works, you get it wrong, I get to make fun of you, again.
Any other issues with your complete ignorance with which I can help?
>
>> There is no responsibility to uphold your word to the people. When the
>> going gets tough, just quit and claim you are doing it for them and
>> the morons will believe you.
>>
>> I do have to admit, her quitting was the best thing for the people of
>> Alaska. Now they might actually have a competent administration.
>
>Palin wasn't fleeing a governance disaster.
Who said disaster? I wrote competence and the complete lack of said
competence evinced by the quitter from wasilla.
Does your reading ever make sense to you?
>
>> >> >Her "fight" was no longer for Alaska, circumstances vaulted her to a
>> >> >different responsibility.
>> >>
>> >> So unlike every other Governor in the USA with aspirations to higher
>> >> office, she quit.
>> >>
>> >> She quit because she was too weak of mind to handle the pressure of
>> >> the big time.
>> >
>> >Buts he quit to go from Alaska to the "big time", you make no sense dude.
>>
>> So she didn't get in the big-time as the candidate for VP? Really?
>
>Oh, she should have stopped there.
The Peter Principal was in effect at Mayor of a small town.
>
>> BTW: You are the one that called Alaska the small-time.
>
>As I did Chicago. It's all context.
Try to pay attention. We are discussing the quitter from Alaska not
the second largest city in the USA. You know the unemployed grifter
from Wasilla.
Unemployed being the fact.
>
>> So the other rule is "it is okay to break your solemn oath to the
>> people that elected you because your state is not important".
>
>There is no breaking of solemn oath. If you don't understand that,
>nothing will make sense to you.
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the
Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of
Alaska, and that I will faithfully discharge my duties as . . . to the
best of my ability."
Well, I know it is redundant but making you look like a nattering boob
is fun.
"solemnly swear ... faithfully discharge my duties"
Yep, she failed in her solemn oath.
Alaskan Beaver Hunter
>
> "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the
> Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of
> Alaska, and that I will faithfully discharge my duties as . . . to the
> best of my ability."
>
To the People of Alaska.
All shucks. Geez. This job is just soo time consuming. I
mean the main stream press just treats me like a washed
up home coming queen. Gosh. I need my nails done. Since
I canceled all funding for special needs children, Gosh,
Todd and I have to take time to drive Little Tard to
school for mentally stupid very day.
And oh shucks .. My daughter's little boy Trigger needs me
to baby sit while she finishes her GED too.
Gosh . I've decided .. well to just quit my job, for
the people .. who will be better off WITHOUT ME. You betcha .
See. I have a contract to write a book, and that means
I got cash in on my 15 minutes of fame before I flame !
Gosh . Gotta catch a chartered plane to LA for a book signing.
Thanks.
Sarah.
PS .. Vote for me next time . I promise I won't quit if I win.
But if I do win, and I need time to get my nails done, or
write another book, well I just may quit for a couple months,
or take a paid leave.
Al
Ivan Skavinsky Skavar
Aratzio, who drives an el camino, leaked:
> >> >> So you can't read and the fact that it took you at least two posts
> >> >> after I pointed out the fact for you to figure it out and all that is
> >> >> somehow my fault.
> >> >
> >> >I admitted my sin, all you people look alike to me.
> >>
> >> Typical wingnut, blame every but themselves.
> >
> >Not everyone.
>
> Never actually take responsibility for your actions when you can blame
> the bullies who were mean to you in 7th grade.
I was the bully.
> >> Maybe if you had an education you would not have to blame others for
> >> all the things wrong in your life.
> >
> >Bu I'm not blaming anyone for anything, I'm just mocking you.
>
> "you now own it."
>
> If you are going to lie, at least snip the proof so it isn't so
> obvious you were left with nothing and went with one of the standard
> responses you keep on a crib sheet.
No need to get snippy.
Wankatoa
ghost_...@hotmail.com:
>
>
>
> On 10/25/09 11:27 AM, in article Xns9CAF6A7...@69.16.186.50,
> "Wankatoa" <Wan...@anonmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Mike Smith <m...@wt.net>
scribblednews:oe78e59s6pppr3otdorlor7qai1doi1h6s@
>> 4ax.com:
>>
>>> On Sat, 24 Oct 2009 21:18:09 -0500, Ivan Skavinsky Skavar
>>> <Iv...@borscht.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In article <4ae3b3e0$0$23760$bbae...@news.suddenlink.net>,
>>>> Kill all Bank Executives <ban...@whore.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I paged through both of them today in a store and I couldn't tell
>>>>> which was the real one or the parody ...
>>>>
>>>> Are you bragging?
>>>
>>> No, he's just another stupid liar. Neither book is in any store, yet.
>>>
>>> And the libtards MUST denigrate Palin every chance they get.
>>> If the libtards do not denigrate and ridicule her, she will be our
>>> next President in a HUGE landslide.
>>>
>>> Mike Smith
>>>
>>
>>
>> Liberals are scared to death of her.
>>
>> A strong, intelligent, well-thought of women who's has children with
>> liberal problems.
>>
>> No one would have expected the incredible hatred the liberals exposed
>> themselves with when they went after her unmarried daughter with a
special
>> needs child.
>>
>> Disgusting.
>>
> "Hypocrite": Another name for today's Liberal.
>
>
We all have many names for liberals, adjectives, but we all know the most
obvious ones:
stupid
ignorant
childish
young
foolish
uneducated
ill-logical
greedy
slow
functionally retarded
The list is endless..
--
Remember:
A fine is a tax for doing wrong
A tax is a fine for doing well.
Death To all Liberals!
Ivan Skavinsky Skavar
Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 21:35:01 -0500, in the land of alt.aratzio, Ivan
> Skavinsky Skavar <Iv...@borscht.com> got double secret probation for
> writing:
>
> >In article <hcu9e551689vqfn02...@4ax.com>,
> > Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
> >> Well there you have it, "it is okay to break your solemn oath to the
> >> people who elect you
> >
> >There is no solemn oath to serve the term. You're arguing about
> >something that doesn't exist that wasn't violated.
>
> Well here you go, the solemn oath sworn to the people of Alaska when
> taking office:
>
> "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the
> Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of
> Alaska, and that I will faithfully discharge my duties as . . . to the
> best of my ability."
>
> Note the "solemnly swear" and "faithfully discharge my duties"
If you had an actual legal argument, smarter folks than you would have
made it. You're chasing wabbits.
> See how that works, you get it wrong, I get to make fun of you, again.
No, it didn't work. Your argument is shit, any governor can resign at
any time for any reason. Whether you like that or not is irrelevant.
Alaskan Beaver Hunter
>>o buy it as something new and original.
>
> A book from an Alaskan has to be boring.
yeap
Moose Stroganoff
Moose Stew
Moose Steak
Moose BBQ
Moose Soup
Moose Sausage
Moose Crepe
Moose Sauce
Moose Pie
Moose Roast
Moose Burgher
Moose Spaghetti
Moose Chops
Moose Rips
Moose Tripe
Moose Taco
Moose Boiled
Moose Broiled
Moose Steamed
Moose Blacken
Moose fried
Moose Cake
Moose Jello
Moose Bread
Moose Roll
Moose Bagel
Al
Alaskan Beaver Hunter <Fucky...@eatme.com> wrote:
Well, yeah, McDonald's is a bit different there, but stay away from the
bagels.
George Kerby
On 10/26/09 7:37 PM, in article
4ae640cd$0$23757$bbae...@news.suddenlink.net, "Alaskan Beaver Hunter"
<Fucky...@eatme.com> wrote:
Lots of time on your hands, obviously...
Aratzio
>In article <7gv9e5tthifv105ml...@4ax.com>,
> Aratzio, who drives an el camino, leaked:
>
>
>> >> >> So you can't read and the fact that it took you at least two posts
>> >> >> after I pointed out the fact for you to figure it out and all that is
>> >> >> somehow my fault.
>> >> >
>> >> >I admitted my sin, all you people look alike to me.
>> >>
>> >> Typical wingnut, blame every but themselves.
>> >
>> >Not everyone.
>>
>> Never actually take responsibility for your actions when you can blame
>> the bullies who were mean to you in 7th grade.
>
>I was the bully.
Sure you were, cupcake. <- sarcasm for you that are stupid.
>
>> >> Maybe if you had an education you would not have to blame others for
>> >> all the things wrong in your life.
>> >
>> >Bu I'm not blaming anyone for anything, I'm just mocking you.
>>
>> "you now own it."
>>
>> If you are going to lie, at least snip the proof so it isn't so
>> obvious you were left with nothing and went with one of the standard
>> responses you keep on a crib sheet.
>
>No need to get snippy.
So you agree you lied.
Aratzio
>In article <ph3ae51ncoqup2ihd...@4ax.com>,
> Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 21:35:01 -0500, in the land of alt.aratzio, Ivan
>> Skavinsky Skavar <Iv...@borscht.com> got double secret probation for
>> writing:
>>
>> >In article <hcu9e551689vqfn02...@4ax.com>,
>> > Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
>
>> >> Well there you have it, "it is okay to break your solemn oath to the
>> >> people who elect you
>> >
>> >There is no solemn oath to serve the term. You're arguing about
>> >something that doesn't exist that wasn't violated.
>>
>> Well here you go, the solemn oath sworn to the people of Alaska when
>> taking office:
>>
>> "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the
>> Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of
>> Alaska, and that I will faithfully discharge my duties as . . . to the
>> best of my ability."
>>
>> Note the "solemnly swear" and "faithfully discharge my duties"
>
>If you had an actual legal argument, smarter folks than you would have
>made it. You're chasing wabbits.
Who said any thing abouyt legalities? Can't win the argument so you
change the parameters. You said "There is no solemn oath to serve the
term". You were 100% wrong and the Oath of Office in the state of
Alaska proves you wrong,
There is a solemn oath and it clearly states that youwill faithfully
discharge your duties.
She swore an oath to the people of Alaska and then she broke that
solemn oath.
>
> > See how that works, you get it wrong, I get to make fun of you, again.
>
>No, it didn't work. Your argument is shit, any governor can resign at
>any time for any reason. Whether you like that or not is irrelevant.
Who said thay cannot? I said she broke her solemn oath to the people
of Alaska. No matter how you weasle and waffle you can't make those
words mean what you need them to mean.
You are an idiot. You approve of a half-wit that will break her solemn
oath the moment things get too difficult for her.
Ivan Skavinsky Skavar
Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 19:28:06 -0500, in the land of alt.aratzio, Ivan
> Skavinsky Skavar <Iv...@borscht.com> got double secret probation for
> writing:
>
> >In article <7gv9e5tthifv105ml...@4ax.com>,
> > Aratzio, who drives an el camino, leaked:
> >
> >
> >> >> >> So you can't read and the fact that it took you at least two posts
> >> >> >> after I pointed out the fact for you to figure it out and all that is
> >> >> >> somehow my fault.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >I admitted my sin, all you people look alike to me.
> >> >>
> >> >> Typical wingnut, blame every but themselves.
> >> >
> >> >Not everyone.
> >>
> >> Never actually take responsibility for your actions when you can blame
> >> the bullies who were mean to you in 7th grade.
> >
> >I was the bully.
>
> Sure you were, cupcake. <- sarcasm for you that are stupid.
It's not that hard with the marxist jellyfish, it's not a brag.
> >> >> Maybe if you had an education you would not have to blame others for
> >> >> all the things wrong in your life.
> >> >
> >> >Bu I'm not blaming anyone for anything, I'm just mocking you.
> >>
> >> "you now own it."
> >>
> >> If you are going to lie, at least snip the proof so it isn't so
> >> obvious you were left with nothing and went with one of the standard
> >> responses you keep on a crib sheet.
> >
> >No need to get snippy.
>
> So you agree you lied.
Why?
Ivan Skavinsky Skavar
Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
> Alaska proves you wrong.
No, nitwit, I am not wrong. There is nothing in any oath of any elected
or appointed position that says "you cannot resign". Deal with it.
> There is a solemn oath and it clearly states that youwill faithfully
> discharge your duties.
You seem to have mistaken the US for North Korea.
�n�hw��f
of news:Ivan-E3CE12.2...@news-wc.giganews.com:
Just taking the actual text of the oath and examining it shows shes
unqualified for any elected office: "to the best of my ability."
Obviously, if that was her "best ability" its insuficient.
>> There is a solemn oath and it clearly states that youwill
>> faithfully discharge your duties.
>
> You seem to have mistaken the US for North Korea.
>
Its rather easy nowadays :)
The pussified dems are folding on re-working the PATRIOT act to rein in
the excessive spying.
FYI
--
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=COaoYqkpkUA
cageprisoners.com|www.snuhwolf.9f.com|www.eyeonpalin.org
_____ ____ ____ __ /\_/\ __ _ ______ _____
/ __/ |/ / / / / // // . . \\ \ |\ | / __ \ \ \ __\
_\ \/ / /_/ / _ / \ / \ \| \| \ \_\ \ \__\ _\
/___/_/|_/\____/_//_/ \_@_/ \__|\__|\____/\____\_\
Aratzio
>In article <pgjce51ujrisjbhsb...@4ax.com>,
> Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 19:28:06 -0500, in the land of alt.aratzio, Ivan
>> Skavinsky Skavar <Iv...@borscht.com> got double secret probation for
>> writing:
>>
>> >In article <7gv9e5tthifv105ml...@4ax.com>,
>> > Aratzio, who drives an el camino, leaked:
>> >
>> >
>> >> >> >> So you can't read and the fact that it took you at least two posts
>> >> >> >> after I pointed out the fact for you to figure it out and all that is
>> >> >> >> somehow my fault.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >I admitted my sin, all you people look alike to me.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Typical wingnut, blame every but themselves.
>> >> >
>> >> >Not everyone.
>> >>
>> >> Never actually take responsibility for your actions when you can blame
>> >> the bullies who were mean to you in 7th grade.
>> >
>> >I was the bully.
>>
>> Sure you were, cupcake. <- sarcasm for you that are stupid.
>
>It's not that hard with the marxist jellyfish, it's not a brag.
So you were as delusional in 7th grade as you are now.
>> >> >> Maybe if you had an education you would not have to blame others for
>> >> >> all the things wrong in your life.
>> >> >
>> >> >Bu I'm not blaming anyone for anything, I'm just mocking you.
>> >>
>> >> "you now own it."
>> >>
>> >> If you are going to lie, at least snip the proof so it isn't so
>> >> obvious you were left with nothing and went with one of the standard
>> >> responses you keep on a crib sheet.
>> >
>> >No need to get snippy.
>>
>> So you agree you lied.
>
>Why?
Because you lied. It isn't hard to figure out.
Aratzio
Still too stupid to grasp the difference between the two things. No
one ever said she could not resign. Resigning is breaking her solmn
oat. Are you too stupid ti grasp that fact?
Again you wrote "There is no solemn oath to serve the term." when the
oath is obviously clearly stated as being solemn and the sath taker
promises to "faithfully discharge my duties"
What part of that oath makes it hard for you to think?
>
>
>> There is a solemn oath and it clearly states that youwill faithfully
>> discharge your duties.
>
>You seem to have mistaken the US for North Korea.
BWAHAAAAHAAAAAHAAAAAAA
"Only commies make people hold to their oaths of office".
Honorable Professeur Von TwoSteps OA
Message-ID : <94vee51t9vqne63r7...@4ax.com>
>Only commies make.. snip
The only commies about these days are the ones hiding under your bed
Stoopid slut, get with the times
--
HPVTS.OA.Tinfoil Sombrero
God.Bless AUK for my award
Ivan Skavinsky Skavar
Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
> Again you wrote "There is no solemn oath to serve the term." when the
> oath is obviously clearly stated as being solemn and the sath taker
> promises to "faithfully discharge my duties"
>
> What part of that oath makes it hard for you to think?
You can pound sand all year, but the fact is a governor or senator or
congressman or a dog-catcher can resign their position at any time, and
it's not a violation of the oath to "faithfully discharge".
Ivan Skavinsky Skavar
Honorable Professeur Von TwoSteps OA <.@.> wrote:
> From : Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com>
> Message-ID : <94vee51t9vqne63r7...@4ax.com>
>
>
> >Only commies make.. snip
>
>
>
>
> The only commies about these days are the ones hiding under your bed
>
> Stoopid slut, get with the times
Better let these guys know:
Ivan Skavinsky Skavar
Actually, she listed her accomplishments in her resignation speech.
Your accomplishments are quantified in your post.
�n�hw��f
Her ability to quit early, quit often was included?
> Your accomplishments are quantified in your post.
>
I've succeded in my goal with you.
^_^
�n�hw��f
Once a quitter, always a quitter.
<nods>
Ivan Skavinsky Skavar
"�n�hw��f" <snuh...@netscape.net> wrote:
> Ivan Skavinsky Skavar <Iv...@borscht.com> pinched out a steaming pile of
>
> > Your accomplishments are quantified in your post.
> >
> I've succeded in my goal with you.
You've succeeded in whining with a child's interpretation of oath of
office.
Was that your intent?
Ivan Skavinsky Skavar
"�n�hw��f" <snuh...@netscape.net> wrote:
> Ivan Skavinsky Skavar <Iv...@borscht.com> pinched out a steaming pile
> of news:Ivan-DD2066.0...@news-wc.giganews.com:
>
> > In article <94vee51t9vqne63r7...@4ax.com>,
> > Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Again you wrote "There is no solemn oath to serve the term." when
> >> the oath is obviously clearly stated as being solemn and the sath
> >> taker promises to "faithfully discharge my duties"
> >>
> >> What part of that oath makes it hard for you to think?
> >
> >
> > You can pound sand all year, but the fact is a governor or senator
> > or congressman or a dog-catcher can resign their position at any
> > time, and it's not a violation of the oath to "faithfully
> > discharge".
> >
>
> Once a quitter, always a quitter.
>
> <nods>
Ignoring the elections she won, her accomplishments in office, the
millions for the book and the preoccupation by the left seems a pretty
good deal.
Talking to you is like talking to a table
> Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
>> Once a quitter, always a quitter.
>
>> <nods>
>
You girls should marry each other and carry this
conversation on forever.
Aratzio
>In article <94vee51t9vqne63r7...@4ax.com>,
Absolutely correct, however, it is a violation of the oath to NOT
faithfully discharge the duties. Quitting is NOT faithfully
discharging one's duties.
However, there is one out here for Palin. There is a clause about
"abilities". It might just be the best of her abilities is quitting.
We have sufficient evidence it is not ethics, governance or
administration.
Aratzio
Quitting being the one she emphasized.
>
>Your accomplishments are quantified in your post.
#1 - Making a fool of you.
Ivan Skavinsky Skavar
Ivan Skavinsky Skavar
Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Oct 2009 09:46:11 -0500, in the land of alt.aratzio, Ivan
> Skavinsky Skavar <Iv...@borscht.com> got double secret probation for
> writing:
>
> >In article <94vee51t9vqne63r7...@4ax.com>,
> > Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Again you wrote "There is no solemn oath to serve the term." when the
> >> oath is obviously clearly stated as being solemn and the sath taker
> >> promises to "faithfully discharge my duties"
> >>
> >> What part of that oath makes it hard for you to think?
> >
> >
> >You can pound sand all year, but the fact is a governor or senator or
> >congressman or a dog-catcher can resign their position at any time, and
> >it's not a violation of the oath to "faithfully discharge".
>
> Absolutely correct, however, it is a violation of the oath to NOT
> faithfully discharge the duties.
Resigning the post is not a violation of oath of office. Give it up.
Alaskan Beaver Hunter
>> Absolutely correct, however, it is a violation of the oath to NOT
>> faithfully discharge the duties.
>
> Resigning the post is not a violation of oath of office. Give it up.
Girls Girls Girls..
McQuitter violated the office by not following the oath she pledged
to uphold.
There is no story she can spin when ever she pulls her head out
of her stupid ass that changes the fact she quit ... for selfish, self
centered, reasons. Any opponent she runs off again will stick her
face so far in that pile of bull shit it will leak out her ears.
Al
Alaskan Beaver Hunter <Fucky...@eatme.com> wrote:
> Ivan Skavinsky Skavar wrote:
> >> Absolutely correct, however, it is a violation of the oath to NOT
> >> faithfully discharge the duties.
> >
> > Resigning the post is not a violation of oath of office. Give it up.
>
> Girls Girls Girls..
>
> McQuitter violated the office by not following the oath she pledged
> to uphold.
I'm sorry, but resigning her position is not a violation of her oath.
OTOH, Obama spent the great majority of his time in the Senate
campaigning for president, not working for the people of Illinois, as
his oath required.
Obama, not Palin, violated oath of office, them's de facts.
Aratzio
>In article <bnihe55scrabmeeqa...@4ax.com>,
> Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 28 Oct 2009 09:46:11 -0500, in the land of alt.aratzio, Ivan
>> Skavinsky Skavar <Iv...@borscht.com> got double secret probation for
>> writing:
>>
>> >In article <94vee51t9vqne63r7...@4ax.com>,
>> > Aratzio <a6ah...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Again you wrote "There is no solemn oath to serve the term." when the
>> >> oath is obviously clearly stated as being solemn and the sath taker
>> >> promises to "faithfully discharge my duties"
>> >>
>> >> What part of that oath makes it hard for you to think?
>> >
>> >
>> >You can pound sand all year, but the fact is a governor or senator or
>> >congressman or a dog-catcher can resign their position at any time, and
>> >it's not a violation of the oath to "faithfully discharge".
>>
>> Absolutely correct, however, it is a violation of the oath to NOT
>> faithfully discharge the duties.
>
>Resigning the post is not a violation of oath of office. Give it up.
Is it or is it not a violation of a sworn solemn oath to the people of
Alaska to NOT faithfully discharge the duties?
Unless you think quitting mid-term is a faithful execution of her
duties to the best of her abilities.
She quit on the people of Alaska after she swore she would
faithfully...
She is an unemployed blogger, which is probably a good thing for the
state as a whole.
Aratzio
Alaskan Beaver Hunter <Fucky...@eatme.com> got double secret
probation for writing:
>Ivan Skavinsky Skavar wrote:
Which ia why I fully support the Palin/Bachmann 2012 ticket
Palin/Bachmann 2012 - When Only Twice The Crazy Will Do.