Re: Dinner with Sarah Palin
Tom Ace
> http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/09/04/dinner-palin-auctioned-eba...
Sigh. Such important things I miss by not getting my news from Fox.
Tom Ace
Bill Sornson
> http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/09/04/dinner-palin-auctioned-ebay/?test=latestnews
OK, I'll bite. Why the heck did you post that?
Bill "the phrase 'leading with one's chin' comes to mind" S.
Peter Cole
>
> http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/09/04/dinner-palin-auctioned-ebay/?test=latestnews
>
>
> ANCHORAGE, Alaska -- Want to have dinner with former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin?
> Plan on writing a big check.
>
> The ex-Republican vice presidential candidate is offering the dinner as part of
> a charity auction on eBay for the Ride 2 Recovery program, which supports
> wounded veterans through cycling programs.
>
> The 10-day auction starts Tuesday. The opening bid for dinner for five with
> Palin is $25,000, and organizers say the winner will have to foot the travel
> bill to meet up with her, likely in Alaska.
>
>
>
>
She'll probably cancel.
slide
Weepublicans are evil or that the Obamanation is really God in a thin
disguise or something.
It'd be clear if you had the IQ of the typical liberal - roughly 50. So
drink a bottle of gin and re-read the OP. It'll be obvious then.
Tom Sherman °_°
the loony right who will hate him no matter what, and in the process
abandoning the progressive base and the remnants of the middle class who
elected him, we will very likely have a neo-fascist government under
President Palin in 2013. Better starts sucking up now.
--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
Obama - Yes We Can, but No We Won't!
RonSonic
I'm really not sure. Figured there'd be something clever, witty, interesting,
provocative or worthwhile in reply. Besides, it's on topic to the extent of
mentioning bicycles.
--
Oh damn. There's that annoying blog. Again. http://dumbbikeblog.blogspot.com
Bill Sornson
> On Sat, 5 Sep 2009 12:01:19 -0700, "Bill Sornson" <so...@noyb.com>
> wrote:
>
>> RonSonic wrote:
>>> http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/09/04/dinner-palin-auctioned-ebay/?test=latestnews
>>
>> OK, I'll bite. Why the heck did you post that?
>>
>> Bill "the phrase 'leading with one's chin' comes to mind" S.
>
> I'm really not sure. Figured there'd be something clever, witty,
> interesting, provocative or worthwhile in reply. Besides, it's on
> topic to the extent of mentioning bicycles.
Ah. I confess I didn't read the article as I'd already seen something about
it on Drudge. Hope it raises a lot of money (which of course the media will
find objectionable, regardless)...
Tom Sherman °_°
Another person bravely tossing insults from behind the curtain of anonymity.
Simon Lewis
RonSonic
Your taxonomy is off. True there is a loony right and it will hate Obama no
matter what. But Obama won't bother to appease them since even he is smart
enough to know it isn't possible and that they are few and carry little
influence with more important demographics like the normal right and the
confused middle who really want to like Obama and wish he'd cooperate.
Who Obama is mistakenly trying to appease are the corporations and they may have
a lot of money but they don't have that many votes. Taranto at the WSJ riffed on
this recently and reminded of a classic WSJ editorial on the difference between
conservatism and corporate interest:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122728924999048295.html .
As for Palin as a fascist, really. You should find some other word for people
you dislike.
Tom Sherman °_°
> On Sat, 05 Sep 2009 14:56:39 -0500, Tom Sherman �_�
> <twsherm...@THISsouthslope.net> wrote:
>
>> RonSonic aka Ron Bales wrote:
>>> http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/09/04/dinner-palin-auctioned-ebay/?test=latestnews
>>>
>>>
>>> ANCHORAGE, Alaska -- Want to have dinner with former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin?
>>> Plan on writing a big check.
>>>
>>> The ex-Republican vice presidential candidate is offering the dinner as part of
>>> a charity auction on eBay for the Ride 2 Recovery program, which supports
>>> wounded veterans through cycling programs.
>>>
>>> The 10-day auction starts Tuesday. The opening bid for dinner for five with
>>> Palin is $25,000, and organizers say the winner will have to foot the travel
>>> bill to meet up with her, likely in Alaska.
>>>
>> Since the spineless Obama is making a futile attempt to kiss the butt of
>> the loony right who will hate him no matter what, and in the process
>> abandoning the progressive base and the remnants of the middle class who
>> elected him, we will very likely have a neo-fascist government under
>> President Palin in 2013. Better starts sucking up now.
>
> Your taxonomy is off. True there is a loony right and it will hate Obama no
> matter what. But Obama won't bother to appease them since even he is smart
> enough to know it isn't possible and that they are few and carry little
> influence with more important demographics like the normal right and the
> confused middle who really want to like Obama and wish he'd cooperate.
>
certainly makes them a sizable majority of loonies.
> Who Obama is mistakenly trying to appease are the corporations and they may have
> a lot of money but they don't have that many votes.
WHAT? The corporations have at least 80 votes in the Senate, 300 in the
House, and 5 on the Supreme Court?
Or were you writing about votes that do not matter in the two-party
corporatist duopoly?
> Taranto at the WSJ riffed on
> this recently and reminded of a classic WSJ editorial on the difference between
> conservatism and corporate interest:
> http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122728924999048295.html .
>
> As for Palin as a fascist, really. You should find some other word for people
> you dislike.
>
Palin would be a tool of her corporate sponsored handlers, nothing more.
RonSonic
<noEmai...@stillnodomainey.com> wrote:
>On Sat, 05 Sep 2009 19:29:13 -0400, RonSonic
><rons...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>
>>As for Palin as a fascist, really. You should find some other word for people
>>you dislike.
>
>I think you're right. She doesn't have any organized program, just
>scattered opinions that spew out. Now Bush/Cheney/Rove - there's a
>nice fascist team.
>
>But, back on topic: If I buy Palin dinner, will she put out?
For twenty five large, I'd hope so.
Pat
You sure are interpolating a lot...is this what you really think or are you
just two sheets to the wind?
Pat in TX
Pat
> On Sat, 05 Sep 2009 19:29:13 -0400, RonSonic
> <rons...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>
>> for people you dislike.
>
> scattered opinions that spew out. Now Bush/Cheney/Rove - there's a
> nice fascist team.
>
> But, back on topic: If I buy Palin dinner, will she put out?
According to Levi Johnston, she can't cook.
Bill Sornson
> As for Palin as a fascist, really. You should find some other word
> for people you dislike.
How about for people who want to control what you eat, drink, do, see, wear,
read, listen to, drive, use for energy and light...
Tom Sherman °_°
Did not Mayor Palin try to fire the municipal librarian for NOT banning
books?
--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
Celebrity culture is an opposite of community, informing us
that these few nonsense-heads matter but that the rest of
us do not. - Jay Griffiths
Dan O
> slide wrote:
> > Bill Sornson wrote:
> >> RonSonic wrote:
>
> >> OK, I'll bite. Why the heck did you post that?
>
> >> Bill "the phrase 'leading with one's chin' comes to mind" S.
>
> > Somehow we're supposed to see now that Palin is evil or Wascally
> > Weepublicans are evil or that the Obamanation is really God in a thin
> > disguise or something.
>
> > It'd be clear if you had the IQ of the typical liberal - roughly 50.
> > So drink a bottle of gin and re-read the OP. It'll be obvious then.
>
> You sure are interpolating a lot...is this what you really think or are you
> just two sheets to the wind?
>
In another thread just now, I almost typoed "... just palin wrong...
" :-)
RonSonic
<twsherm...@THISsouthslope.net> wrote:
>Bill Sornson wrote:
>> RonSonic wrote:
>>
>>> As for Palin as a fascist, really. You should find some other word
>>> for people you dislike.
>>
>> How about for people who want to control what you eat, drink, do, see, wear,
>> read, listen to, drive, use for energy and light...
>>
>>
>
>Did not Mayor Palin try to fire the municipal librarian for NOT banning
>books?
This is about as square a coverage as there will be:
http://www.adn.com/sarah-palin/story/515512.html
It appears that if there was a gripe between them it was politics rather than
anything else.
It also appears the main accusations there come from a source with a well known
grudge.
Andre Jute
> http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/09/04/dinner-palin-auctioned-eba...
>
> Plan on writing a big check.
>
> The ex-Republican vice presidential candidate is offering the dinner as part of
> a charity auction on eBay for the Ride 2 Recovery program, which supports
> wounded veterans through cycling programs.
>
> The 10-day auction starts Tuesday. The opening bid for dinner for five with
> Palin is $25,000, and organizers say the winner will have to foot the travel
> bill to meet up with her, likely in Alaska.
Dinner with a feisty lady governor of Alaska is a whole lot more
likely to be worth the money and the travel than dinner with some
Chicago machine politician. -- AJ
Pat
Really, who would that be?
Pat
Just because she has a "well known grudge" doesn't mean she's wrong....
slide
Interesting how Sarah excites both desire and fear in the liberal mind.
Neil Brooks
I think it's neither.
I think the conservatives who swung /toward/ McCain may have included
a fair number who fantasized about sleeping with her (I can think of
few things less interesting, personally).
Sentient beings, secure in their own intellects, could NEVER have
wanted her "a heartbeat away...."
Fear? Fear that somebody like that COULD be elected to Leader Of The
Free World? Sure. That.
But that's vastly different from anything you likely meant to imply.
D'ohBoy
> Bill Sornson wrote:
> > RonSonic wrote:
>
> > OK, I'll bite. Why the heck did you post that?
>
> > Bill "the phrase 'leading with one's chin' comes to mind" S.
>
> Somehow we're supposed to see now that Palin is evil or Wascally
> Weepublicans are evil or that the Obamanation is really God in a thin
> disguise or something.
>
> It'd be clear if you had the IQ of the typical liberal - roughly 50. So
> drink a bottle of gin and re-read the OP. It'll be obvious then.
Ummm.... Are you saying Mr Sonic or Mr Sornson are typical
liberals??
Cuz the OP and Sornson are typical (stereo- ?), but in no way
liberal....
Except in their excuse-making for the failure of neo-con policy.
D'ohBoy
Johnny Twelve-Point presented by JFT
She's physically attractive -- good body, nice face, healthy and
outdoorsy. Driven too, which is kinda hot. That's where the desire
comes from.
She was close to becoming president and was grossly incompetent as an
elected official. That's where the fear comes from..
landotter
The connection to secessionist militias and to radically insane
religion didn't help.
Michael Press
Tom Sherman °_° <twsherm...@THISsouthslope.net> wrote:
> Bill Sornson wrote:
> > RonSonic wrote:
> >
> >> As for Palin as a fascist, really. You should find some other word
> >> for people you dislike.
> >
> > How about for people who want to control what you eat, drink, do, see, wear,
> > read, listen to, drive, use for energy and light...
> >
> >
>
> Did not Mayor Palin try to fire the municipal librarian for NOT banning
> books?
How about you look it up an find out what everybody said, then report that?
--
Michael Press
Tom Sherman °_°
Wait until January 20, 2013 when she is either President or
Vice-President. :(
--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
Tom Sherman °_°
Johnny Twelve-Point presented by JFT
P. Chisholm
> Bill Sornson wrote:
> > RonSonic wrote:
>
> > OK, I'll bite. Why the heck did you post that?
>
> > Bill "the phrase 'leading with one's chin' comes to mind" S.
>
> Somehow we're supposed to see now that Palin is evil or Wascally
> Weepublicans are evil or that the Obamanation is really God in a thin
> disguise or something.
>
> It'd be clear if you had the IQ of the typical liberal - roughly 50. So
> drink a bottle of gin and re-read the OP. It'll be obvious then.
Yep, Sarah was a great choice by McCain.
Palin isn't evil, she's dumb.
Peter Cole
That sounds a little paranoid.
I'm all for people who aim to protect and improve what I eat, drink and
breathe. I'm for people who seek to reduce economic and social
inequality. I'm for people who want to plan for a sustainable future.
I'm against the Christian Right because I believe they seek a theocracy.
I put them in the same camp as Islamic, Jewish and Hindu
fundamentalists. McCain was compelled to choose Palin to get the support
of the Christian Right.
Theocracies are driven by fear of change, but change is upon us, like it
or not. We are in the historical era of hockey stick curves, disbelieve
the thermal one if you wish, but there are plenty of others. We are
entering the age of wars over necessities -- food, water, energy.
Staving off Malthusian consequences will require cooperation, ingenuity
and the acceptance of change. There's no going back to the good old days
-- whether they were so good or not.
andre...@aol.com
While I am not a liberal, I'd love to see her in playboy.
andre...@aol.com
If I was a scientist I'd be afraid that she had the power to cut
funding for things like fruit fly research.
andre...@aol.com
I don't think that she is dumb. But, she is incredibly ignorant.
andre...@aol.com
WHo is trying to do that? Some crazy religious clan?
andre...@aol.com
That is because she is certainly closer to your knowledge and
intellectual ability.
Neil Brooks
You have to know "people" like Bill Sornson.
They don't want recommendations or incentives for better health --
personal or global -- or reduced energy independence, but generally
don't care if a government tells you what you may or may not do in
your bedroom, and who you may or may not marry (consenting adults).
Yet it seems they're at the pinnacle of hypocrisy when it comes to
this "Family Values" shit.
Astounding, huh?
Bill Sornson
Since global warming alarmism IS a religious movement of sorts, you're more
right than you know.
Tom Sherman °_°
> <andre...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:a59dd5aa-9dc0-4e5b...@h13g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...
>> If I was a scientist I'd be afraid that she had the power to cut
>> funding for things like fruit fly research.
>
> research from the government instead of from the companies making money from
> that research.
>
>
Fat chance of that, since the Dimocraptic Party is the party of
corporate welfare, and the Repugnican Party is the party of Even More
Corporate Welfare�.
Tom Sherman °_°
Mr. Jute seems to have missed the word "former".
RonSonic
>Bill Sornson wrote:
>> RonSonic wrote:
>>
>>> As for Palin as a fascist, really. You should find some other word
>>> for people you dislike.
>>
>> How about for people who want to control what you eat, drink, do, see, wear,
>> read, listen to, drive, use for energy and light...
>>
>>
>
>That sounds a little paranoid.
>
>I'm all for people who aim to protect and improve what I eat, drink and
>breathe. I'm for people who seek to reduce economic and social
>inequality. I'm for people who want to plan for a sustainable future.
>
>I'm against the Christian Right because I believe they seek a theocracy.
>I put them in the same camp as Islamic, Jewish and Hindu
>fundamentalists. McCain was compelled to choose Palin to get the support
>of the Christian Right.
He had to pick someone to get the support of anyone on any sort of right.
>Theocracies are driven by fear of change, but change is upon us, like it
>or not. We are in the historical era of hockey stick curves, disbelieve
>the thermal one if you wish, but there are plenty of others. We are
>entering the age of wars over necessities -- food, water, energy.
>Staving off Malthusian consequences will require cooperation, ingenuity
>and the acceptance of change. There's no going back to the good old days
>-- whether they were so good or not.
Your Christian theocracy fears are unfounded. The far more overtly Christian
America of the past was hardly a theocracy.
As for Malthus, he was over a hundred years ago and was wrong then. Of course
there isn't going back to anything. There are things to go forward into that
don't grant unnatural levels of control to the government or anyone else.
Ron
Tom Sherman °_°
> "Tom Sherman �_�" <twsherm...@THISsouthslope.net> wrote in message
> news:h83e1t$sck$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>> Fat chance of that, since the Dimocraptic Party is the party of corporate
>> welfare, and the Repugnican Party is the party of Even More Corporate
>> Welfare�.
>
>
When federal taxes on the super rich are cut, inevitably people who work
for a living pick up the slack in greater payroll, state, local,
property, etc taxes and user fees.
The only US presidents with any fiscal responsibility the last 28 years
were GHW Bush and Clinton.
Tom Sherman °_°
No, it just had fundamentalist "Christian" values as law, e.g.
criminalization of nudity, miscegenation, homosexuality, birth control,
etc. The Palin supporters would like to turn the social clock back AT
LEAST 60 years.
Tom Kunich
news:h83k51$ko4$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>
> When federal taxes on the super rich are cut, inevitably people who work
> for a living pick up the slack in greater payroll, state, local, property,
> etc taxes and user fees.
>
> The only US presidents with any fiscal responsibility the last 28 years
> were GHW Bush and Clinton.
Psst - taxes are controlled by CONGRESS. Those worthless bastards are
interested in power more than anything else.
Pat
> Dan O wrote:
>> On Sep 5, 6:03 pm, "Pat" <newint...@home.com> wrote:
>
>>>
>>
>> In another thread just now, I almost typoed "... just palin wrong...
>> " :-)
>>
>>
>
> Interesting how Sarah excites both desire and fear in the liberal
> mind.
It's not desire or fear unless you include 1. the desire for her to run for
political office in the future, and 2. the fear that she won't.
That's it in a nutshell.
Pat in TX
Pat
Then how come George Bush never used his veto to stop higher taxes?
Pat
>
> Wait until January 20, 2013 when she is either President or
> Vice-President. :(
Not gonna happen. Why? For one thing, she would never make it out of the
Republican primaries.
Sarah the Quitter. That says it all.
Pat in TX
Pat
And, she thinks she's just fine that way. So, doesn't that make her dumb?
Pat in TX
Pat
>
> Your Christian theocracy fears are unfounded. The far more overtly
> Christian America of the past was hardly a theocracy.
>
> As for Malthus, he was over a hundred years ago and was wrong then.
> Of course there isn't going back to anything. There are things to go
> forward into that don't grant unnatural levels of control to the
> government or anyone else.
>
> Ron
You wouldn't think fears of a "Christian" theocracy are unfounded if you
weren't a fundamentalist "every word of the Bible is correct" thinking
person. Those are the ones who want it to be a theocracy.
Pat in TX
Pat
No, you've pretty well nailed him.
Pat in TX
Pat
Now, THERE'S the Fundamentalist thinking: if you don't agree with it, call
it a competing religious movement so that you can decry it on that basis. I
had to laugh when they claimed atheism was a religion, but then it didn't
seem so funny when they claimed that Science is a religion.
<shaking head in disbelief>
Pat in TX
Pat
He just wants to sit there and have her wink at him. It's an ego thing.
Tom Kunich
news:7gl4k8F...@mid.individual.net...
Are you suggesting that Bush was somehow interested in reducing taxes? Maybe
you've missed the fact that the two parties as presently constituted are
both interested in increasing their powers via handing out money from the
public treasury?
Johnny Twelve-Point presented by JFT
<pe...@vecchios.com> wrote:
>On Sep 5, 1:54�pm, slide <dryadsdadx...@xxxxyahoo.com> wrote:
>> Bill Sornson wrote:
>> > RonSonic wrote:
>> >>http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/09/04/dinner-palin-auctioned-eba...
>>
>> > OK, I'll bite. �Why the heck did you post that?
>>
>> > Bill "the phrase 'leading with one's chin' comes to mind" S.
>>
>> Somehow we're supposed to see now that Palin is evil or Wascally
>> Weepublicans are evil or that the Obamanation is really God in a thin
>> disguise or something.
>>
>> It'd be clear if you had the IQ of the typical liberal - roughly 50. So
>> drink a bottle of gin and re-read the OP. It'll be obvious then.
>
>Yep, Sarah was a great choice by McCain.
>
>Palin isn't evil, she's dumb.
Evil is a strong word, but it's *arguably* applicable to her anti-gay
sentiments.
And in any case, she's not just dumb, but also corrupt and
vindicitive, as show in the troopergate stuff and also her attempts to
remove a librarian in Wasilla.
Johnny Twelve-Point presented by JFT
Good distinction.
Johnny Twelve-Point presented by JFT
wrote:
Yeah, other than that pesky evidence thing, and the consensus of
leading climate scientists. Yeah, it's pretty much a cult.
Tom Sherman °_°
RonSonic
Probably traded that pen for a free hand in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Ron
RonSonic
Like the way they shot down John McCain? To the extent they supported McCain at
all it was only as an alternative to O.
Tom Kunich
message news:0draa5te0m6rou5tk...@4ax.com...
"There is no convincing evidence that human release of carbon dioxide or
other greenhouse gases is causing, or will cause in the future, catastrophic
heating of the Earth's atmosphere or disruption of the Earth's climate."
Oregon Petition, from the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, signed
by over 17,000 international scientists including more than 2,000 of the
world's leading climatologists, meteorologists and planetary/atmospheric
scientists.
Note that it says plainly that "The proposed limits on greenhouse gases
would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology,
and damage the health and welfare of mankind."
Other information:
"A poll conducted last year by the British Medical Journal among physicians
all over the world elected fresh water and sanitation infrastructure as the
greatest medical advance of the last 150 years - a privilege still
unavailable for over 40% of the world's population (for reasons that will
become clear later, Al Gore and the major environmental NGOs never campaign
for this)."
"The second point to make is that, despite everything the IPCC, Al Gore and
his Hollywood friends and a biased media say, there isn't a single piece of
scientific evidence (meaning hard facts, not mere factoids or a concocted
"consensus") linking the anthropogenic carbon emissions to the atmospheric
temperatures. In 2007, an unforeseen combination of weak solar activity and
the La Ni�a phenomenon (a cooling of the Eastern Pacific Ocean surface
waters) caused a sudden drop of the world average temperature by no less
than 0.7oC, de facto "canceling" in a single year all the warming allegedly
registered since 1870 - the pretext for all this fuss about global warming."
"By the way, with the exception of the Permian-Carboniferous glaciations
(250-300 million years ago), CO2 atmospheric concentrations have never been
so low as during the current geological period, the Quaternary (the latest 2
million years)."
RonSonic
Actually I am very thoroughly not a fundamentalist.
My fear of a thing is not based entirely on how awful it would be, but also on
its likelihood. The zombie apocalypse is about a similar level of threat. As in,
it could happen and it'd be terrible, but we sure don't see how.
AMuzi
What part of McDemocrat was an alternative?
--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
Tom Sherman °_°
> RonSonic wrote:
>> On Mon, 07 Sep 2009 15:50:42 -0500, Tom Sherman �_�
>> <twsherm...@THISsouthslope.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Pat i. Texas wrote:
>>>> Tom Sherman �_� wrote:
>>>>> Wait until January 20, 2013 when she is either President or
>>>>> Vice-President. :(
>>>> Not gonna happen. Why? For one thing, she would never make it out of
>>>> the Republican primaries.
>>>>
>>>> Sarah the Quitter. That says it all.
>>>>
>>> What if Rush, Hannity and Beck et al tell the dittoheads to vote for
>>> her?
>>
>> Like the way they shot down John McCain? To the extent they supported
>> McCain at
>> all it was only as an alternative to O.
>
> What part of McDemocrat was an alternative?
>
<http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175109/david_swanson_the_more_things_change>.
--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
Obama - Yes We Can, but No We Won't!
Tom Kunich
news:h8402d$rod$2...@news.eternal-september.org...
>
> What part of McDemocrat was an alternative?
Hear, hear.
Bill Sornson
> "Johnny Twelve-Point presented by JFT" <usenet...@jt10000.com>
> wrote in message news:0draa5te0m6rou5tk...@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 7 Sep 2009 08:47:38 -0700, "Bill Sornson" <so...@noyb.com>
>> wrote:
{Gee, was the CONTEXT of the below comment removed by 12IQ?!? Shock et
surprise! LOL }
Someone let me know if Twelve IQ Points replies to that.
ROTFL
Bill "consensus is just so /2006/" S.
Johnny Twelve-Point presented by JFT
wrote:
>> "Johnny Twelve-Point presented by JFT" <usenet...@jt10000.com>
>> wrote in message news:0draa5te0m6rou5tk...@4ax.com...
>>> Yeah, other than that pesky evidence thing, and the consensus of
>>> leading climate scientists. Yeah, it's pretty much a cult.
>Someone let me know if Twelve IQ Points replies to that.
>
Sorni, I don't reply to Kunich. I don't read what he writes - he's in
my killfile and I actually ignore what he writes if it makes it
through via quoting.
You should try this approach to ignoring people sometime, rather than
quoting people you claim to ignore. As you did me, above.
In fact, you ought to not ask people to tell you about text from
someone you claim to want to ignore. That's just dopey.
RonSonic
<twsherm...@THISsouthslope.net> wrote:
>Andrew Muzi wrote:
>> RonSonic wrote:
>>> On Mon, 07 Sep 2009 15:50:42 -0500, Tom Sherman �_�
>>> <twsherm...@THISsouthslope.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Pat i. Texas wrote:
>>>>> Tom Sherman �_� wrote:
>>>>>> Wait until January 20, 2013 when she is either President or
>>>>>> Vice-President. :(
>>>>> Not gonna happen. Why? For one thing, she would never make it out of
>>>>> the Republican primaries.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sarah the Quitter. That says it all.
>>>>>
>>>> What if Rush, Hannity and Beck et al tell the dittoheads to vote for
>>>> her?
>>>
>>> Like the way they shot down John McCain? To the extent they supported
>>> McCain at
>>> all it was only as an alternative to O.
>>
>> What part of McDemocrat was an alternative?
>>
>Obama has turned out to be a DINO:
><http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175109/david_swanson_the_more_things_change>.
He's the American President. With the problems, available tools and
responsibilities of the American President. Why wouldn't his international
policies be similar?
--
Oh damn. There's that annoying blog. Again. http://dumbbikeblog.blogspot.com
Tom Sherman °_°
lunatics. What is Obama's excuse?
Tom Kunich
>
> Sorni, I don't reply to Kunich. I don't read what he writes - he's in
> my killfile and I actually ignore what he writes if it makes it
> through via quoting.
Note that he doesn't like it when anyone disagrees with his position. To the
point where he simply won't address the actual facts.
Too bad, John went off the deep end a couple of years ago. Before that he
was actually one of the best posters here.
Dan O
> "Johnny Twelve-Point presented by JFT" <usenetrem...@jt10000.com> wrote in
> messagenews:0draa5te0m6rou5tk...@4ax.com...
>
> > On Mon, 7 Sep 2009 08:47:38 -0700, "Bill Sornson" <so...@noyb.com>
> > wrote:
>
> >>Since global warming alarmism IS a religious movement of sorts, you're
> >>more
> >>right than you know.
>
> > Yeah, other than that pesky evidence thing, and the consensus of
> > leading climate scientists. Yeah, it's pretty much a cult.
>
> "There is no convincing evidence that human release of carbon dioxide or
> other greenhouse gases is causing, or will cause in the future, catastrophic
> heating of the Earth's atmosphere or disruption of the Earth's climate."
>
> Oregon Petition, from the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, signed
> by over 17,000 international scientists including more than 2,000 of the
> world's leading climatologists, meteorologists and planetary/atmospheric
> scientists.
>
> http://www.oism.org/pproject/
>
> Note that it says plainly that "The proposed limits on greenhouse gases
> would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology,
> and damage the health and welfare of mankind."
>
> Other information:
>
<snip>
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Oregon_Institute_of_Science_and_Medicine
"The Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine (OISM) describes itself
as "a small research institute" that studies "biochemistry, diagnostic
medicine, nutrition, preventive medicine and the molecular biology of
aging." It is headed by Arthur B. Robinson, an eccentric scientist who
has a long history of controversial entanglements with figures on the
fringe of accepted research. OISM also markets a home-schooling kit
for "parents concerned about socialism in the public schools" and
publishes books on how to survive nuclear war."
Tom Kunich
news:r9bba55gfl314r589...@4ax.com...
>
>>That aside, I have to agree with you suggestion about GWB & Co
>>spending money, passing legislation, and starting a war to help their
>>friends. So, why weren't you ever complaining about GWB?
>
> I await your reply.
Why would I complain about Bush when he was 100 times better than the
alternative? As you might realize, being better than the alternative is NOT
being good.
Bill Sornson
> "Johnny Twelve-Point presented by JFT" <usenet...@jt10000.com>
> wrote in message news:mn5ba5h16iptm41gk...@4ax.com...
>>
>> Sorni, I don't reply to Kunich. I don't read what he writes - he's in
>> my killfile and I actually ignore what he writes if it makes it
>> through via quoting.
>
> Note that he doesn't like it when anyone disagrees with his position.
> To the point where he simply won't address the actual facts.
Just too rich. Flogger HAS to know I've plonked him (must be 30-40 notices
of it), yet he still addresses me to tell me he's ignoring your complete and
utter refutation of what he wrote. (As usual he's apparently deleted all
that, as if it makes it go away. LOL )
> Too bad, John went off the deep end a couple of years ago. Before
> that he was actually one of the best posters here.
I vaguely recall that as well. Interesting posts and spirited
arguments...gave way to lunacy, hysteria and worst of all blatant hypocrisy
and dishonesty.
Bill "and thus I plonk" S.
Dan O
> "Dan O" <danover...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:76db23a2-f72e-49a0...@q40g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> >http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Oregon_Institute_of_Scienc...
>
> > "The Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine (OISM) describes itself
> > as "a small research institute" that studies "biochemistry, diagnostic
> > medicine, nutrition, preventive medicine and the molecular biology of
> > aging." It is headed by Arthur B. Robinson, an eccentric scientist who
> > has a long history of controversial entanglements with figures on the
> > fringe of accepted research. OISM also markets a home-schooling kit
> > for "parents concerned about socialism in the public schools" and
> > publishes books on how to survive nuclear war."
>
> like the source for their opinions?
"When questioned in 1998, OISM's Arthur Robinson admitted that only
2,100 signers of the Oregon Petition had identified themselves as
physicists, geophysicists, climatologists, or meteorologists, "and of
those the greatest number are physicists." This grouping of fields
concealed the fact that only a few dozen, at most, of the signatories
were drawn from the core disciplines of climate science - such as
meteorology, oceanography, and glaciology - and almost none were
climate specialists. The names of the signers are available on the
OISM's website, but without listing any institutional affiliations or
even city of residence, making it very difficult to determine their
credentials or even whether they exist at all. When the Oregon
Petition first circulated, in fact, environmental activists
successfully added the names of several fictional characters and
celebrities to the list, including John Grisham, Michael J. Fox, Drs.
Frank Burns, B. J. Honeycutt, and Benjamin Pierce (from the TV show
M*A*S*H), an individual by the name of "Dr. Red Wine," and Geraldine
Halliwell, formerly known as pop singer Ginger Spice of the Spice
Girls."
Johnny Twelve-Point presented by JFT
wrote:
>Just too rich. Flogger HAS to know I've plonked him (must be 30-40 notices
>of it), yet he still addresses me to tell me he's ignoring your complete and
And, also today:
On Mon, 7 Sep 2009 15:47:20 -0700, "Bill Sornson" <so...@noyb.com>
wrote:
>> "Johnny Twelve-Point presented by JFT" <usenet...@jt10000.com>
>> wrote in message news:0draa5te0m6rou5tk...@4ax.com...
>>> Yeah, other than that pesky evidence thing, and the consensus of
>>> leading climate scientists. Yeah, it's pretty much a cult.
>Someone let me know if Twelve IQ Points replies to that.
You quote me today, you ask for info on what I said today, and you say
you've killfiled me today.
How stupid are you?
Peter Cole
> "Dan O" <danov...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:76db23a2-f72e-49a0...@q40g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Oregon_Institute_of_Science_and_Medicine
>>
>>
>> "The Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine (OISM) describes itself
>> as "a small research institute" that studies "biochemistry, diagnostic
>> medicine, nutrition, preventive medicine and the molecular biology of
>> aging." It is headed by Arthur B. Robinson, an eccentric scientist who
>> has a long history of controversial entanglements with figures on the
>> fringe of accepted research. OISM also markets a home-schooling kit
>> for "parents concerned about socialism in the public schools" and
>> publishes books on how to survive nuclear war."
>
> don't like the source for their opinions?
>
No, as everybody knows by now, it's a fraud.
Neil Brooks
> Just too rich. Flogger HAS to know I've plonked him (must be 30-40 notices
> of it), yet he still addresses me to tell me he's ignoring your complete and
> utter refutation of what he wrote. (As usual he's apparently deleted all
> that, as if it makes it go away. LOL )
And yet ... you KEEP addressing him.
Over and over and over and over.
Impulse control issues: one of the many hallmarks of Dry Drunk
Syndrome.
Too bad you never dealt with ... anything.
Neil Brooks
<usenetrem...@jt10000.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 7 Sep 2009 19:26:51 -0700, "Bill Sornson" <so...@noyb.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Just too rich. Flogger HAS to know I've plonked him (must be 30-40 notices
> >of it), yet he still addresses me to tell me he's ignoring your complete and
>
> And, also today:
>
> On Mon, 7 Sep 2009 15:47:20 -0700, "Bill Sornson" <so...@noyb.com>
> wrote:
>
> >> wrote in messagenews:0draa5te0m6rou5tk...@4ax.com...
> >>> Yeah, other than that pesky evidence thing, and the consensus of
> >>> leading climate scientists. Yeah, it's pretty much a cult.
> >Someone let me know if Twelve IQ Points replies to that.
>
> You quote me today, you ask for info on what I said today, and you say
> you've killfiled me today.
>
> How stupid are you?
It's pretty boundless.
RonSonic
<twsherm...@THISsouthslope.net> wrote:
I know it's really hard for you to grasp, but maybe, just maybe those policies
were not so much deranged or crazy as simply beyond your ken. Or at least your
present world view.
Can we get behind the idea that GWB and BHO have information we don't. That they
have people advising them on the basis of knowledge we don't have. Could it be
that just maybe they're both right. The two of them never seem to have agreed on
much so maybe the things they agree on make sense on some level.
At some point you've got to give up the idea that every single thing Bush ever
did was wrong, stupid and crazy.
Tom Sherman °_°
at the expense of the people who created the wealth in the first place.
Obama just puts a more intelligent, un-smirking face on it.
Johnny Twelve-Point presented by JFT
<rons...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>Can we get behind the idea that GWB and BHO have information we don't.
Hahaha. On major domestic policy directions, Obama has never claimed
to have secret information. GWB, Cheney, etc did it a lot on national
security.
This "they're both bad" stuff is a sign of the lame conservatives
trying to hold onto world view that "liberals" are bad. And it's
lame.
Johnny Twelve-Point presented by JFT
<rons...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>At some point you've got to give up the idea that every single thing Bush ever
>did was wrong, stupid and crazy.
Not everything. And some were not crazy - they were greedy.
But let's look at a few major actions:
National security - incompetent/stupid. Took US into wrong war.
Wasted hundreds of billions of dollars. Undemined goodwill toward US
around the world. Aided terrorist recruitment
The environment - greedy, playing into oil and heavy industry
interests
Civil rights - greedy/power seeking - strenghthened ability of
government to secretyly spy on citizens, detain non-citizens, etc
Finance/economy - greedy/incopetetent -- continued dismantling of
regulation of financial services, contributing to current economic
collapse
Distaster relief - incompetent
I think Bush made some good choices regarding US efforts to combat
AIDS in Africa (though these were undermined by some anti-family
planning efforts). He was making some good statements regarding our
relations with Mexico before 9/11.
So it's not everything that he messed up or helped mess up. Just key
things like national security, the economy, civil rights and the
environment..
Bill Sornson
> http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/09/04/dinner-palin-auctioned-ebay/?test=latestnews
>
>
> ANCHORAGE, Alaska -- Want to have dinner with former Alaska Gov.
> Sarah Palin? Plan on writing a big check.
>
> The ex-Republican vice presidential candidate is offering the dinner
> as part of a charity auction on eBay for the Ride 2 Recovery program,
> which supports wounded veterans through cycling programs.
>
> The 10-day auction starts Tuesday. The opening bid for dinner for
> five with Palin is $25,000, and organizers say the winner will have
> to foot the travel bill to meet up with her, likely in Alaska.
Lunch with Carl Rove is a bit more affordable:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=260474255080&ssPageName=STRK:MESC:IT
Bill "waiting on Clueless' and Shallow's bids" S.