Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Biden And Flat Tires
417 views
Skip to first unread message
Tom Kunich
Jan 16, 2024, 11:51:13 AM1/16/24
to
During Obama and his Great Recession that the Stupid 4+1 don't believe was there hero Obama's fault, pe3ople without work would run their tires until the steel casing broke through and would bleed steel particles all over the road causing bicycles endless problems with flat tires almost constantly. This did NOT stop until Trump entered office and then disappeared almost overnight.
Biden trumped Obama by doing the same thing in three years. Perhaps this is one of the reasons that Biden approval ratings are the lowest on record. And Trump's the highest.
I have four bikes down in the garage with flat tires and all of them are the slow leaks indicative of worn out car tires shedding wires. When I repair a pin hole flat the next ride is the same problem. One of the tubes I was repairing had six of these micro holes in it. That could be too much trouble to repair so it was trashed and the next ride on that bike had me getting another flat half way into the ride. I could not repair it since I have mistakenly put a short filler tube in it but the leak was so small that I was able to take a short cut home. Yesterday morning it was flat and I had to take out the Di2 bike which I am rapidly coming to despise. My hands become somewhat numb and I cannot tell which button I am pressing.
This isn't the case with any manual shifting. To show that this isn't a peculiarity of mine, all of the local bike shops are running out of tubes. Several of the local shops have been buying the narrower road tubes with Shrader fillers which are still available/ To use these you have to have less depth on the rim and it has to be drilled out for the Shrader filler. So the Stupid 4+1 are going to have to be fitted with tin foil hats because they fully intend to deny it. Even Liebermann who doesn't ride or Slocomb who, if he ever rode a bike, it was so long ago that he forgets what a bike looks like.
November can't come fast enough.
Biden trumped Obama by doing the same thing in three years. Perhaps this is one of the reasons that Biden approval ratings are the lowest on record. And Trump's the highest.
I have four bikes down in the garage with flat tires and all of them are the slow leaks indicative of worn out car tires shedding wires. When I repair a pin hole flat the next ride is the same problem. One of the tubes I was repairing had six of these micro holes in it. That could be too much trouble to repair so it was trashed and the next ride on that bike had me getting another flat half way into the ride. I could not repair it since I have mistakenly put a short filler tube in it but the leak was so small that I was able to take a short cut home. Yesterday morning it was flat and I had to take out the Di2 bike which I am rapidly coming to despise. My hands become somewhat numb and I cannot tell which button I am pressing.
This isn't the case with any manual shifting. To show that this isn't a peculiarity of mine, all of the local bike shops are running out of tubes. Several of the local shops have been buying the narrower road tubes with Shrader fillers which are still available/ To use these you have to have less depth on the rim and it has to be drilled out for the Shrader filler. So the Stupid 4+1 are going to have to be fitted with tin foil hats because they fully intend to deny it. Even Liebermann who doesn't ride or Slocomb who, if he ever rode a bike, it was so long ago that he forgets what a bike looks like.
November can't come fast enough.
Zen Cycle
Jan 16, 2024, 12:14:22 PM1/16/24
to
On 1/16/2024 11:51 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> During Obama and his Great Recession that the Stupid 4+1 don't believe was there hero Obama's fault, pe3ople without work would run their tires until the steel casing broke through and would bleed steel particles all over the road causing bicycles endless problems with flat tires almost constantly. This did NOT stop until Trump entered office and then disappeared almost overnight.
>
> Biden trumped Obama by doing the same thing in three years. Perhaps this is one of the reasons that Biden approval ratings are the lowest on record. And Trump's the highest.
>
> I have four bikes down in the garage with flat tires and all of them are the slow leaks indicative of worn out car tires shedding wires. When I repair a pin hole flat the next ride is the same problem. One of the tubes I was repairing had six of these micro holes in it. That could be too much trouble to repair so it was trashed and the next ride on that bike had me getting another flat half way into the ride. I could not repair it since I have mistakenly put a short filler tube in it but the leak was so small that I was able to take a short cut home. Yesterday morning it was flat and I had to take out the Di2 bike which I am rapidly coming to despise. My hands become somewhat numb and I cannot tell which button I am pressing.
>
> This isn't the case with any manual shifting. To show that this isn't a peculiarity of mine, all of the local bike shops are running out of tubes.
I haven't laughed this hard in weeks. Generally speaking I won't miss
> During Obama and his Great Recession that the Stupid 4+1 don't believe was there hero Obama's fault, pe3ople without work would run their tires until the steel casing broke through and would bleed steel particles all over the road causing bicycles endless problems with flat tires almost constantly. This did NOT stop until Trump entered office and then disappeared almost overnight.
>
> Biden trumped Obama by doing the same thing in three years. Perhaps this is one of the reasons that Biden approval ratings are the lowest on record. And Trump's the highest.
>
> I have four bikes down in the garage with flat tires and all of them are the slow leaks indicative of worn out car tires shedding wires. When I repair a pin hole flat the next ride is the same problem. One of the tubes I was repairing had six of these micro holes in it. That could be too much trouble to repair so it was trashed and the next ride on that bike had me getting another flat half way into the ride. I could not repair it since I have mistakenly put a short filler tube in it but the leak was so small that I was able to take a short cut home. Yesterday morning it was flat and I had to take out the Di2 bike which I am rapidly coming to despise. My hands become somewhat numb and I cannot tell which button I am pressing.
>
> This isn't the case with any manual shifting. To show that this isn't a peculiarity of mine, all of the local bike shops are running out of tubes.
tommy when he can't post here any more, but I _will_ miss gems like this.
BTW tommy
https://www.amazon.com/Tube-700-48mm-Presta-Valve/dp/B077CT1NY7?th=1
Free overnight delivery with Prime
Roger Merriman
Jan 16, 2024, 1:57:15 PM1/16/24
to
26inch tubes is easy enough to get replacement tubes or tires from.
Admittedly tubes last many years as well the tires are generally man enough
to cope with any urban debris they encounter.
Roger Merriman
sms
Jan 16, 2024, 3:50:00 PM1/16/24
to
On 1/16/2024 9:14 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
> I haven't laughed this hard in weeks. Generally speaking I won't miss
> tommy when he can't post here any more, but I _will_ miss gems like this.
That was the best!
> I haven't laughed this hard in weeks. Generally speaking I won't miss
> tommy when he can't post here any more, but I _will_ miss gems like this.
FWIW, the great bicycle tube and tire shortage was during the Trump
administration.
Trump should have gotten an award from the National Bicycle Dealers
Association (NBDA) because it was his horrible botching of the response
to the Covid epidemic that led to the spectacular sales of bicycles,
parts, and accessories.
<https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/05/16/857157196/bike-sales-gear-up-as-the-homebound-try-socially-distant-exercise>
Biden, with his competent response to Covid, ended the pandemic and
bicycle sales plunged as people could go back to other activities.
During the pandemic, there was a big shortage to tubes and tires and
prices skyrocketed. Now tubes and tires are readily available and prices
have fallen. I just bought 27.5" Kenda tubes for less than $4 each
<https://www.ebay.com/itm/296093855956>.
Obama's competent handling of the economy ended the recession caused by
W. "The economy improved markedly under former President Barack Obama,
from the start of 2009 through the end of 2016. Faced with the specter
of another Great Depression in winter 2009, President Obama enacted a
series of policies that helped the economy avoid that fate. The economy
was growing again by the second half of 2009, and jobs followed suit by
early 2010. Economic growth continued apace for the rest of President
Obama’s time in office, and job growth logged its longest expansion on
record by early 2017, dating back to 1939.1 Employment opportunities
improved, the unemployment rate fell, wages eventually increased, and
household debt dropped sharply."
Biden is reversing the failures of the Trump economy, with spectacular
job growth, low unemployment, and a record stock market. The inflation
caused by the spending during the pandemic is coming down nicely.
--
“If you are not an expert on a subject, then your opinions about it
really do matter less than the opinions of experts. It's not
indoctrination nor elitism. It's just that you don't know as much as
they do about the subject.”—Tin Foil Awards
AMuzi
Jan 16, 2024, 4:19:04 PM1/16/24
to
for firearms sales?
https://www.statista.com/statistics/249740/percentage-of-households-in-the-united-states-owning-a-firearm/
--
Andrew Muzi
a...@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
Zen Cycle
Jan 16, 2024, 4:22:31 PM1/16/24
to
NRA/GOP that Obama was going to take everyone's guns.
--
Add xx to reply
AMuzi
Jan 16, 2024, 4:26:09 PM1/16/24
to
complete the series above.
Catrike Ryder
Jan 16, 2024, 4:36:24 PM1/16/24
to
On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 12:49:55 -0800, sms <scharf...@geemail.com>
wrote:
The people aren't buying that...
https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/approval/joe-biden/approval-rating
wrote:
https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/approval/joe-biden/approval-rating
Catrike Ryder
Jan 16, 2024, 4:40:13 PM1/16/24
to
On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 16:22:27 -0500, Zen Cycle <funkm...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
During his presidency, Obama called for stricter gun laws and urged
Congress to reinstate the assault weapons ban following the 2016 Pulse
nightclub attack in Orlando, which killed 49 people and wounded dozens
more.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/barack-obama-gun-ownership-growing-ideological-partisan-issue-cbs-mornings-interview/
wrote:
Congress to reinstate the assault weapons ban following the 2016 Pulse
nightclub attack in Orlando, which killed 49 people and wounded dozens
more.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/barack-obama-gun-ownership-growing-ideological-partisan-issue-cbs-mornings-interview/
Tom Kunich
Jan 16, 2024, 4:53:53 PM1/16/24
to
sms
Jan 16, 2024, 4:59:02 PM1/16/24
to
On 1/16/2024 1:19 PM, AMuzi wrote:
<snip>
> Does the Obama Team (2009~16 and 2021~present) get credit for firearms
> sales?
Absolutely.
A sufficient number of crazies believed that Obama would take their guns
away. Democratic presidents are always better for the firearms industry
because so many stupid people think that they will be unable to purchase
guns or ammunition.
<snip>
> Does the Obama Team (2009~16 and 2021~present) get credit for firearms
> sales?
A sufficient number of crazies believed that Obama would take their guns
away. Democratic presidents are always better for the firearms industry
because so many stupid people think that they will be unable to purchase
guns or ammunition.
Catrike Ryder
Jan 16, 2024, 4:59:58 PM1/16/24
to
On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 13:58:59 -0800, sms <scharf...@geemail.com>
wrote:
>On 1/16/2024 1:19 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>> Does the Obama Team (2009~16 and 2021~present) get credit for firearms
>> sales?
>
>Absolutely.
>
>A sufficient number of crazies believed that Obama would take their guns
>away. Democratic presidents are always better for the firearms industry
>because so many stupid people think that they will be unable to purchase
>guns or ammunition.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/barack-obama-gun-ownership-growing-ideological-partisan-issue-cbs-mornings-interview/
wrote:
>On 1/16/2024 1:19 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>> Does the Obama Team (2009~16 and 2021~present) get credit for firearms
>> sales?
>
>Absolutely.
>
>A sufficient number of crazies believed that Obama would take their guns
>away. Democratic presidents are always better for the firearms industry
>because so many stupid people think that they will be unable to purchase
>guns or ammunition.
Tom Kunich
Jan 16, 2024, 5:10:39 PM1/16/24
to
Biden is the most hated figure in modern history and even Obama, a man in so far over his head that he was a disaster for this nation, says outright that Biden is a crook.
And you are such a first class moron that you THINK that Biden was somehow fixing what Trump broke. Try running on that the next time you run for office.
Anyone that believes that Biden was responsible for 19 million jobs is too stupid to know that returning to a job you held before the Biden lock-down is NOT "job creation" and that the IRS revenue is expecting almost a trillion dollar shortfall.
AMuzi
Jan 16, 2024, 5:45:26 PM1/16/24
to
rail...
AMuzi
Jan 16, 2024, 5:50:42 PM1/16/24
to
On 1/16/2024 3:58 PM, sms wrote:
> On 1/16/2024 1:19 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> Does the Obama Team (2009~16 and 2021~present) get credit
>> for firearms sales?
>
> Absolutely.
>
> A sufficient number of crazies believed that Obama would
> take their guns away. Democratic presidents are always
> better for the firearms industry because so many stupid
> people think that they will be unable to purchase guns or
> ammunition.
>
That turned out to be all hat and no cattle.
> On 1/16/2024 1:19 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> Does the Obama Team (2009~16 and 2021~present) get credit
>> for firearms sales?
>
> Absolutely.
>
> A sufficient number of crazies believed that Obama would
> take their guns away. Democratic presidents are always
> better for the firearms industry because so many stupid
> people think that they will be unable to purchase guns or
> ammunition.
>
Our Constitution, culture and courts remain intact.
I was going for the spurious correlation aspect.
Jeff Liebermann
Jan 16, 2024, 6:03:20 PM1/16/24
to
campaign:
<https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/jan/13/john-kerry-biden-administration-re-election-campaign>
That isn't jumping ship.
--
Jeff Liebermann je...@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
AMuzi
Jan 16, 2024, 6:05:02 PM1/16/24
to
On 1/16/2024 5:03 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 16:45:24 -0600, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>
>> On 1/16/2024 3:36 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
>>> The people aren't buying that...
>>> https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/approval/joe-biden/approval-rating
>
>> Even John Kerry jumped ship. The remaining rats are at the
>> rail...
>
> Kerry is 80 years old. He plans to work on the Biden re-election
> campaign:
> <https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/jan/13/john-kerry-biden-administration-re-election-campaign>
> That isn't jumping ship.
>
I didn't know that, thanks.
> On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 16:45:24 -0600, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>
>> On 1/16/2024 3:36 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
>>> The people aren't buying that...
>>> https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/approval/joe-biden/approval-rating
>
>> Even John Kerry jumped ship. The remaining rats are at the
>> rail...
>
> Kerry is 80 years old. He plans to work on the Biden re-election
> campaign:
> <https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/jan/13/john-kerry-biden-administration-re-election-campaign>
> That isn't jumping ship.
>
Made for each other...
sms
Jan 16, 2024, 7:03:41 PM1/16/24
to
On 1/16/2024 2:50 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> On 1/16/2024 3:58 PM, sms wrote:
>> On 1/16/2024 1:19 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>> Does the Obama Team (2009~16 and 2021~present) get credit for
>>> firearms sales?
>>
>> Absolutely.
>>
>> A sufficient number of crazies believed that Obama would take their
>> guns away. Democratic presidents are always better for the firearms
>> industry because so many stupid people think that they will be unable
>> to purchase guns or ammunition.
>>
> That turned out to be all hat and no cattle.
> Our Constitution, culture and courts remain intact.
Exactly. The fear of the gun nuts is that there will be background
> On 1/16/2024 3:58 PM, sms wrote:
>> On 1/16/2024 1:19 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>> Does the Obama Team (2009~16 and 2021~present) get credit for
>>> firearms sales?
>>
>> Absolutely.
>>
>> A sufficient number of crazies believed that Obama would take their
>> guns away. Democratic presidents are always better for the firearms
>> industry because so many stupid people think that they will be unable
>> to purchase guns or ammunition.
>>
> That turned out to be all hat and no cattle.
> Our Constitution, culture and courts remain intact.
checks, not that guns would be unavailable.
AMuzi
Jan 16, 2024, 7:19:56 PM1/16/24
to
On 1/16/2024 6:03 PM, sms wrote:
> On 1/16/2024 2:50 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 1/16/2024 3:58 PM, sms wrote:
>>> On 1/16/2024 1:19 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>> Does the Obama Team (2009~16 and 2021~present) get
>>>> credit for firearms sales?
>>>
>>> Absolutely.
>>>
>>> A sufficient number of crazies believed that Obama would
>>> take their guns away. Democratic presidents are always
>>> better for the firearms industry because so many stupid
>>> people think that they will be unable to purchase guns or
>>> ammunition.
>>>
>> That turned out to be all hat and no cattle.
>> Our Constitution, culture and courts remain intact.
>
> Exactly. The fear of the gun nuts is that there will be
> background checks, not that guns would be unavailable.
>
Well, that's a reasonable extrapolation.
> On 1/16/2024 2:50 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 1/16/2024 3:58 PM, sms wrote:
>>> On 1/16/2024 1:19 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>> Does the Obama Team (2009~16 and 2021~present) get
>>>> credit for firearms sales?
>>>
>>> Absolutely.
>>>
>>> A sufficient number of crazies believed that Obama would
>>> take their guns away. Democratic presidents are always
>>> better for the firearms industry because so many stupid
>>> people think that they will be unable to purchase guns or
>>> ammunition.
>>>
>> That turned out to be all hat and no cattle.
>> Our Constitution, culture and courts remain intact.
>
> Exactly. The fear of the gun nuts is that there will be
> background checks, not that guns would be unavailable.
>
Once everyone registers, confiscation is simpler, as history
shows.
Catrike Ryder
Jan 16, 2024, 7:29:15 PM1/16/24
to
On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 16:03:37 -0800, sms <scharf...@geemail.com>
wrote:
>On 1/16/2024 2:50 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 1/16/2024 3:58 PM, sms wrote:
>>> On 1/16/2024 1:19 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>> Does the Obama Team (2009~16 and 2021~present) get credit for
>>>> firearms sales?
>>>
>>> Absolutely.
>>>
>>> A sufficient number of crazies believed that Obama would take their
>>> guns away. Democratic presidents are always better for the firearms
>>> industry because so many stupid people think that they will be unable
>>> to purchase guns or ammunition.
>>>
>> That turned out to be all hat and no cattle.
>> Our Constitution, culture and courts remain intact.
>
>Exactly. The fear of the gun nuts is that there will be background
>checks, not that guns would be unavailable.
So why would that spur gun sales?
wrote:
>On 1/16/2024 2:50 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 1/16/2024 3:58 PM, sms wrote:
>>> On 1/16/2024 1:19 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>> Does the Obama Team (2009~16 and 2021~present) get credit for
>>>> firearms sales?
>>>
>>> Absolutely.
>>>
>>> A sufficient number of crazies believed that Obama would take their
>>> guns away. Democratic presidents are always better for the firearms
>>> industry because so many stupid people think that they will be unable
>>> to purchase guns or ammunition.
>>>
>> That turned out to be all hat and no cattle.
>> Our Constitution, culture and courts remain intact.
>
>Exactly. The fear of the gun nuts is that there will be background
>checks, not that guns would be unavailable.
Frank Krygowski
Jan 16, 2024, 9:37:42 PM1/16/24
to
On 1/16/2024 4:22 PM, Zen Cycle wrote:
>
> A large number of people bought into the lie spread by the
> NRA/GOP that Obama was going to take everyone's guns.
I know a couple of those guys. They are idiots in other ways as well.
>
> A large number of people bought into the lie spread by the
> NRA/GOP that Obama was going to take everyone's guns.
--
- Frank Krygowski
Lou Holtman
Jan 17, 2024, 3:08:50 AM1/17/24
to
Lou
Catrike Ryder
Jan 17, 2024, 4:15:27 AM1/17/24
to
On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 21:37:38 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>On 1/16/2024 4:22 PM, Zen Cycle wrote:
> >
>> A large number of people bought into the lie spread by the
>> NRA/GOP that Obama was going to take everyone's guns.
That was is intent...
<frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>On 1/16/2024 4:22 PM, Zen Cycle wrote:
> >
>> A large number of people bought into the lie spread by the
>> NRA/GOP that Obama was going to take everyone's guns.
In the aftermath of the Orlando terrorist attack, President Barack
Obama today called on Congress to reinstate the assault weapons ban
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/obama-calls-assault-weapons-ban-fly-buy-law/story?id=39846590
>I know a couple of those guys.
Zen Cycle
Jan 17, 2024, 7:34:31 AM1/17/24
to
the same people who would have taken you seriousy.
Zen Cycle
Jan 17, 2024, 7:37:58 AM1/17/24
to
further sales.
> following the 2016 Pulse
> nightclub attack in Orlando, which killed 49 people and wounded dozens
> more.
>
> https://www.cbsnews.com/news/barack-obama-gun-ownership-growing-ideological-partisan-issue-cbs-mornings-interview/
Catrike Ryder
Jan 17, 2024, 8:16:01 AM1/17/24
to
On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 07:37:54 -0500, Zen Cycle <funkm...@hotmail.com>
<SNIP>
Yes, Dummy, you see, the original assault weapons ban had a
grandfather clause that allowed a person to keep the weapon if he'd
gotten it before the ban, so, a wise person who thought they might
ever want one, went out and bought one, assuming a reinstatement of
the ban would have the same grandfather clause.
Yes, Dummy, you see, the original assault weapons ban had a
grandfather clause that allowed a person to keep the weapon if he'd
gotten it before the ban, so, a wise person who thought they might
ever want one, went out and bought one, assuming a reinstatement of
the ban would have the same grandfather clause.
Zen Cycle
Jan 17, 2024, 8:20:39 AM1/17/24
to
"corporate", My in-town shop is now exclusive to Cannondale and their
associated brands, and the last shop that sponsored my team became a
Trek store. That means I can't find things like a derailleur clamp for a
braze-on derailleur at either shop any more, they would have to order
them from Problem Solvers just like I do (yes, I recently experienced
that very incident). Even accessories like bar tape are restricted by
their corporate branding. At least I'm not forced to go because I've
fucked something up.
> Instead he buys things off of Amazon.
but no one else?
https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/6vYL7JsVilE/m/5p7xRH7rAQAJ
"Here I am meaning to price out the necessary Campy 12 speed parts
(Chorus levers and Centaur derailleurs and a 12 speed cassette) and
Amazon is off the air."
https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/77R0z-Tw8fs/m/fESqnksfDQAJ
"My Chinese wheels weigh 1445 grams and cost me $353 with free shipping."
https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/6vYL7JsVilE/m/RZnBLKo2AgAJ
"If Ebay and Craigslist and Google and all of the rest of the programs I
have worked without the restart, Amazon should have as well or else
THEIR programming was faulty. You don't like it? Shove it up your ass
idiot."
> Do you suppose that is because he can't take the sarcasm about his "racing" abilities?
that's _your_ experience, it isn't mine.
AMuzi
Jan 17, 2024, 10:08:41 AM1/17/24
to
such assurances.
funkma...@hotmail.com
Jan 17, 2024, 10:50:03 AM1/17/24
to
"wouldn't have taken anyone's guns away, it would have restricted further sales."
"person who thought they might ever want one, went out and bought one, assuming a reinstatement of the ban would have the same grandfather clause."
got it...dumbass.
Catrike Ryder
Jan 17, 2024, 11:19:17 AM1/17/24
to
especially if it was a benefit to anyone.
sms
Jan 17, 2024, 11:50:31 AM1/17/24
to
On 1/17/2024 5:20 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
<snip>
> I do, frequently. Unfortunately all the local shops around me have gone
> "corporate", My in-town shop is now exclusive to Cannondale and their
> associated brands, and the last shop that sponsored my team became a
> Trek store. That means I can't find things like a derailleur clamp for a
> braze-on derailleur at either shop any more, they would have to order
> them from Problem Solvers just like I do (yes, I recently experienced
> that very incident). Even accessories like bar tape are restricted by
> their corporate branding. At least I'm not forced to go because I've
> fucked something up.
Remember in 2021 when Tom had a fit that his local bike shop was
following the law regarding face coverings and he stormed out and then
boasted about how he ordered online? See
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/7MGs55w41Qc/m/UGLx-2jPBgAJ>:
"So I came home and ordered the tires and tubes on-line for a fraction
of what it would have cost me in their store and paid $140 or so."
I sent an e-mail to the founder of the bike store, thanking him for
being diligent about stopping the spread of Covid:
"Kudo's to Mikes Bikes for enforcing common-sense Covid-prevention
measures. Fortunately Tom just left without incident. Other covidiot
anti-maskers have been physically removed from stores like Walmart.
<https://youtu.be/f456x1Zvz3U>
<https://twitter.com/i/status/1292306240287248384>"
I got a reply and had an e-mail exchange:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ken Martin
Sep 4, 2021, 4:28 AM
I’m not familiar with this incident, and the attachment didn’t come
through. Can you send it again, or a link to the post? -Ken -- Ken
Martin Founder & CEO Mike
---
Steven Scharf
Sep 4, 2021, 4:32 AM
to Ken
Here is a link to the thread on rec.bicycles.tech:
https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/7MGs55w41Qc
The person that started this was upset that an employee at your
Pleasanton store told him that he had to wear a mask. That person has a
history of being a jerk.
---
Ken Martin
Sep 4, 2021, 4:36 AM
to me
Thank you. Wow, he really does sound like a jerk. Thanks for sticking
up for us!!
-Ken
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<snip>
> I do, frequently. Unfortunately all the local shops around me have gone
> "corporate", My in-town shop is now exclusive to Cannondale and their
> associated brands, and the last shop that sponsored my team became a
> Trek store. That means I can't find things like a derailleur clamp for a
> braze-on derailleur at either shop any more, they would have to order
> them from Problem Solvers just like I do (yes, I recently experienced
> that very incident). Even accessories like bar tape are restricted by
> their corporate branding. At least I'm not forced to go because I've
> fucked something up.
following the law regarding face coverings and he stormed out and then
boasted about how he ordered online? See
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/7MGs55w41Qc/m/UGLx-2jPBgAJ>:
"So I came home and ordered the tires and tubes on-line for a fraction
of what it would have cost me in their store and paid $140 or so."
I sent an e-mail to the founder of the bike store, thanking him for
being diligent about stopping the spread of Covid:
"Kudo's to Mikes Bikes for enforcing common-sense Covid-prevention
measures. Fortunately Tom just left without incident. Other covidiot
anti-maskers have been physically removed from stores like Walmart.
<https://youtu.be/f456x1Zvz3U>
<https://twitter.com/i/status/1292306240287248384>"
I got a reply and had an e-mail exchange:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ken Martin
Sep 4, 2021, 4:28 AM
I’m not familiar with this incident, and the attachment didn’t come
through. Can you send it again, or a link to the post? -Ken -- Ken
Martin Founder & CEO Mike
---
Steven Scharf
Sep 4, 2021, 4:32 AM
to Ken
Here is a link to the thread on rec.bicycles.tech:
https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/7MGs55w41Qc
The person that started this was upset that an employee at your
Pleasanton store told him that he had to wear a mask. That person has a
history of being a jerk.
---
Ken Martin
Sep 4, 2021, 4:36 AM
to me
Thank you. Wow, he really does sound like a jerk. Thanks for sticking
up for us!!
-Ken
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Catrike Ryder
Jan 17, 2024, 12:54:32 PM1/17/24
to
On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 07:50:01 -0800 (PST), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
<funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Wednesday, January 17, 2024 at 8:16:01?AM UTC-5, floriduh dumbass wrote:
>> On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 07:37:54 -0500, Zen Cycle <funkm...@hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >On 1/16/2024 4:40 PM, floriduh dumbass wrote:
>> >
>> >> During his presidency, Obama called for stricter gun laws and urged
>> >> Congress to reinstate the assault weapons ban
>> >
>> >Which wouldn't have taken anyone's guns away, it would have restricted
>> >further sales.
>> <SNIP>
>>
>> Yes, Dummy, you see, the original assault weapons ban had a
>> grandfather clause that allowed a person to keep the weapon if he'd
>> gotten it before the ban, so, a wise person who thought they might
>> ever want one, went out and bought one, assuming a reinstatement of
>> the ban would have the same grandfather clause.
>
>I see, so in floriduh dumbass world,
>
>"wouldn't have taken anyone's guns away, it would have restricted further sales."
>?
be able to understand. Read carefully what I wrote below. Don't assume
you know what it says without reading it.
You see, the original ban disallowed owning the evil black thing
unless* (THE NEXT TEXT IS REALLY IMPORTANT, DUMMY) *you'd acquired it
before the ban went into effect.
<funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Wednesday, January 17, 2024 at 8:16:01?AM UTC-5, floriduh dumbass wrote:
>> On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 07:37:54 -0500, Zen Cycle <funkm...@hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >On 1/16/2024 4:40 PM, floriduh dumbass wrote:
>> >
>> >> During his presidency, Obama called for stricter gun laws and urged
>> >> Congress to reinstate the assault weapons ban
>> >
>> >Which wouldn't have taken anyone's guns away, it would have restricted
>> >further sales.
>> <SNIP>
>>
>> Yes, Dummy, you see, the original assault weapons ban had a
>> grandfather clause that allowed a person to keep the weapon if he'd
>> gotten it before the ban, so, a wise person who thought they might
>> ever want one, went out and bought one, assuming a reinstatement of
>> the ban would have the same grandfather clause.
>
>I see, so in floriduh dumbass world,
>
>"wouldn't have taken anyone's guns away, it would have restricted further sales."
>"person who thought they might ever want one, went out and bought one, assuming a reinstatement of the ban would have the same grandfather clause."
>
>got it...dumbass.
Well. yes, Dummy, it's really simple, even a half wit like you should
>
>got it...dumbass.
be able to understand. Read carefully what I wrote below. Don't assume
you know what it says without reading it.
You see, the original ban disallowed owning the evil black thing
unless* (THE NEXT TEXT IS REALLY IMPORTANT, DUMMY) *you'd acquired it
before the ban went into effect.
Tom Kunich
Jan 17, 2024, 12:59:38 PM1/17/24
to
Catrike Ryder
Jan 17, 2024, 1:36:16 PM1/17/24
to
On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 08:50:26 -0800, sms <scharf...@geemail.com>
wrote:
>Sep 4, 2021, 4:28?AM
to enforce face diapers, but when and where there was no law, I
sh*t-canned the mask and avoided businesses that required the useless
things.
wrote:
>I’m not familiar with this incident, and the attachment didn’t come
>through. Can you send it again, or a link to the post? -Ken -- Ken
>Martin Founder & CEO Mike
>
>---
>
>Steven Scharf
>Sep 4, 2021, 4:32?AM
>through. Can you send it again, or a link to the post? -Ken -- Ken
>Martin Founder & CEO Mike
>
>---
>
>Steven Scharf
>to Ken
>
>Here is a link to the thread on rec.bicycles.tech:
>https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/7MGs55w41Qc
>
>The person that started this was upset that an employee at your
>Pleasanton store told him that he had to wear a mask. That person has a
>history of being a jerk.
>
>---
>
>Ken Martin
>Sep 4, 2021, 4:36?AM
>
>Here is a link to the thread on rec.bicycles.tech:
>https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/7MGs55w41Qc
>
>The person that started this was upset that an employee at your
>Pleasanton store told him that he had to wear a mask. That person has a
>history of being a jerk.
>
>---
>
>Ken Martin
>to me
>
>Thank you. Wow, he really does sound like a jerk. Thanks for sticking
>up for us!!
>
>-Ken
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I understood and respected that some businesses were required by law
>
>Thank you. Wow, he really does sound like a jerk. Thanks for sticking
>up for us!!
>
>-Ken
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
to enforce face diapers, but when and where there was no law, I
sh*t-canned the mask and avoided businesses that required the useless
things.
AMuzi
Jan 17, 2024, 1:48:32 PM1/17/24
to
politely asked to leave another over the course of a year
and a half. meh.
Catrike Ryder
Jan 17, 2024, 2:12:42 PM1/17/24
to
encounter one, except when out on a bike ride... I figure those people
are already suffering from some sort of brain damage.
Yeah, I see people wearing them out on their bicycles in the fresh air
far away from other people, especially anybody with covid.
Tom Kunich
Jan 17, 2024, 2:21:39 PM1/17/24
to
Zen Cycle
Jan 17, 2024, 2:24:39 PM1/17/24
to
you can understand.
in floriduh dumbass world,
the legislation "wouldn't have taken anyone's guns away, it would have
restricted further sales."
is not equal to
"the original ban disallowed owning the evil black thing unless* (THE
NEXT TEXT IS REALLY IMPORTANT, DUMMY) *you'd acquired it
before the ban went into effect"
Are you taking tommy lessons?
Zen Cycle
Jan 17, 2024, 2:25:35 PM1/17/24
to
Catrike Ryder
Jan 17, 2024, 2:47:38 PM1/17/24
to
On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 14:24:34 -0500, Zen Cycle <funkm...@hotmail.com>
"equal to?" Of course they're not equal... I never claimed that. Why
would I? Is your mind really that muddled?
>"the original ban disallowed owning the evil black thing unless* (THE
>NEXT TEXT IS REALLY IMPORTANT, DUMMY) *you'd acquired it
>before the ban went into effect"
>
> got it...dumbass.
>
>Are you taking tommy lessons?
<EYEROLL> The original ban outlawed the possession of guns that were
not acquired before the ban went into effect, Dummy. So what do you
think would occur if they caught you with one of them that you'd
acquired after the ban went into effect? Do you really believe that
it wouldn't be taken away?
At any rate, people went out and bought them because they believed
that Obama would get done what he wanted to do... ban the sale, and
transfer of them, and ban the posession of those that were not
acquired before the ban went into place.
would I? Is your mind really that muddled?
>"the original ban disallowed owning the evil black thing unless* (THE
>NEXT TEXT IS REALLY IMPORTANT, DUMMY) *you'd acquired it
>before the ban went into effect"
>
> got it...dumbass.
>
>Are you taking tommy lessons?
not acquired before the ban went into effect, Dummy. So what do you
think would occur if they caught you with one of them that you'd
acquired after the ban went into effect? Do you really believe that
it wouldn't be taken away?
At any rate, people went out and bought them because they believed
that Obama would get done what he wanted to do... ban the sale, and
transfer of them, and ban the posession of those that were not
acquired before the ban went into place.
Tom Kunich
Jan 17, 2024, 2:51:58 PM1/17/24
to
Tom Kunich
Jan 17, 2024, 2:55:11 PM1/17/24
to
Tom Kunich
Jan 17, 2024, 2:58:44 PM1/17/24
to
On Tuesday, January 16, 2024 at 3:05:02 PM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
> On 1/16/2024 5:03 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> > campaign:
> > <https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/jan/13/john-kerry-biden-administration-re-election-campaign>
> > That isn't jumping ship.
> >
> I didn't know that, thanks.
> Made for each other...
Do you suppose that is why Biden doesn't stand a snowball's chance in hell of winning?
> On 1/16/2024 5:03 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> > On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 16:45:24 -0600, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
> >
> >> On 1/16/2024 3:36 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
> >>> The people aren't buying that...
> >>> https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/approval/joe-biden/approval-rating
> >
> >> Even John Kerry jumped ship. The remaining rats are at the
> >> rail...
> >
> > Kerry is 80 years old. He plans to work on the Biden re-election
> >
> >> On 1/16/2024 3:36 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
> >>> The people aren't buying that...
> >>> https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/approval/joe-biden/approval-rating
> >
> >> Even John Kerry jumped ship. The remaining rats are at the
> >> rail...
> >
> > campaign:
> > <https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/jan/13/john-kerry-biden-administration-re-election-campaign>
> > That isn't jumping ship.
> >
> I didn't know that, thanks.
> Made for each other...
Do you suppose that is why Biden doesn't stand a snowball's chance in hell of winning?
Zen Cycle
Jan 17, 2024, 3:01:18 PM1/17/24
to
for you would have worked, but I see I'll have to go even simpler with a
thought exercise (try hard little kitty, I know it's tough without your
mommy here to help you, but if you go slow a read carefully you just
might get it.)
I wrote:
The legislation "wouldn't have taken anyone's guns away, it would have
restricted further sales."
You wrote:
" [a]person who thought they might ever want one, went out and bought
one, assuming a reinstatement of the ban would have the same grandfather
clause."
Can you spot the difference in those two statements?
clause."
Zen Cycle
Jan 17, 2024, 3:04:46 PM1/17/24
to
The ball is in your court, chickenshit.
Catrike Ryder
Jan 17, 2024, 3:12:23 PM1/17/24
to
On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 15:01:14 -0500, Zen Cycle <funkm...@hotmail.com>
<EYEROLL> Your statement was a not completely true statement about the
government not taking guns away.
My statement was about why people bought guns before the potential ban
took place, hoping they would be able to keep them after the ban took
place, as the earlier ban had allowed.
Of course they're different.
Are you confused about what the "grandfather clause" was?
government not taking guns away.
My statement was about why people bought guns before the potential ban
took place, hoping they would be able to keep them after the ban took
place, as the earlier ban had allowed.
Of course they're different.
Are you confused about what the "grandfather clause" was?
Catrike Ryder
Jan 17, 2024, 3:15:57 PM1/17/24
to
On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 11:55:09 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
<cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Sep 4, 2021, 4:28?AM
where he lives?
<cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > I’m not familiar with this incident, and the attachment didn’t come
>> > through. Can you send it again, or a link to the post? -Ken -- Ken
>> > Martin Founder & CEO Mike
>> >
>> > ---
>> >
>> > Steven Scharf
>> > Sep 4, 2021, 4:32?AM
>> > through. Can you send it again, or a link to the post? -Ken -- Ken
>> > Martin Founder & CEO Mike
>> >
>> > ---
>> >
>> > Steven Scharf
>> > to Ken
>> >
>> > Here is a link to the thread on rec.bicycles.tech:
>> > https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/7MGs55w41Qc
>> >
>> > The person that started this was upset that an employee at your
>> > Pleasanton store told him that he had to wear a mask. That person has a
>> > history of being a jerk.
>> >
>> > ---
>> >
>> > Ken Martin
>> > Sep 4, 2021, 4:36?AM
>> >
>> > Here is a link to the thread on rec.bicycles.tech:
>> > https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/7MGs55w41Qc
>> >
>> > The person that started this was upset that an employee at your
>> > Pleasanton store told him that he had to wear a mask. That person has a
>> > history of being a jerk.
>> >
>> > ---
>> >
>> > Ken Martin
>> > to me
>> >
>> > Thank you. Wow, he really does sound like a jerk. Thanks for sticking
>> > up for us!!
>> >
>> > -Ken
>> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Tommy's hypocrisy knows no bounds
>> --
>> Add xx to reply
>What happened to you publishing your address? You claimed you would. Or was that just another of your iies?
Anyone's address is incredibly easy to find, but what does it matter
>> >
>> > Thank you. Wow, he really does sound like a jerk. Thanks for sticking
>> > up for us!!
>> >
>> > -Ken
>> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Tommy's hypocrisy knows no bounds
>> --
>> Add xx to reply
>What happened to you publishing your address? You claimed you would. Or was that just another of your iies?
where he lives?
AMuzi
Jan 17, 2024, 3:29:34 PM1/17/24
to
AMuzi
Jan 17, 2024, 3:33:00 PM1/17/24
to
https://chicago.suntimes.com/politics/2024/1/5/24023878/assault-weapons-ban-illinois-registered-legal
there are purported English speakers who yet cannot define
the word 'infringe'.
AMuzi
Jan 17, 2024, 3:36:52 PM1/17/24
to
On 1/17/2024 1:58 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> On Tuesday, January 16, 2024 at 3:05:02 PM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 1/16/2024 5:03 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>>> On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 16:45:24 -0600, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 1/16/2024 3:36 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
>>>>> The people aren't buying that...
>>>>> https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/approval/joe-biden/approval-rating
>>>
>>>> Even John Kerry jumped ship. The remaining rats are at the
>>>> rail...
>>>
>>> Kerry is 80 years old. He plans to work on the Biden re-election
>>> campaign:
>>> <https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/jan/13/john-kerry-biden-administration-re-election-campaign>
>>> That isn't jumping ship.
>>>
>> I didn't know that, thanks.
>> Made for each other...
> On Tuesday, January 16, 2024 at 3:05:02 PM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 1/16/2024 5:03 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>>> On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 16:45:24 -0600, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 1/16/2024 3:36 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
>>>>> The people aren't buying that...
>>>>> https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/approval/joe-biden/approval-rating
>>>
>>>> Even John Kerry jumped ship. The remaining rats are at the
>>>> rail...
>>>
>>> Kerry is 80 years old. He plans to work on the Biden re-election
>>> campaign:
>>> <https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/jan/13/john-kerry-biden-administration-re-election-campaign>
>>> That isn't jumping ship.
>>>
>> I didn't know that, thanks.
>> Made for each other...
> Do you suppose that is why Biden doesn't stand a snowball's chance in hell of winning?
You, Sir, seem to be uninformed or naive:
https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/2140-those-who-vote-decide-nothing-those-who-count-the-vote
Frank Krygowski
Jan 17, 2024, 3:56:02 PM1/17/24
to
On 1/17/2024 3:32 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>
> Well right now today:
>
> https://chicago.suntimes.com/politics/2024/1/5/24023878/assault-weapons-ban-illinois-registered-legal
>
> there are purported English speakers who yet cannot define the word
> 'infringe'.
Right! I'm really peeved that I can't own hand grenades and practice
>
> Well right now today:
>
> https://chicago.suntimes.com/politics/2024/1/5/24023878/assault-weapons-ban-illinois-registered-legal
>
> there are purported English speakers who yet cannot define the word
> 'infringe'.
using them in my backyard! And what's with the stupid difficulty buying
fully automatic large bore machine guns? Then there are the disgusting
vehicle regulations that make it so hard to drive an Abrams tank on the
road! I want one for my _safety_!
All that stuff is infringement! But are people protesting? NO!
Here's the real problem: The NRA is all upset about little "pew pew pew"
small caliber guns. We need a Bomb Owners of America to _finally_
guarantee our rights to _real_ arms! Then men can finally feel manly!
--
- Frank Krygowski
Catrike Ryder
Jan 17, 2024, 4:17:44 PM1/17/24
to
On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 14:36:45 -0600, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>On 1/17/2024 1:58 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
>On 1/17/2024 1:58 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
>> On Tuesday, January 16, 2024 at 3:05:02?PM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
>>> On 1/16/2024 5:03 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 16:45:24 -0600, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 1/16/2024 3:36 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
>>>>>> The people aren't buying that...
>>>>>> https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/approval/joe-biden/approval-rating
>>>>
>>>>> Even John Kerry jumped ship. The remaining rats are at the
>>>>> rail...
>>>>
>>>> Kerry is 80 years old. He plans to work on the Biden re-election
>>>> campaign:
>>>> <https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/jan/13/john-kerry-biden-administration-re-election-campaign>
>>>> That isn't jumping ship.
>>>>
>>> I didn't know that, thanks.
>>> Made for each other...
>
>> Do you suppose that is why Biden doesn't stand a snowball's chance in hell of winning?
>
>You, Sir, seem to be uninformed or naive:
>
>https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/2140-those-who-vote-decide-nothing-those-who-count-the-vote
I was raised in Illinois, but fortunately, I left as a teenager.
>>> On 1/16/2024 5:03 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 16:45:24 -0600, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 1/16/2024 3:36 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
>>>>>> The people aren't buying that...
>>>>>> https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/approval/joe-biden/approval-rating
>>>>
>>>>> Even John Kerry jumped ship. The remaining rats are at the
>>>>> rail...
>>>>
>>>> Kerry is 80 years old. He plans to work on the Biden re-election
>>>> campaign:
>>>> <https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/jan/13/john-kerry-biden-administration-re-election-campaign>
>>>> That isn't jumping ship.
>>>>
>>> I didn't know that, thanks.
>>> Made for each other...
>
>> Do you suppose that is why Biden doesn't stand a snowball's chance in hell of winning?
>
>You, Sir, seem to be uninformed or naive:
>
>https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/2140-those-who-vote-decide-nothing-those-who-count-the-vote
Unfortunately, I have relatives still living in Illinois. They're not
particularly happy about it.
Catrike Ryder
Jan 17, 2024, 4:28:28 PM1/17/24
to
small caliber AR15s.
Tom Kunich
Jan 17, 2024, 5:16:50 PM1/17/24
to
Catrike Ryder
Jan 17, 2024, 5:49:10 PM1/17/24
to
On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 14:16:48 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
<cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Sep 4, 2021, 4:28?AM
>> I知 not familiar with this incident, and the attachment didn稚 come
in a bike shop. It was a disastrous "affair" in more ways than one.
No, I don't want to say any more about it.
<cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I知 not familiar with this incident, and the attachment didn稚 come
>> through. Can you send it again, or a link to the post? -Ken -- Ken
>> Martin Founder & CEO Mike
>>
>> ---
>>
>> Steven Scharf
>> Sep 4, 2021, 4:32?AM
>> Martin Founder & CEO Mike
>>
>> ---
>>
>> Steven Scharf
>> to Ken
>>
>> Here is a link to the thread on rec.bicycles.tech:
>> https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/7MGs55w41Qc
>>
>> The person that started this was upset that an employee at your
>> Pleasanton store told him that he had to wear a mask. That person has a
>> history of being a jerk.
>>
>> ---
>>
>> Ken Martin
>> Sep 4, 2021, 4:36?AM
>>
>> Here is a link to the thread on rec.bicycles.tech:
>> https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/7MGs55w41Qc
>>
>> The person that started this was upset that an employee at your
>> Pleasanton store told him that he had to wear a mask. That person has a
>> history of being a jerk.
>>
>> ---
>>
>> Ken Martin
>> to me
>>
>> Thank you. Wow, he really does sound like a jerk. Thanks for sticking
>> up for us!!
>>
>> -Ken
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> --
>>
>> 的f you are not an expert on a subject, then your opinions about it
>>
>> Thank you. Wow, he really does sound like a jerk. Thanks for sticking
>> up for us!!
>>
>> -Ken
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> --
>>
>> really do matter less than the opinions of experts. It's not
>> indoctrination nor elitism. It's just that you don't know as much as
>> they do about the subject.迫Tin Foil Awards
>> indoctrination nor elitism. It's just that you don't know as much as
>Your sticking up for Mike's Bikes doesn't seem to have helped them. They are presently in financial trouble no doubt from trying to enforce Fauci's mania. Would you like to meet somewhere to discuss it?
There's a "Mike's Bikes" in Ruskin Florida, where I was once a partner
in a bike shop. It was a disastrous "affair" in more ways than one.
No, I don't want to say any more about it.
Sir Ridesalot
Jan 17, 2024, 6:02:28 PM1/17/24
to
On Wednesday, January 17, 2024 at 9:08:41 a.m. UTC-6, AMuzi wrote:
> On 1/17/2024 7:15 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
> >> On 1/16/2024 4:40 PM, floriduh dumbass wrote:
> On 1/17/2024 7:15 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
> >>> During his presidency, Obama called for stricter gun laws and urged
> >>> Congress to reinstate the assault weapons ban
> >>
> >> Which wouldn't have taken anyone's guns away, it would have restricted
> >> further sales.
> >
> > <SNIP>
> >
> > Yes, Dummy, you see, the original assault weapons ban had a
> > grandfather clause that allowed a person to keep the weapon if he'd
> > gotten it before the ban, so, a wise person who thought they might
> > ever want one, went out and bought one, assuming a reinstatement of
> > the ban would have the same grandfather clause.
> >
> >
> >>> Congress to reinstate the assault weapons ban
> >>
> >> Which wouldn't have taken anyone's guns away, it would have restricted
> >> further sales.
> >
> > <SNIP>
> >
> > Yes, Dummy, you see, the original assault weapons ban had a
> > grandfather clause that allowed a person to keep the weapon if he'd
> > gotten it before the ban, so, a wise person who thought they might
> > ever want one, went out and bought one, assuming a reinstatement of
> > the ban would have the same grandfather clause.
> >
> >
> Ask our contributor Mr Ridesalot about the permanence of
> such assurances.
Like when the people of High River registered their long guns and during a flood the RCMP went into the homes and took those ling guns. Gee, I wonder how the RCMP knew which homes had a ling gun in them?
> such assurances.
It seems to me that our governments want only the authorities and criminals to have guns. The laws that the government pass only penalize law abiding gun owners and don't seem to do much to prevent the criminals from getting guns.
Cheers
Catrike Ryder
Jan 17, 2024, 6:09:57 PM1/17/24
to
On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 15:02:26 -0800 (PST), Sir Ridesalot
<i_am_cyc...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
"We're from the government and we're here to help."
<i_am_cyc...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
Zen Cycle
Jan 17, 2024, 6:24:32 PM1/17/24
to
>
> My statement was about why people bought guns before the potential ban
> took place, hoping they would be able to keep them after the ban took
> place, as the earlier ban had allowed.
>
> Of course they're different.
your ass so badly over the AR15
>
> Are you confused about what the "grandfather clause" was?
Of course, dumbass, I mean 'legally acquired', not weapons that were
purchased illegally (after the ban), of course those would be
confiscated if found, but I wasn't referring to guns purchased after a
ban, dumbass.
Catrike Ryder
Jan 17, 2024, 6:55:40 PM1/17/24
to
On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 18:24:28 -0500, Zen Cycle <funkm...@hotmail.com>
gun to your son, friend, neighbor.
>> My statement was about why people bought guns before the potential ban
>> took place, hoping they would be able to keep them after the ban took
>> place, as the earlier ban had allowed.
>>
>> Of course they're different.
>
>No, they aren't, you're trying to play a semantic game because I burned
>your ass so badly over the AR15
You haven't made that case... But clearly my statement about the
Grandfather clause was all about why gun sales increased during the
Obama administration.
>> Are you confused about what the "grandfather clause" was?
>
>in this context it's "wouldn't have taken anyone's guns away"
exceptions noted above... However the proposed ban was what
contributed to the increase in gun sales during the Obama
administration... which was what this discussion was all about before
you went off on this "legally purchased" tangent.
>Of course, dumbass, I mean 'legally acquired', not weapons that were
>purchased illegally (after the ban), of course those would be
>confiscated if found, but I wasn't referring to guns purchased after a
>ban, dumbass.
Purchased, or otherwise transferred, Dummy...
However the proposed ban was what contributed to the increase in gun
sales during the Obama administration... which was what this
discuission was all about before you went off on this "legally
purchased" tangent.
wrote:
>On 1/17/2024 3:12 PM, floriduh dumbass wrote:
>> On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 15:01:14 -0500, Zen Cycle <funkm...@hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> You really aren't paying attention. I would have thought dumbing it down
>>> for you would have worked, but I see I'll have to go even simpler with a
>>> thought exercise (try hard little kitty, I know it's tough without your
>>> mommy here to help you, but if you go slow a read carefully you just
>>> might get it.)
>>>
>>>
>>> I wrote:
>>> The legislation "wouldn't have taken anyone's guns away, it would have
>>> restricted further sales."
>>>
>>> You wrote:
>>>
>>> " [a]person who thought they might ever want one, went out and bought
>>> one, assuming a reinstatement of the ban would have the same grandfather
>>> clause."
>>>
>>> Can you spot the difference in those two statements?
>>
>> <EYEROLL> Your statement was a not completely true statement about the
>> government not taking guns away.
>
>Yes, it was. The ban wouldn't have taken any legally purchase weapons.
<LOL> Legally purchased... except when you give your legally purchased
>On 1/17/2024 3:12 PM, floriduh dumbass wrote:
>> On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 15:01:14 -0500, Zen Cycle <funkm...@hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> You really aren't paying attention. I would have thought dumbing it down
>>> for you would have worked, but I see I'll have to go even simpler with a
>>> thought exercise (try hard little kitty, I know it's tough without your
>>> mommy here to help you, but if you go slow a read carefully you just
>>> might get it.)
>>>
>>>
>>> I wrote:
>>> The legislation "wouldn't have taken anyone's guns away, it would have
>>> restricted further sales."
>>>
>>> You wrote:
>>>
>>> " [a]person who thought they might ever want one, went out and bought
>>> one, assuming a reinstatement of the ban would have the same grandfather
>>> clause."
>>>
>>> Can you spot the difference in those two statements?
>>
>> <EYEROLL> Your statement was a not completely true statement about the
>> government not taking guns away.
>
>Yes, it was. The ban wouldn't have taken any legally purchase weapons.
gun to your son, friend, neighbor.
>> My statement was about why people bought guns before the potential ban
>> took place, hoping they would be able to keep them after the ban took
>> place, as the earlier ban had allowed.
>>
>> Of course they're different.
>
>No, they aren't, you're trying to play a semantic game because I burned
>your ass so badly over the AR15
Grandfather clause was all about why gun sales increased during the
Obama administration.
>> Are you confused about what the "grandfather clause" was?
>
>in this context it's "wouldn't have taken anyone's guns away"
contributed to the increase in gun sales during the Obama
administration... which was what this discussion was all about before
you went off on this "legally purchased" tangent.
>Of course, dumbass, I mean 'legally acquired', not weapons that were
>purchased illegally (after the ban), of course those would be
>confiscated if found, but I wasn't referring to guns purchased after a
>ban, dumbass.
However the proposed ban was what contributed to the increase in gun
sales during the Obama administration... which was what this
discuission was all about before you went off on this "legally
purchased" tangent.
John B.
Jan 17, 2024, 7:43:16 PM1/17/24
to
although not an Abrams as I don't believe that the Army sell their
currently used main battle tank. I assume that the right to use a tank
on pubic highways is akin to using any tracked vehicle on a public
highway.
As for hand grenades, Ohio has quite expensive laws regarding the use
of explosives although I see no specific laws regarding hand grenades,
per se, but perhaps they are covered by some non specific rule.
Or to put it another way, Frankie, once again, expounds on a subject
about which he apparently knows nothing at all.?
--
Cheers,
John B.
John B.
Jan 17, 2024, 8:06:07 PM1/17/24
to
to own and bear arms?
--
Cheers,
John B.
Zen Cycle
Jan 17, 2024, 8:09:43 PM1/17/24
to
On 1/17/2024 6:55 PM, floriduh dumbass wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 18:24:28 -0500, Zen Cycle <funkm...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 1/17/2024 3:12 PM, floriduh dumbass wrote:
>>> On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 15:01:14 -0500, Zen Cycle <funkm...@hotmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> You really aren't paying attention. I would have thought dumbing it down
>>>> for you would have worked, but I see I'll have to go even simpler with a
>>>> thought exercise (try hard little kitty, I know it's tough without your
>>>> mommy here to help you, but if you go slow a read carefully you just
>>>> might get it.)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I wrote:
>>>> The legislation "wouldn't have taken anyone's guns away, it would have
>>>> restricted further sales."
>>>>
>>>> You wrote:
>>>>
>>>> " [a]person who thought they might ever want one, went out and bought
>>>> one, assuming a reinstatement of the ban would have the same grandfather
>>>> clause."
>>>>
>>>> Can you spot the difference in those two statements?
>>>
>>> <EYEROLL> Your statement was a not completely true statement about the
>>> government not taking guns away.
>>
>> Yes, it was. The ban wouldn't have taken any legally purchase weapons.
>
> <LOL> Legally purchased... except when you give your legally purchased
> gun to your son, friend, neighbor.
That isn't how grandfathering works, dumbass. If transfers were allowed
> On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 18:24:28 -0500, Zen Cycle <funkm...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 1/17/2024 3:12 PM, floriduh dumbass wrote:
>>> On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 15:01:14 -0500, Zen Cycle <funkm...@hotmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> You really aren't paying attention. I would have thought dumbing it down
>>>> for you would have worked, but I see I'll have to go even simpler with a
>>>> thought exercise (try hard little kitty, I know it's tough without your
>>>> mommy here to help you, but if you go slow a read carefully you just
>>>> might get it.)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I wrote:
>>>> The legislation "wouldn't have taken anyone's guns away, it would have
>>>> restricted further sales."
>>>>
>>>> You wrote:
>>>>
>>>> " [a]person who thought they might ever want one, went out and bought
>>>> one, assuming a reinstatement of the ban would have the same grandfather
>>>> clause."
>>>>
>>>> Can you spot the difference in those two statements?
>>>
>>> <EYEROLL> Your statement was a not completely true statement about the
>>> government not taking guns away.
>>
>> Yes, it was. The ban wouldn't have taken any legally purchase weapons.
>
> <LOL> Legally purchased... except when you give your legally purchased
> gun to your son, friend, neighbor.
under the grandfathering legislation, they wouldn't be illegal, get it?
>
>>> My statement was about why people bought guns before the potential ban
>>> took place, hoping they would be able to keep them after the ban took
>>> place, as the earlier ban had allowed.
>>>
>>> Of course they're different.
>>
>> No, they aren't, you're trying to play a semantic game because I burned
>> your ass so badly over the AR15
>
> You haven't made that case
... But clearly my statement about the
> Grandfather clause was all about why gun sales increased during the
> Obama administration.
>
>>> Are you confused about what the "grandfather clause" was?
>>
>> in this context it's "wouldn't have taken anyone's guns away"
>
> exceptions noted above... However the proposed ban was what
> contributed to the increase in gun sales during the Obama
> administration... which was what this discussion was all about before
> you went off on this "legally purchased" tangent.
asshole, You're the ignorant douche playing semantic games (badly)
>
>> Of course, dumbass, I mean 'legally acquired', not weapons that were
>> purchased illegally (after the ban), of course those would be
>> confiscated if found, but I wasn't referring to guns purchased after a
>> ban, dumbass.
>
> Purchased, or otherwise transferred, Dummy...
humpty dumpty
>
> However the proposed ban was what contributed to the increase in gun
> sales during the Obama administration... which was what this
> discuission was all about before you went off on this "legally
> purchased" tangent.
spurred sales. This is just you being a floriduh dumbass trying to
troll, and failing miserably as usual. Qualifying as 'legally purchased
(or other wise transferred)' is a critical point to the discussion such
that I would have thought it was implied and didn't need to be stated,
but then just when I think you couldn't be any more of a dumbass, you go
and outdo yourself with even more dumbassery.
AMuzi
Jan 17, 2024, 8:24:27 PM1/17/24
to
infringed'. A perusal of period military reports, especially
quartermaster reports after captured sites, distinguishes
between 'guns' (artillery, field pieces, mountain guns etc)
and borne or small arms (rifles mostly but pistols as well,
if rarely). Good luck with an argument for hand grenades or
mobile artillery.
Frank Krygowski
Jan 17, 2024, 8:37:10 PM1/17/24
to
"perusal of the period military reports" show could be "borne"?
I'm all for that interpretation. So is Jim Jeffries:
https://youtu.be/a9UFyNy-rw4?t=421
--
- Frank Krygowski
Zen Cycle
Jan 17, 2024, 9:31:23 PM1/17/24
to
NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA
It's going to be fun watching you _try_ to follow up on that threat (and
no, it has nothing to do with the fact that you live across the country.
..
All of my guns are gone because my younger brother had undue effect on
me while I was concussed. But now that I have the Loto and a complete 10
speed group for the Fondriest, I will sell off everything else which
will give me room in the garage. And I will rearm myself. With the
return of common sense cops will see the return of honest judges.
John B.
Jan 17, 2024, 10:48:37 PM1/17/24
to
from what I have read that in the 1700's the term "Arms", as used in
the law, was intended to mean the weapons used by a military force and
in fact a number of states suggested amendments including the right
for the state to form a properly armed militia.
See
https://www.buckeyefirearms.org/iii-what-arms-meant-circa-1787
for a rather detailed discussion of the subject in the sense of the
term in the late 1700's.
--
Cheers,
John B.
Catrike Ryder
Jan 18, 2024, 5:06:54 AM1/18/24
to
On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 20:09:39 -0500, Zen Cycle <funkm...@hotmail.com>
Well, yes, so the law does take guns that were bought legally. Yes, I
know that's a very small exception.
>>>> My statement was about why people bought guns before the potential ban
>>>> took place, hoping they would be able to keep them after the ban took
>>>> place, as the earlier ban had allowed.
>>>>
>>>> Of course they're different.
>>>
>>> No, they aren't, you're trying to play a semantic game because I burned
>>> your ass so badly over the AR15
>>
>> You haven't made that case
>
>Yes, I did, you brought nothing to bear other than a contrived opinion.
You only repeat the thing about the A F ordering them under that name.
>... But clearly my statement about the
>> Grandfather clause was all about why gun sales increased during the
>> Obama administration.
>>
>>>> Are you confused about what the "grandfather clause" was?
>>>
>>> in this context it's "wouldn't have taken anyone's guns away"
>>
>> exceptions noted above... However the proposed ban was what
>> contributed to the increase in gun sales during the Obama
>> administration... which was what this discussion was all about before
>> you went off on this "legally purchased" tangent.
>
>And I didn't disagree with that fact that a proposed ban spurred sales,
>asshole, You're the ignorant douche playing semantic games (badly)
..and I didn't initially disagree with your statement about not taking
guns away..
>>> Of course, dumbass, I mean 'legally acquired', not weapons that were
>>> purchased illegally (after the ban), of course those would be
>>> confiscated if found, but I wasn't referring to guns purchased after a
>>> ban, dumbass.
>>
>> Purchased, or otherwise transferred, Dummy...
Yes.. I suspect it apply even if the gun was to be "transferred" via
probate.
>Of course, we see the way you interpret legal documentation - just like
>humpty dumpty
Blah, blah, blah..
>> However the proposed ban was what contributed to the increase in gun
>> sales during the Obama administration... which was what this
>> discuission was all about before you went off on this "legally
>> purchased" tangent.
>
>Again, dumbass, I wasn't disagreeing with the idea that a proposed ban
>spurred sales. This is just you being a floriduh dumbass trying to
>troll, and failing miserably as usual. Qualifying as 'legally purchased
>(or other wise transferred)' is a critical point to the discussion such
>that I would have thought it was implied and didn't need to be stated,
>but then just when I think you couldn't be any more of a dumbass, you go
>and outdo yourself with even more dumbassery.
>>
...and I wasn't disagree with your statement about the law not taking
guns away, Dummy. My initial response to your statement was a "yes,"
and then I went on to address the previous poster's nonsense claim
that people went out and bought guns because they thought Obama was
going to take them away, which is ridiculous in itself. Why would
people go out and buy something that they believed were going to be
confiscated?
I explained to Junior several times that our two responces were, of
course, different because they addressing two different issues, but he
went on and on about how they were different.
I think Junior doesn't quite understand that I generally consider his
nonsense posts to be not worth reading, while he thinks everything is
all about him and his posts.
know that's a very small exception.
>>>> My statement was about why people bought guns before the potential ban
>>>> took place, hoping they would be able to keep them after the ban took
>>>> place, as the earlier ban had allowed.
>>>>
>>>> Of course they're different.
>>>
>>> No, they aren't, you're trying to play a semantic game because I burned
>>> your ass so badly over the AR15
>>
>> You haven't made that case
>
>Yes, I did, you brought nothing to bear other than a contrived opinion.
>... But clearly my statement about the
>> Grandfather clause was all about why gun sales increased during the
>> Obama administration.
>>
>>>> Are you confused about what the "grandfather clause" was?
>>>
>>> in this context it's "wouldn't have taken anyone's guns away"
>>
>> exceptions noted above... However the proposed ban was what
>> contributed to the increase in gun sales during the Obama
>> administration... which was what this discussion was all about before
>> you went off on this "legally purchased" tangent.
>
>And I didn't disagree with that fact that a proposed ban spurred sales,
>asshole, You're the ignorant douche playing semantic games (badly)
guns away..
>>> Of course, dumbass, I mean 'legally acquired', not weapons that were
>>> purchased illegally (after the ban), of course those would be
>>> confiscated if found, but I wasn't referring to guns purchased after a
>>> ban, dumbass.
>>
>> Purchased, or otherwise transferred, Dummy...
probate.
>Of course, we see the way you interpret legal documentation - just like
>humpty dumpty
>> However the proposed ban was what contributed to the increase in gun
>> sales during the Obama administration... which was what this
>> discuission was all about before you went off on this "legally
>> purchased" tangent.
>
>Again, dumbass, I wasn't disagreeing with the idea that a proposed ban
>spurred sales. This is just you being a floriduh dumbass trying to
>troll, and failing miserably as usual. Qualifying as 'legally purchased
>(or other wise transferred)' is a critical point to the discussion such
>that I would have thought it was implied and didn't need to be stated,
>but then just when I think you couldn't be any more of a dumbass, you go
>and outdo yourself with even more dumbassery.
>>
guns away, Dummy. My initial response to your statement was a "yes,"
and then I went on to address the previous poster's nonsense claim
that people went out and bought guns because they thought Obama was
going to take them away, which is ridiculous in itself. Why would
people go out and buy something that they believed were going to be
confiscated?
I explained to Junior several times that our two responces were, of
course, different because they addressing two different issues, but he
went on and on about how they were different.
I think Junior doesn't quite understand that I generally consider his
nonsense posts to be not worth reading, while he thinks everything is
all about him and his posts.
funkma...@hotmail.com
Jan 18, 2024, 6:04:35 AM1/18/24
to
> >>>> My statement was about why people bought guns before the potential ban
> >>>> took place, hoping they would be able to keep them after the ban took
> >>>> place, as the earlier ban had allowed.
> >>>>
> >>>> Of course they're different.
> >>>
> >>> No, they aren't, you're trying to play a semantic game because I burned
> >>> your ass so badly over the AR15
> >>
> >> You haven't made that case
> >
> >Yes, I did, you brought nothing to bear other than a contrived opinion.
> You only repeat the thing about the A F ordering them under that name.
> >... But clearly my statement about the
> >> Grandfather clause was all about why gun sales increased during the
> >> Obama administration.
> >>
> >>>> Are you confused about what the "grandfather clause" was?
> >>>
> >>> in this context it's "wouldn't have taken anyone's guns away"
> >>
> >> exceptions noted above... However the proposed ban was what
> >> contributed to the increase in gun sales during the Obama
> >> administration... which was what this discussion was all about before
> >> you went off on this "legally purchased" tangent.
> >
> >And I didn't disagree with that fact that a proposed ban spurred sales,
> >asshole, You're the ignorant douche playing semantic games (badly)
> ..and I didn't initially disagree with your statement about not taking
> guns away..
> >>> Of course, dumbass, I mean 'legally acquired', not weapons that were
> >>> purchased illegally (after the ban), of course those would be
> >>> confiscated if found, but I wasn't referring to guns purchased after a
> >>> ban, dumbass.
> >>
> >> Purchased, or otherwise transferred, Dummy...
> Yes.. I suspect it apply even if the gun was to be "transferred" via
> probate.
> >Of course, we see the way you interpret legal documentation - just like
> >humpty dumpty
> Blah, blah, blah..
> >> However the proposed ban was what contributed to the increase in gun
> >> sales during the Obama administration... which was what this
> >> discuission was all about before you went off on this "legally
> >> purchased" tangent.
> >
> >Again, dumbass, I wasn't disagreeing with the idea that a proposed ban
> >spurred sales. This is just you being a floriduh dumbass trying to
> >troll, and failing miserably as usual. Qualifying as 'legally purchased
> >(or other wise transferred)' is a critical point to the discussion such
> >that I would have thought it was implied and didn't need to be stated,
> >but then just when I think you couldn't be any more of a dumbass, you go
> >and outdo yourself with even more dumbassery.
> >>
> ...and I wasn't disagree with your statement about the law not taking
> guns away, Dummy. My initial response to your statement was a "yes,"
> and then I went on to address the previous poster's nonsense claim
> that people went out and bought guns because they thought Obama was
> going to take them away, which is ridiculous in itself.
> Why would
> people go out and buy something that they believed were going to be
> confiscated?
> I explained to Junior several times that our two responces were, of
> course, different because they addressing two different issues, but he
> went on and on about how they were different.
The legislation wouldn't have taken anyone's guns away, it would have restricted further sales."
" [a]person who thought they might ever want one, went out and bought one, assuming a reinstatement of the ban would have the same grandfather clause."
> I think Junior doesn't quite understand that I generally consider his
> nonsense posts to be not worth reading,
Sure dumbass, that's why you keep responding, right? <eyeroll>
> nonsense posts to be not worth reading,
> while he thinks everything is all about him and his posts.
"I look in the mirror and like what I see" - floriduh dumbass
Catrike Ryder
Jan 18, 2024, 6:20:47 AM1/18/24
to
On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 03:04:33 -0800 (PST), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
<funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> I think Junior doesn't quite understand that I generally consider his
>> nonsense posts to be not worth reading,
>
>Sure dumbass, that's why you keep responding, right? <eyeroll>
I sometimes repond because I enjoy seeing you rant and rave about
<funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> I think Junior doesn't quite understand that I generally consider his
>> nonsense posts to be not worth reading,
>
>Sure dumbass, that's why you keep responding, right? <eyeroll>
things you can't deal with. Other times I open your posts and see
your hateful rhetoric and just roll my eyes.
John B.
Jan 18, 2024, 7:26:48 AM1/18/24
to
4On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 06:20:40 -0500, Catrike Ryder
Think of it as doing a kindness. After all he has to nag someone, how
else to demonstrate his superiority? And if you didn't respond he'd be
reduced to nagging poor old Tom.
--
Cheers,
John B.
else to demonstrate his superiority? And if you didn't respond he'd be
reduced to nagging poor old Tom.
--
Cheers,
John B.
Catrike Ryder
Jan 18, 2024, 7:58:14 AM1/18/24
to
On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 19:26:41 +0700, John B. <sloc...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Even though I was all grown up before the "flowers_in_your_hair,
flowers_everywhere" generation, I don't understand all the hatred.
wrote:
flowers_everywhere" generation, I don't understand all the hatred.
Zen Cycle
Jan 18, 2024, 7:59:51 AM1/18/24
to
On 1/18/2024 6:20 AM, floriduh dumbass wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 03:04:33 -0800 (PST), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
> <funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> I think Junior doesn't quite understand that I generally consider his
>>> nonsense posts to be not worth reading,
>>
>> Sure dumbass, that's why you keep responding, right? <eyeroll>
>
> I sometimes repond because I enjoy seeing you rant and rave about
> things you can't deal with.
lol...I present facts from verifiable sources, in floriduh dumbass world
> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 03:04:33 -0800 (PST), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
> <funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> I think Junior doesn't quite understand that I generally consider his
>>> nonsense posts to be not worth reading,
>>
>> Sure dumbass, that's why you keep responding, right? <eyeroll>
>
> I sometimes repond because I enjoy seeing you rant and rave about
> things you can't deal with.
that's 'ranting about things I can't deal with'.
> Other times I open your posts and see
> your hateful rhetoric and just roll my eyes.
Zen Cycle
Jan 18, 2024, 8:04:02 AM1/18/24
to
none of this is about me.
I haven't bragged about the size of my legs, or alleged nudist
encounters, or how much stronger/faster/more experienced of a ride I am.
Kitty is more apt to make those types of statements. I'm just exposing
his abject hypocrisy and willful ignorance.
Zen Cycle
Jan 18, 2024, 8:05:20 AM1/18/24
to
Catrike Ryder
Jan 18, 2024, 8:11:06 AM1/18/24
to
On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 08:05:16 -0500, Zen Cycle <funkm...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
I don't hate you, Junior, but I do pity you a bit. All that anger...
Tsk, tsk, tsk....
wrote:
Tsk, tsk, tsk....
AMuzi
Jan 18, 2024, 9:06:55 AM1/18/24
to
era to understand their text.
Others seem to think that words have no meaning and all
definitions are fluid, depending on one man's whim:
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/washington-secrets/1676898/biden-aims-to-sign-on-to-uns-global-gun-registration-treaty/
Zen Cycle
Jan 18, 2024, 9:15:44 AM1/18/24
to
Zen Cycle
Jan 18, 2024, 9:24:07 AM1/18/24
to
https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-biden-arms-trade-treaty-registry-551206015533
"There is no “U.N. Small Arms Treaty.” A separate U.N. agreement, the
Arms Trade Treaty, regulates the international trade of a range of
weapons. It does not track domestic gun sales. While former President
Donald Trump symbolically withdrew from that treaty in 2019, the U.S.
technically remains a signatory. The agreement was never ratified by the
Senate, and Biden hasn’t taken any further action on it."
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2022/10/26/fact-check-false-claim-us-joining-international-gun-registry/10530099002/
"The U.S. is not set to join any such treaty, according to a State
Department spokesperson. Experts said the Arms Trade Treaty, which
appears to be the treaty referenced in the post, would not establish an
international gun registry."
(Any washington examiner claim is immediately as suspect as any claim
from kunich or shitstain)
AMuzi
Jan 18, 2024, 9:33:58 AM1/18/24
to
repeats daily that 'the border is secure'.
Zen Cycle
Jan 18, 2024, 10:15:36 AM1/18/24
to
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/press-briefings/2024/01/16/press-briefing-by-press-secretary-karine-jean-pierre-and-nsc-coordinator-for-strategic-communications-john-kirby-38/
Nothing there even remotely close to 'the border is secure'.
Do you have a link to a Biden quote or a WH press release stating the
border is secure, and/or there are no issues with border security? I'd
be interested in reading that.
Tom Kunich
Jan 18, 2024, 11:00:27 AM1/18/24
to
Tom Kunich
Jan 18, 2024, 11:08:28 AM1/18/24
to
Tom Kunich
Jan 18, 2024, 11:11:11 AM1/18/24
to
Tom Kunich
Jan 18, 2024, 11:16:30 AM1/18/24
to
Frank Krygowski
Jan 18, 2024, 11:52:55 AM1/18/24
to
On 1/18/2024 6:04 AM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> I quote from the official government report, dumbass. You state nothing but contrived opinion. Yes, I know, it kitty world, the contrived opinion of a floriduh dumbass is more accurate and valid than a government report referencing the actual transactions that states the history of the program.
Gosh! You mean the tricycle rider from Florida posted something that
>
> I quote from the official government report, dumbass. You state nothing but contrived opinion. Yes, I know, it kitty world, the contrived opinion of a floriduh dumbass is more accurate and valid than a government report referencing the actual transactions that states the history of the program.
wasn't _documented_? Why, how can that be? He demands perfect
documentation from others!
:-)
--
- Frank Krygowski
Frank Krygowski
Jan 18, 2024, 12:04:36 PM1/18/24
to
On 1/18/2024 9:06 AM, AMuzi wrote:
round magazines that can be emptied in a few seconds into rooms full of
innocents, perhaps we can use that to move toward rational gun policies.
--
- Frank Krygowski
Catrike Ryder
Jan 18, 2024, 12:16:45 PM1/18/24
to
They're just my opinons. Take 'em or leave 'em.
AMuzi
Jan 18, 2024, 12:17:29 PM1/18/24
to
Catrike Ryder
Jan 18, 2024, 12:54:47 PM1/18/24
to
supposed to do.
AMuzi
Jan 18, 2024, 1:27:12 PM1/18/24
to
pistols by repeat felons were not affected by that. Who
could have guessed that?
Frank Krygowski
Jan 18, 2024, 1:34:51 PM1/18/24
to
--
- Frank Krygowski
AMuzi
Jan 18, 2024, 1:58:13 PM1/18/24
to
testimony. An NBC News interview video is here:
https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2023/05/05/mayorkas-not-worried-about-title-42-ending-the-border-is-secure-because-we-are-maximizing-our-resources-for-most-effective-results/
Try 1:06 of the two minute video.
The super cute and hot Press Secretary says the same stupid
stuff BTW.
funkma...@hotmail.com
Jan 18, 2024, 2:41:26 PM1/18/24
to
funkma...@hotmail.com
Jan 18, 2024, 2:43:39 PM1/18/24
to
Message has been deleted
funkma...@hotmail.com
Jan 18, 2024, 2:51:02 PM1/18/24
to
> They're just my opinons. Take 'em or leave 'em.
funkma...@hotmail.com
Jan 18, 2024, 2:58:17 PM1/18/24
to
To be clear, I'm not denying some administration officials my claim the border is secure, I'm questioning "this administration repeats daily that 'the border is secure'. "
Zen Cycle
Jan 18, 2024, 3:50:23 PM1/18/24
to
ooookaaaay....that was from May of 2023, Maybe it's just me, but I
wouldn't qualify that as "this administration repeats daily that 'the
border is secure'. "
To be clear, I'm not denying some administration officials may claim the
border is secure, I'm questioning the "this administration repeats daily
that 'the border is secure'. " hyperbole.
Tom Kunich
Jan 18, 2024, 4:03:41 PM1/18/24
to
Tom Kunich
Jan 18, 2024, 4:07:56 PM1/18/24
to
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages