Human Welfare v. Corporate Welfare - Which costs us more?

Jeff M

unread,

Apr 7, 2013, 9:04:52 PM4/7/13

to

About $59 billion is spent on traditional social welfare programs. $92
billion is spent on corporate subsidies. So, the government spent 50%
more on corporate welfare than it did on food stamps and housing
assistance in 2006.

Before we look at the details, a heartfelt plea from the Save the CEOï¿½s
Charitable Trust:

Thereï¿½s so much suffering in the world. It can all get pretty
overwhelming sometimes. Consider, for a moment the sorrow in the eyes of
a CEO whoï¿½s just found out that his end-of-year bonus is only going to
be a paltry $2.3 million.

ï¿½It felt like a slap in the face. Imagine what it would feel like just
before Christmas to find out that youï¿½re going to be forced to scrape by
on your standard $8.4 million compensation package alone. Imagine what
is was like to have to look into my daughterï¿½s face and tell her that I
couldnï¿½t afford to both buy her a dollar sign shaped island and hire
someone to chew her food from now on, too. To put her in that situation
of having to chooseï¿½ Sheï¿½s only a child for Godï¿½s sake.ï¿½

It doesnï¿½t have to be this way. Thanks to federal subsidies from
taxpayers like you, CEOï¿½s like G. Allen Andreas of Archer Daniels
Midland was able to take home almost $14 million in executive
compensation last year. But heï¿½s one of the lucky ones. There are still
corporations out there that actually have to provide goods and services
to their consumers in order to survive. They need your help.

For just $93 billion a year the federal government is able to provide a
better life for these CEOï¿½s and their families. Thatï¿½s less than the
cost of 240 million cups of coffee a day. Wonï¿½t you help a needy
corporation today?

The Traditional Welfare Queen
Definition: social welfare
n. Financial aid, such as a subsidy, provided by a government to
specific individuals.

When one thinks about government welfare, the first thing that comes to
mind is the proverbial welfare queen sitting atop her majestic throne of
government cheese issuing a royal decree to her clamoring throngs of
illegitimate babies that they may shut the hell up while she tries to
watch Judge Judy. However, many politically well-connected corporations
are also parasitically draining their share of fiscal blood from your
paycheck before you ever see it. Itï¿½s called corporate welfare. The
intent here is to figure out which presents the greater burden to our
federal budget, corporate or social welfare programs.

There are, of course, positive and negative aspects to this spending.The
primary negative aspect is that you have to increase taxes to pay for
it. Taxing individuals lowers their standard of living. It reduces
peopleï¿½s ability to afford necessities like medical care, education, and
low mileage off-road vehicles.The common usage definition of social
welfare includes welfare checks and food stamps. Welfare checks are
supplied through a federal program called Temporary Aid for Needy
Families. Combined federal and state TANF spending was about $26 billion
in 2006. In 2009, the federal government will spend about $25 billion on
rental aid for low-income households and about $8 billion on public
housing projects. For some perspective, thatï¿½s about 3 percent of the
total federal budget.

Note: I do not consider Medicaid to be included in the term ï¿½welfareï¿½ as
it is used in common parlance. Typically, if one states that someone is
ï¿½on welfareï¿½, they mean that the person is receiving direct financial
aid from the government. If we included Medicaid in our definition of
social welfare, we would also have to consider any service that the
government pays for to be ï¿½welfareï¿½. For instance, public roadways to
individualsï¿½ homes would also be considered ï¿½welfareï¿½ under that
expansive definition.

TANF (Temporary Aid to Needy Families)
Another negative aspect relates to the fact that social welfare programs
reduce the incentive for recipients to become productive members of
society. However, in 1996, Congress passed a bill enacting limited
welfare reform, replacing the Aid to Families with Dependent Children
(AFDC) program with the new Temporary Aid to Needy Families (TANF)
program. One key aspect of this reform required recipients to engage in
job searches, on the job training, community service work, or other
constructive behaviors as a condition for receiving aid. The bill was
signed by a man named Bill Clinton, who is much better known for an act
of fellatio which, of course, had far greater societal implications.
Regardless, the success of this reform was pretty dramatic. Caseloads
were cut nearly in half. Once individuals were required to work or
undertake constructive activities as a condition of receiving aid they
left welfare rapidly. Another surprising result was a drop in the child
poverty rate. Employment of single mothers increased substantially and
the child poverty rate fell sharply from 20.8 percent in 1995 to 16.3
percent in 2000.

Graph Source: http://census.gov/hhes/www/poverty.html

The Corporate Welfare Queen
Now, letï¿½s consider the other kind of welfare.

Definition: corporate welfare
n. Financial aid, such as a subsidy, provided by a government to
corporations or other businesses.

The Cato Institute estimated that, in 2002, $93 billion were devoted to
corporate welfare. This is about 5 percent of the federal budget.To
clarify what is and isnï¿½t corporate welfare, a ï¿½no-bidï¿½ Iraq contract
for the prestigious Halliburton, would not be considered corporate
welfare because the government technically directly receives some good
or service in exchange for this expenditure. Based on the Pentagonï¿½s
Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) findings of $1.4 billion of
overcharging and fraud, I suppose the primary service they provide could
be considered to be repeatedly violating the American taxpayer.On the
other hand, the $15 billion in subsidies contained in the Energy Policy
Act of 2005, to the oil, gas, and coal industries, would be considered
corporate welfare because no goods or services are directly returned to
the government in exchange for these expenditures.

Infographic Source:
http://awesome.good.is/transparency/web/1012/subsidize-this/flat.html
Tax breaks targeted to benefit specific corporations could also be
considered a form of welfare. Tax loopholes force other businesses and
individual taxpayers without the same political clout to pick up the
slack and sacrifice a greater share of their hard-earned money to
decrease the financial burden on these corporations. However, to
simplify matters, weï¿½ve only included financial handouts to companies in
our working definition of corporate welfare.

Whenever corporate welfare is presented to voters, it always sounds like
a pretty reasonable, well-intended idea. Politicians say that theyï¿½re
stimulating the economy or helping struggling industries or creating
jobs or funding important research. But when you steal money from the
paychecks of working people, you hurt the economy by reducing their
ability to buy the things they want or need. This decrease in demand
damages other industries and puts people out of work.

Most of the pigs at the government trough are among the biggest
companies in America, including the Big 3 automakers, Boeing, Archer
Daniels Midland, and now-bankrupt Enron.

Farm Subsidies
However, the largest fraction of corporate welfare spending, about 40%,
went through the Department of Agriculture, most of it in the form of
farm subsidies. (Edwards, Corporate Welfare, 2003) Well, that sounds OK.
Someoneï¿½s got to help struggling family farms stay afloat, right? But in
reality, farm subsidies actually tilt the cotton field in favor of the
largest industrial farming operations. When it comes to deciding how to
dole out the money, the agricultural subsidy system utilizes a process
that is essentially the opposite of that used in the social welfare
systemï¿½s welfare system. In the corporate welfare system, the more money
and assets you have, the more government assistance you get. Conversely,
social welfare programs are set up so that the more money and assets you
have, the less government assistance you get. The result is that the
absolute largest 7% of corporate farming operations receive 45% of all
subsidies. (Edwards, Downsizing the Federal Government, 2004) So instead
of protecting family farms, these subsidies actually enhance the ability
of large industrial operations to shut them out of the market.

Graph Source: http://ers.usda.gov/data

Wal-Mart. Always high subsidies. Always.
The same is true in all other industries, too. The government gives tons
of favors to the largest corporations, increasing the significant
advantage they already have over smaller competing businesses. If, in
the court of public opinion, Wal-Mart has been tried and convicted for
the murder of main street, mom-and-pop America, then the government
could easily be found guilty as a willing accomplice. Wal-Mart receives
hundreds of millions of dollars of subsidization by local governments
throughout the country. These subsidies take the form of bribes by local
politicians trying to convince Wal-Mart to come to their town with the
dream of significant job creation. Of course, from that follows a larger
tax base. For example, a distribution center in Macclenny, Florida
received $9 million in government subsidies in the form of free land,
government-funded recruitment and training of employees, targeted tax
breaks, and housing subsidies for employees allowing them to be paid
significantly lower wages. A study by Good Jobs First found that 244
Wal-Marts around the country had received over $1 billion in government
favors.

The Big Picture
So now letï¿½s look at the big picture. The final totals are $59 billion,
3 percent of the total federal budget, for regular welfare and $92
billion, 5 percent of the total federal budget, for corporations. So,
the government spends roughly 50% more on corporate welfare than it does
on these particular public assistance programs.

Should we spend less on corporate welfare and/or social welfare
programs? Or should we spend even more? Itï¿½s up to you. A bunch of
people died horrible deaths to make sure this country remained a
democracy, so if you feel strongly about this issue you owe it to them
to call or write your congressman and senators and give them a piece of
your mind.

Some More Sources:
2013 Budget:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2013/assets/budget.pdf

Source: Office of Management and Budget, Budget of the United States
Government (Washington: Government Publishing Office), various years;
and data from the American Association for the Advancement of Science
R&D Budget and Policy Program, various years.

Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service,
http://www.ers.usda.gov/data.

Source: Export-Import Bank, 2006 Annual Report (Washington:
Export-Import Bank, 2007).

Source Data from Chris Edwards at Cato:

Corporate Welfare by Agency

Corporate Welfare by Agency 2

Corporate Welfare by Company

I am extremely appreciative of any corrections or additional info that I
left out. Please include hyperlinked SOURCES. I want to update this post
with more recent numbers and more expansive definitions of both
corporate and social welfare. My ultimate solution to this problem is
wiki-izing ThinkByNumbers.org so that good citizens such as yourselves
can correct any unfortunate omissions. I hope to have that feature
functional in the coming months.

http://thinkbynumbers.org/government-spending/corporate-welfare/corporate-welfare-statistics-vs-social-welfare-statistics/

Clave

unread,

Apr 7, 2013, 9:07:15 PM4/7/13

to

"BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote in
message news:aGo8t.759216$OJ2.3...@en-nntp-11.dc1.easynews.com...
> On 4/7/2013 8:54 PM, Clave wrote:
>> "BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote in
>> message news:eto8t.759214$OJ2.4...@en-nntp-11.dc1.easynews.com...
>>> On 4/7/2013 8:40 PM, Denny wrote:
>>>> BeamMeUpScotty <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 4/7/2013 7:42 PM, Clave wrote:
>>>>>> "BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote
>>>>>> in
>>>>>> message news:Yjn8t.759199$OJ2....@en-nntp-11.dc1.easynews.com...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <...>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Obama begged us to let him fix the problem, now all he does is make
>>>>>>> excuses for being too incompetent to fix any of the problems.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Excuses like an intransigently obstructionist House, you mean. An
>>>>>> opposition party whose primary goal of preventing him from
>>>>>> accomplishing anything is more important to them than the health of
>>>>>> our
>>>>>> citizens and our economy.
>>>>>
>>>>> Did you or Obama expect the Republicans to lay down and put their legs
>>>>> in the air for you? How stupid are you two?
>>>>>
>>>>> OOOohhhhh the mean nasty Republicans won't let me have my way!
>>>>>
>>>>> What will you do, buzz a drone over the House of representative and
>>>>> rename them all terrorists?
>>>>>
>>>>> What whining little shits you and Obama are.
>>>>>
>>>>> Paid to do a JOB and Obama can't get it done.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Little things like that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jim
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The honorable Senator McConnell said that his main goal was to defeat
>>>> President Obama. Not create jobs, That shows you where the Republica
>>>> priorties are.
>>>>
>>> Who has time to create JOBS when Obama is violating the constitution
>>> every week.
>>
>> You are quite simply out of your tiny little mind.
>>
>> You probably see Socialists in your soup.
>>
>> Jim
>>
>>
>>
> Signing statements and unconstitutional regime appointments during a
> session of congress and Obamacare(remember it was unconstitutional until
> the courts changed that "spending bill" into a "TAX BILL" and that is
> also unconstitutional) and there are so many other unconstitutional
> example of deciding *NOT* to enforce a law when Obama is
> constitutionally directed to enforce *ALL* laws of the federal
> Government... the laws you enforce are not optional.
>
>
> Everyday Obama neglects to enforce those laws is another violation of
> the constitution.

What a lucky thing it is for the rest of America that no one gives two shits
about what you think is and isn't Constitutional.

Jim

Clave

unread,

Apr 7, 2013, 9:08:33 PM4/7/13

to

"BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote in
message news:pyo8t.759215$OJ2.4...@en-nntp-11.dc1.easynews.com...

> On 4/7/2013 8:47 PM, Clave wrote:
>> "BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote in

>> message news:Qno8t.759213$OJ2.4...@en-nntp-11.dc1.easynews.com...

>>> On 4/7/2013 8:38 PM, Clave wrote:
>>>> "BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote in

>>>> message news:Feo8t.759211$OJ2.1...@en-nntp-11.dc1.easynews.com...

>>>>> On 4/7/2013 8:27 PM, Clave wrote:
>>>>>> "BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote
>>>>>> in

>>>>>> message news:PVn8t.759208$OJ2....@en-nntp-11.dc1.easynews.com...

>>>>>>> On 4/7/2013 8:02 PM, Clave wrote:
>>>>>>>> "BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote
>>>>>>>> in

>>>>>>>> message news:BDn8t.759204$OJ2.2...@en-nntp-11.dc1.easynews.com...

>>>>>>>>> On 4/7/2013 7:39 PM, Denny wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> BeamMeUpScotty <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/7/2013 7:22 PM, Jeff M wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/7/2013 6:17 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama is the Welfare President.....
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> ... and the Republicans are the Corporate Welfare Party.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Fair and equal isn't it.....
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Everyone's been screwed by corporations at one time or anohter.
>>>>>>>>>> They
>>>>>>>>>> fire
>>>>>>>>>> you. They ship your job overseas. Oil companies raise the price
>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>> gasoline
>>>>>>>>>> while provitting billions. Fair or not, this will always cost the
>>>>>>>>>> Republicans millions of votes.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> We've all been screwed by the Welfare system and the people that
>>>>>>>>> cheat
>>>>>>>>> the system.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You mean agribusinesses and defense contractors.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jim
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I mean the drug dealers and crack whore mothers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> LOL -- the "Welfare Queen" is a myth, ScottyL00n. The US pouring
>>>>>> untold
>>>>>> billions into black defense projects is not.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jim
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Right.... there are no drug dealers or crack babies...
>>>>
>>>> Show me how much money the government is giving to them.
>>>>
>>>> Jim
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Show me how much the government is giving illegally to Agribusiness and
>>> Defense contractors?
>>
>> What does "illegally" have to do with it, other than giving you a way to
>> weasel out of an issue you brought up?
>>
>> Jim
>>
>>
>>
> Cheating fraud abuse.... that's what the welfare cheats are you pegged
> them as corporate cheats I said they are crack whores and drug dealers
> that lie and commit fraud...

Which was ANOTHER way you tried to weasel around the obvious implications of
the issue YOU brought up.

You dance poorly.

Jim

BeamMeUpScotty

unread,

Apr 7, 2013, 9:09:46 PM4/7/13

to

On 4/7/2013 9:02 PM, Jeff M wrote:

> On 4/7/2013 7:53 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> We've all been screwed by the Welfare system and the
>>>>>>>>>> people that cheat the system.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You mean agribusinesses and defense contractors.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Jim
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I mean the drug dealers and crack whore mothers.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> LOL -- the "Welfare Queen" is a myth, ScottyL00n. The US
>>>>>>> pouring untold billions into black defense projects is
>>>>>>> not.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jim
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Right.... there are no drug dealers or crack babies...
>>>>>
>>>>> Show me how much money the government is giving to them.
>>>>>
>>>>> Jim
>>>>
>>>> Show me how much the government is giving illegally to
>>>> Agribusiness and Defense contractors?
>>>
>>> What does "illegally" have to do with it, other than giving you a
>>> way to weasel out of an issue you brought up?
>>>
>>> Jim
>>>
>> Cheating fraud abuse.... that's what the welfare cheats are you
>> pegged them as corporate cheats I said they are crack whores and drug

>> dealers that lie and commit fraud, are you stupid?

>
> About $59 billion is spent on traditional social welfare programs. $92
> billion is spent on corporate subsidies. So, the government spent 50%
> more on corporate welfare than it did on food stamps and housing
> assistance in 2006.

Housing subsidies are NOT corporate welfare that is a program for the
poor and those on welfare.....

Agribusiness subsidies are usually stuff that ends up with FREE CHEESE
going out as welfare and WIC payments.

They are BACK DOOR WELFARE PROGRAMS FOR DRUG DEALERS AND CRACK WHORES.

You try to call them corporate welfare? Why do you try to mislead
people like that? Are you dishonest or just not smart enough and you
like spreading your own ignorance?

Jeff M

unread,

Apr 7, 2013, 9:18:59 PM4/7/13

to

Read it again, dummy.

> Agribusiness subsidies are usually stuff that ends up with FREE CHEESE
> going out as welfare and WIC payments.

Again, you are factually incorrect.

> They are BACK DOOR WELFARE PROGRAMS FOR DRUG DEALERS AND CRACK WHORES.

Of course that's also factually wrong. It's really tragic, how often
ignorant ideological pigheadedness trumps fact, truth and reason in the
weak-minded.

> You try to call them corporate welfare? Why do you try to mislead
> people like that?

Yeah, no regressive would ever present anything so "misleading" to his
ideologically blinded fellows as are factual data.

Gunner Asch

unread,

Apr 7, 2013, 9:22:56 PM4/7/13

to

On 07 Apr 2013 22:41:13 GMT, dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:

>Sparks <energizedc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Apr 7, 2:01=A0pm, Gunner Asch <gunnera...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Sun, 7 Apr 2013 13:20:49 -0700 (PDT), Sparks
>> > <energizedconservat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > >I disagree that Israel has violated the human and civil rights of a
>> > >people. There are Arab Israelis who live in Israel.
>> >
>> > Hell...there are Arabs in the Knesset..Israeli Parliment.
>>
>> Excellent point.
>> >
>> > Hardy a version of the =A0hundreds of years of American Democrat
>> > bigotry and bias against blacks.
>>
>> In that regard, another thing that seems to have escaped today's
>> liberals and leftists is that the only African-Americans in Congress
>> who represent white majority districts are African-American
>> Republicans. Apparently, white Democrats don't elect African-Americans
>> to represent them.
>
>Well there's Obama, as an example.

Indeed. With rampant voter fraud..we got the first Middle Eastern
president.

Btw...he is 50% white, 44% middle eastern and only 6% black.

By that score..Im a full fledged Native American (Ojibwa)

Gunner

Gunner Asch

unread,

Apr 7, 2013, 9:26:23 PM4/7/13

to

On 07 Apr 2013 23:30:47 GMT, dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:

>Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.org> wrote:

>> On 4/7/2013 5:41 PM, Denny wrote:
>> > Sparks <energizedc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >> On Apr 7, 2:01=A0pm, Gunner Asch <gunnera...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>> On Sun, 7 Apr 2013 13:20:49 -0700 (PDT), Sparks
>> >>> <energizedconservat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> I disagree that Israel has violated the human and civil rights of a
>> >>>> people. There are Arab Israelis who live in Israel.
>> >>>
>> >>> Hell...there are Arabs in the Knesset..Israeli Parliment.
>> >>
>> >> Excellent point.
>> >>>
>> >>> Hardy a version of the =A0hundreds of years of American Democrat
>> >>> bigotry and bias against blacks.
>> >>
>> >> In that regard, another thing that seems to have escaped today's
>> >> liberals and leftists is that the only African-Americans in Congress
>> >> who represent white majority districts are African-American
>> >> Republicans. Apparently, white Democrats don't elect African-Americans
>> >> to represent them.
>> >
>> > Well there's Obama, as an example.
>>

>> Beat me to the punch!
>>
>> Anybody know anything about this callow Sparks fellow?
>>
>> He appears to have suddenly sprung up as a fully indoctrinated and
>> indurated mouthpiece for regressive extremism, complete with all the
>> expected talking points, arrogance, overconfident ignorance, facility
>> for denial and the endless repetitiveness that are the hallmarks of that
>> type.
>>
>> I am a bit curious, since he may well be nothing more than another of
>> his type now posting under a new nym to escape the ruination of his
>> credibility under the old, but still classically exemplifying the
>> Dunning-Kruger Effect.
>>
>> "The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which unskilled
>> individuals suffer from illusory superiority, mistakenly rating their
>> ability much higher than average. This bias is attributed to a
>> meta-cognitive inability of the unskilled to recognize their mistakes."
>
>Beats me. He's OK, more literate than some. I've just been here a few
>months myself. And I'll mostly beat you to the punch every time. Im old but
>I'm springy.
>
>
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

Oooh! The Democrat-Kruger Effect!

Absolutely true!

Kruger proposed that, for a given skill, incompetent people will:

tend to overestimate their own level of skill;
fail to recognize genuine skill in others;
fail to recognize the extremity of their inadequacy;
recognize and acknowledge their own previous lack of skill, if
they are exposed to training for that skill.

Dunning has since drawn an analogy ("the anosognosia of everyday
life")[1][7] with a condition in which a person who suffers a physical
disability because of brain injury seems unaware of or denies the
existence of the disability, even for dramatic impairments such as
blindness or liberalism

Gunner Asch

unread,

Apr 7, 2013, 9:27:31 PM4/7/13

to

On 07 Apr 2013 22:32:11 GMT, dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:

>Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, 7 Apr 2013 13:20:49 -0700 (PDT), Sparks
>> <energizedc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >I disagree that Israel has violated the human and civil rights of a
>> >people. There are Arab Israelis who live in Israel.
>>
>> Hell...there are Arabs in the Knesset..Israeli Parliment.
>>

>> Hardy a version of the hundreds of years of American Democrat bigotry
>> and bias against blacks.
>
>The "Israeli" Arabs have the right to vote, and very few other rights.

Then trot out those pesky cites before the lads here start asking for
them. I know you can do it.

Lets have them and see if you are a lying sack of shit, or simply a
sack of shit.

Bring em ON!!

Gunner Asch

unread,

Apr 7, 2013, 9:28:10 PM4/7/13

to

On 07 Apr 2013 22:38:32 GMT, dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:

>Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> On Sun, 7 Apr 2013 13:33:38 -0700 (PDT), Sparks
>> <energizedc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> > You're very concerned with Israel.
>> >>
>> >> No.
>> >
>> >Yes, you seem to have one standard for Israel, and a completely
>> >different one for every other nation on the planet.
>> >>
>>
>> Of course. the wanker is just another Leftwing Anti-Semite. No
>> different than the Nazis
>>
>> Gunner
>
>What a warped outlook.

Indeed. As Ive stated many times, Leftwingers are indeed mentally
ill.

Gunner

Message has been deleted

Gunner Asch

unread,

Apr 7, 2013, 9:32:28 PM4/7/13

to

On 08 Apr 2013 00:34:45 GMT, dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:

>BeamMeUpScotty <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:

>> On 4/7/2013 7:34 PM, Jeff M wrote:
>> > On 4/7/2013 6:21 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:
>> > [snip]
>> >> That's right, we're all Racist Bigots.......
>> >
>> > Well, not all of you.
>> >
>> >> And Racist Bigots would never elect a Mormon.
>> >
>> > Mormonism is a religion, not a race. Even so, many of you were notably
>> > fainthearted in your support for his candidacy, probably either because
>> > you don't believe that Mormons are really Christians, or from simple
>> > religious bigotry within the Republican party.
>> >
>> > This is nothing new, of course. As far back as 1884, Republicans
>> > expressly condemned the Mormon Church by name, resolving “that it is
>> > the duty of Congress to enact such laws as shall promptly and
>> > effectually suppress the system of polygamy within our Territories; and
>> > divorce the political from the ecclesiastical power of the so-called
>> > Mormon church,” to be enforced “by the military, if need be.”
>> >
>>
>> Liberals Hate Mormons.... it was pure and simple, Liberal
>> discrimination.
>
>I know many liberals. Not one hates Mormons.

I know many liberals. They think Mormons are scum and dirt.

You are a liar and cover up what Lieberals do and say and think.

You must be a Lieberal too.

Gunner Asch

unread,

Apr 7, 2013, 9:35:02 PM4/7/13

to

On 07 Apr 2013 23:46:18 GMT, dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:

>BeamMeUpScotty <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:

>> On 4/7/2013 6:49 PM, Denny wrote:
>> > Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> >> On 07 Apr 2013 20:59:56 GMT, dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>> I haven't seen the statistics, but I'll take yur word for it. Maybe
>> >>> you remember a brief episode called the Bush recession. That would
>> >>> explain the statistics.
>> >>
>> >> The Bush Recession ended in January of 2009. Then it became the Obama
>> >> Recession, some 4+ years ago.
>> >
>> > Well you're the peoplBut not forgotten.

>> >
>>
>> Obama begged us to let him fix the problem, now all he does is make
>> excuses for being too incompetent to fix any of the problems.
>

>Keep repeating that over and over, and it might come true. Who knows?
>Miracles happen.

So....about that "getting the troops out of the Middle East and that
closing Gitmo thingy he promised ...all within 6 months of gaining the
Whitehouse

Odd..that was 5 yrs ago..wasnt it?

And he still hasnt done either of them?? And he could with a simple
stroke of the pen......

And you bought into it..didnt you......dumb boi....you are really
stupid.

Message has been deleted

Gunner Asch

unread,

Apr 7, 2013, 9:36:12 PM4/7/13

to

On Sun, 07 Apr 2013 20:23:50 -0400, BeamMeUpScotty
<ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:

>On 4/7/2013 7:42 PM, Clave wrote:
>> "BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote in

>> message news:Yjn8t.759199$OJ2....@en-nntp-11.dc1.easynews.com...
>>
>> <...>

>>
>>> Obama begged us to let him fix the problem, now all he does is make
>>> excuses for being too incompetent to fix any of the problems.
>>

>> Excuses like an intransigently obstructionist House, you mean. An
>> opposition party whose primary goal of preventing him from accomplishing
>> anything is more important to them than the health of our citizens and our
>> economy.
>
>Did you or Obama expect the Republicans to lay down and put their legs
>in the air for you? How stupid are you two?
>
>OOOohhhhh the mean nasty Republicans won't let me have my way!
>
>What will you do, buzz a drone over the House of representative and
>rename them all terrorists?
>
>What whining little shits you and Obama are.
>
>Paid to do a JOB and Obama can't get it done.
>

Odd that the Democrats controlled Congress for 5 yrs, including 3 with
Obama as President.

Yet..they couldnt even pass a budget....

Gunner Asch

unread,

Apr 7, 2013, 9:37:40 PM4/7/13

to

On 07 Apr 2013 23:39:53 GMT, dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:

>Everyone's been screwed by corporations at one time or anohter. They fire
>you. They ship your job overseas.

Sounds exactly like a Government as well.

Jeff M

unread,

Apr 7, 2013, 9:38:38 PM4/7/13

to

On 4/7/2013 8:09 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:

[snip]

> Agribusiness subsidies are usually stuff that ends up with FREE CHEESE

> going out as welfare [snip]

Just so you know, there hasn't been any "FREE CHEESE going out as
welfare" for last two decades or thereabouts. Also, as a factual
matter, not one cent of the corporate agribusiness subsidies was ever
diverted from those recipients' pockets to either the eventual human
recipients or to the cost of distributing any foodstuffs to them.

The government simply had bought up so much dairy product to
artificially inflate their prices and agribusiness profits, and
certainly not with either the intent or purpose to later give it away,
that its storage warehouses were simply overflowing with the stuff, at
some additional cost to the taxpayers. So the government decided it
either had to pay to dispose of it or give some of it away to the needy.

Personally, though, I think a strategic national food stockpile makes a
lot of sense, along the lines of the national pharmaceutical stockpile,
the strategic oil reserve, and other such programs, strictly as a
national security measure against major disruptions to our food supply
chain.

Ray Keller

unread,

Apr 7, 2013, 9:48:04 PM4/7/13

to

LOL
Jeftard the Disbarred lawyer admits he is a lier
On the other hand, the AVVO and Florida Bar information is factual and about
him

The Florida State Bar only lists one Jeff McCann and he is disbarred

http://www.floridabar.org/names.nsf/0/1E2018ED1F7A362185256D950064C0A5?OpenDocument

Jeffrey Allen McCann
SuspendedNot eligible to practice in Florida

ID Number:-647004
Address:4371 Northlake Blvd # 249
Palm Beach Gardens, Florida 334106253
United States
Phone:561.839.5307

E-Mail:jmla...@gmail.com
vCard:

County:Palm Beach
Circuit:15
Admitted:08/06/2003

10-Year Discipline HistoryYes

Action DateReference
Suspension01-04-2012201250658
Suspended - with Conditions04-20-2012201290120

Law School:Nova Southeastern University - Shepard Broad Law Center
Graduation Year:2002
Degree:Doctor of Jurisprudence/Juris Doctor

Firm:The Mccann Firm P.A.
Services:ADA accessible client services

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff M" <NoS...@NoThanks.org>
Newsgroups:
alt.bestjobsusa.florida.jobs,miami.general,misc.survivalism,soc.culture.african.american,tampa.music
Sent: Friday, February 22, 2013 1:52 AM
Subject: Re: Honest Colin Powell Points out the Racists, Again

> I just respond in kind, automatically posting the same sort of stuff
> that happens to have his name on it, precisely as he's doing, until Ray
> grows up or at least grows tired of his own nonsense. In the meantime, I
> just laugh at the fool he's making of himself online.
>
> But what are you gonna do? I can pity him, and I try not to feed the
> trolls. But even if Ray's driven by nothing more than his internal
> demons of mental illness, its obvious that I'm the target of this
> loony's strangely angry little obsession. Maybe he'll recover his mental
> and emotional equilibrium one day, or finally grow up, or just tire of
> being such a self-embarrassing fool. You can never tell with someone as
> disturbed as Ray appears to be. In the meantime, you could always just
> killfile Ray or me or both for a little while.
>

http://www.avvo.com/attorneys/33401-fl-jeffrey-mccann-1295730.html
Jeffrey Allen McCann
Avvo Rating 1.0 Extreme Caution
This lawyer has been disciplined by a state licensing authority.
State Citation type Year cited Last
updated by Avvo
Florida Suspended - with Conditions 2012 12/19/2012
Florida Suspension 2012

2A is the right to shoot tyrants, not deer.

Ray Keller

unread,

Apr 7, 2013, 9:52:58 PM4/7/13

to

Message has been deleted

Jeff M

unread,

Apr 7, 2013, 10:01:51 PM4/7/13

to

On 4/7/2013 8:52 PM, Ray Keller wrote:
>
> LOL
> Jeftard the Disbarred lawyer admits he is a lier

The laughably idiotic "Ray Keller" keeps hopelessly trying to spread
this slander that I'm disbarred, even after it was conclusively proved
to be merely his own intentional lie. Anyone can access the Florida Bar
web page and quickly confirm this for themselves. I am simply
temporarily on the inactive list due to a medical disability, not
disciplined, and certainly not disbarred, as he knows perfectly well,
but he foolishly keep trying to spread that lie by reposting it repeatedly.

I take it as something between his abject admission of frustration over
his own mental inferiority, a clear demonstration of his low moral
character, an angry expression of his personal envy or jealousy of me,
and his obvious sick obsession and possible disgusting man-crush on me.

Fortunately, he is perhaps the biggest laughingstock here, and is held
in nearly universal contempt and subject to constant derision for his
repeated public displays of his own stupidity. He has also long since
completely shredded his own credibility through his pattern of repeating
just such discredited lies as this. I am quite confident no one pays
any attention to him anymore, but I am in the process of dealing with it
anyway.

In the meantime, as I said, anyone can easily check out the facts
themselves, or just Google "Ray Keller's" posting history for a good
laugh at his readily apparent intellectual and moral deficits. Or they
could simply post any simple question about anything at all for "Ray
Keller," and they would immediately see for themselves what sort of
dullard "Ray Keller" really is.

Message has been deleted

Jeff M

unread,

Apr 7, 2013, 10:03:11 PM4/7/13

to

On 4/7/2013 8:48 PM, Ray Keller wrote:

> Jeftard the Disbarred lawyer admits he is a lier

Message has been deleted

Clave

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 2:02:21 AM4/8/13

to

"Sparks" <energizedc...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:2a2a2592-b6e1-4e1a...@n7g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...
> On Apr 7, 2:48 pm, "Clave" <ChrisClav...@TheMonastery.com> wrote:
>> "Sparks" <energizedconservat...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:d4a6fdb8-6620-40a0...@u20g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> > On Apr 7, 2:30 pm, "Clave" <ChrisClav...@TheMonastery.com> wrote:
>>
>> <...>
>>
>> >> You, Dummer and PlimpTard are going to get
>> >> nothing but laughed at.
>>
>> > Sure, because we challenge you, and you're incapable of an
>> > intellectual response.
>>
>> LOL -- yeah, that must be it. Same with everyone else who's laughing at
>> you.
>
> Such a shame (for you) that it's all you've got.

That and demonstrable reality.

Jim

Sparks

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 2:04:08 AM4/8/13

to

On Apr 7, 8:43 am, dzweib...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:
> Sparks <energizedconservat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On Apr 6, 3:02=A0pm, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
> > > On 4/6/2013 12:31 PM, Sparks wrote:
>
> > > > On Apr 6, 11:57 am, Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.org> wrote:
> > > >> On 4/6/2013 1:49 PM, Sparks wrote:
>
> > > >>> On Apr 6, 8:39 am, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
> > > >>>> On 4/6/2013 12:21 AM, Sparks wrote:
> > > >> [snip]
> > > >>>> The left *needs* racism:
> > > >>>>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704671904575193921155
> > > >>>>42=
> > ...
>
> > > >>> Yes, they need to further divide this nation in order to continue
> > > >>> to win elections.
>
> > > >> Hahaha! =A0How quickly you forget! =A0(or pretend to)
>
> > > >> Remember the last losing Republican candidate for President, Mitt
> > > >> Romney, actually running on dividing the nation? =A0Have you already
> > > >> forgotten the largely imaginary "47%" that Romney promised to
> > > >> official=
> > ly
> > > >> and completely forget if he won?
>
> > > > He didn't promise to forget them. He said he knew they would not vote
> > > > for him, because he knew the Democrats had succeeded in convincing
> > > > those people that Romney was the boogeyman.
>
> > > >> Recall, also, what a disastrously losing tactic the Republican
> > > >> politic=
> > s
> > > >> of national division proved to be?
>
> > > > That's not why he lost the election. He lost the election because
> > > > President Obama (and his friends) ran a viciously personal negative
> > > > campaign against Romney, in which Obama (and his friends) succeeded
> > > > in convincing enough people that Romney was a bad man.
>
> > > Romney lost the election because he was a weak candidate.
>
> > That's true, he allowed himself to be defined by his opponent and
> > refused to defend himself.
>
> He lost because his main message was that the economy had gone downhill
> since Obama came into office.

It has. Unemployment rose for most of Obama's first term. The only
reason it's going down recently is due to the number of people who
have given up and left the workforce.
>
> A patent lie. Even the least-informed
> indepedant voter realized that.

A majority of independent voters voted for Romney.
>
> And, simply, times had changed. The era of
> lower taxes for the rich/supply-side economics is a thing of the past

He wasn't talking about lowering their taxes. That was a lie of the
left.

Message has been deleted

Sparks

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 2:07:12 AM4/8/13

to

On Apr 7, 4:01 pm, Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.org> wrote:

> On 4/7/2013 5:41 PM, Denny wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Sparks <energizedconservat...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> >> On Apr 7, 2:01=A0pm, Gunner Asch <gunnera...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> On Sun, 7 Apr 2013 13:20:49 -0700 (PDT), Sparks
> >>> <energizedconservat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >>>> I disagree that Israel has violated the human and civil rights of a
> >>>> people. There are Arab Israelis who live in Israel.
>
> >>> Hell...there are Arabs in the Knesset..Israeli Parliment.
>
> >> Excellent point.
>
> >>> Hardy a version of the =A0hundreds of years of American Democrat
> >>> bigotry and bias against blacks.
>
> >> In that regard, another thing that seems to have escaped today's
> >> liberals and leftists is that the only African-Americans in Congress
> >> who represent white majority districts are African-American
> >> Republicans. Apparently, white Democrats don't elect African-Americans
> >> to represent them.
>
> > Well there's Obama, as an example.
>
> Beat me to the punch!

I specifically referred to congressional districts, where the only
African-American congressmen who represent majority white districts
are Republicans.
>
> Anybody know anything about this callow Sparks fellow?

Yes, I know quite a bit about me.
>
> He appears to have suddenly sprung up as a fully indoctrinated and
> indurated mouthpiece for regressive extremism, complete with all the
> expected talking points, arrogance, overconfident ignorance, facility
> for denial and the endless repetitiveness that are the hallmarks of that
> type.

A lot of that sounds exactly like you. Is this more psychological
projection?
>
> I am a bit curious, since he may well be nothing more than another of
> his type now posting under a new nym to escape the ruination of his
> credibility under the old,

No, I've posted in the past using this nym.
>
> but still classically exemplifying the
> Dunning-Kruger Effect.
>
> "The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which unskilled
> individuals suffer from illusory superiority, mistakenly rating their
> ability much higher than average. This bias is attributed to a
> meta-cognitive inability of the unskilled to recognize their mistakes."

All I'm doing is producing facts. That last paragraph sounds like more
projection from you.

Sparks

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 2:12:06 AM4/8/13

to

On Apr 7, 1:48 pm, dzweib...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:
> Sparks <energizedconservat...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > On Apr 6, 4:46=A0pm, dzweib...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:
> > > Sparks <energizedconservat...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > > > On Apr 6, 8:43=3DA0am, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
> > > > > On 4/6/2013 12:27 AM, Sparks wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Apr 5, 9:37 pm, Yoorg...@Jurgis.net wrote:
> > > > > >> On Thu, 4 Apr 2013 20:20:14 -0700 (PDT), Sparks
>
> > > > > >> <energizedconservat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > > >>>> Not to speak for Yourg, but If we hadn't been slaves to the
> > > > > >>>> Israelis=3D
> > > > =A0all
> > > > > >>>> these decades, we wouldn't be in this middle eastern mess.
>
> > > > > >>> In what way have we been Israel's slaves?
>
> > > > > >> BILLION and BILLION of our wealth go to back them
>
> > > > > > So what? We've also given billions to Egypt, Jordan, and the
> > > > > > Palestinians. Are we their slaves, too?
>
> > > > > >> 6,000 Dead Americans, not to mention a thousand others in
> > > > > >> various skirmishes---including a deliberate attack on a US
> > > > > >> warship by Isra=
> > el
> > > > > >> (oh, sorry, oops, our fault, they said)
>
> > > > > > How does any of that make us their slaves? That's my question,
> > > > > > and =
> > no
> > > > > > one has answered it.
>
> > > > > I don't think we're Israel's "slaves", but our foreign policy is
> > > > > far too supportive of Israel, against America's interests, and the
> > > > > reason is domestic Jewish influence.
>
> > > > No, it's far more than that.
>
> > > > >=3DA0Yes, we give economic and military support
> > > > > to Egypt, but we give a vastly disproportionately greater support
> > > > > to Israel, and we shouldn't.
>
> > > > When you add up the aid we have given Egypt, Jordan, and the
> > > > Palestinians, it's roughly equal to what we have given Israel. Why
> > > > shouldn't we support the lone democracy (except for Iraq) in that
> > > > region?
>
> > > Lebanon is a democracy.
>
> > Sort of.
>
> > > Neocons dislike Lebanon because ithas a sizable
> > > Hezbolla percentage representation in it's parliament. Israel calls
> > > them all terrorists so the neocons automatically agreed.
>
> > You don't think Hezbollah are terrorists?
>
> They are by the Israeli definition.
>
> Years ago I read a book about the various organizations you would call
> terrorists. Hesbolla,Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihand, and the Islamic
> Brotherhood. Tjeu re all different but are usually lumped together. I can't
> remember the name. I wish more people had read it. But you shouldn't
> bother. You wouldn't believe a word.

I go by people's actions. Hezbollah is backed by Iran, and has started
unnecessary wars with Israel that did more harm than good to the
people they supposedly represent. They are terrorists by their
actions.

Sparks

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 2:13:00 AM4/8/13

to

On Apr 7, 1:54 pm, dzweib...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:
> Sparks <energizedconservat...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > On Apr 7, 8:25=A0am, BeamMeUpScotty
> > <ThenDestroyEveryth...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:
> > > On 4/7/2013 3:25 AM, Sparks wrote:

>
> > > > On Apr 6, 3:02 pm, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
> > > >> On 4/6/2013 12:31 PM, Sparks wrote:
>
> > > >>> On Apr 6, 11:57 am, Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.org> wrote:
> > > >>>> On 4/6/2013 1:49 PM, Sparks wrote:
>
> > > >>>>> On Apr 6, 8:39 am, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
> > > >>>>>> On 4/6/2013 12:21 AM, Sparks wrote:
> > > >>>> [snip]
> > > >>>>>> The left *needs* racism:
> > > >>>>>>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100014240527487046719045751939211

> > > >>>>>>55=
> > 42...

>
> > > >>>>> Yes, they need to further divide this nation in order to continue

> > > >>>>> t=

> > o
> > > >>>>> win elections.
>
> > > >>>> Hahaha! =A0How quickly you forget! =A0(or pretend to)
>
> > > >>>> Remember the last losing Republican candidate for President, Mitt
> > > >>>> Romney, actually running on dividing the nation? =A0Have you
> > > >>>> already forgotten the largely imaginary "47%" that Romney promised

> > > >>>> to offici=
> > ally

> > > >>>> and completely forget if he won?
>
> > > >>> He didn't promise to forget them. He said he knew they would not
> > > >>> vote for him, because he knew the Democrats had succeeded in
> > > >>> convincing those people that Romney was the boogeyman.
>
> > > >>>> Recall, also, what a disastrously losing tactic the Republican

> > > >>>> polit=
> > ics

> > > >>>> of national division proved to be?
>
> > > >>> That's not why he lost the election. He lost the election because
> > > >>> President Obama (and his friends) ran a viciously personal negative
> > > >>> campaign against Romney, in which Obama (and his friends) succeeded

> > > >>> i=

> > n
> > > >>> convincing enough people that Romney was a bad man.
>
> > > >> Romney lost the election because he was a weak candidate.
>
> > > > That's true, he allowed himself to be defined by his opponent and
> > > > refused to defend himself.
>

> > > Obama was just doing what all Alinsky-ites do, Obama was personally
> > > destroying Romney and if he needed lies to do that's OK because it for
> > > the cause of Socialism.
>
> > True. Even Bill Clinton said he didn't like those lies. Imagine that.
>
> > > Romney was a failure because he chose to allow Obama/Liberals to tell
> > > lie=
> > s.
>
> > He allowed the lies without defending himself. I sent an email to his
> > campaign at one point and told them if he didn't start defending
> > himself, I was going to lose faith in his campaign. Unfortunately, he
> > didn't defend himself and he lost.
>
> LOL. My God. Romny never had a chance; before the nomination, before the
> primaries, before the Clinton administration. He's not a bad man, and has
> many qualities, but America would never ever. If you believe otherwise you
> don't understand this country.

Is it because they wouldn't elect a Mormon?

Message has been deleted

Gunner Asch

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 2:14:27 AM4/8/13

to

On 08 Apr 2013 05:50:57 GMT, dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:

>Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> On 07 Apr 2013 22:41:13 GMT, dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:

>>
>> >Sparks <energizedc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >> On Apr 7, 2:01=A0pm, Gunner Asch <gunnera...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> >> > On Sun, 7 Apr 2013 13:20:49 -0700 (PDT), Sparks
>> >> > <energizedconservat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > >I disagree that Israel has violated the human and civil rights of a
>> >> > >people. There are Arab Israelis who live in Israel.
>> >> >
>> >> > Hell...there are Arabs in the Knesset..Israeli Parliment.
>> >>
>> >> Excellent point.
>> >> >
>> >> > Hardy a version of the =A0hundreds of years of American Democrat
>> >> > bigotry and bias against blacks.
>> >>
>> >> In that regard, another thing that seems to have escaped today's
>> >> liberals and leftists is that the only African-Americans in Congress
>> >> who represent white majority districts are African-American
>> >> Republicans. Apparently, white Democrats don't elect African-Americans
>> >> to represent them.
>> >
>> >Well there's Obama, as an example.
>>

>> Indeed. With rampant voter fraud..we got the first Middle Eastern
>> president.
>>
>> Btw...he is 50% white, 44% middle eastern and only 6% black.
>>
>> By that score..Im a full fledged Native American (Ojibwa)
>>
>> Gunner
>
>Wow, I've never seen so many lies crammed into such few words. Way to go!
>Who was his middle eastern ancestor?

http://www.derekpgilbert.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/obamaturban.jpg

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080301082012AAauTBC

Is Barack Hussein Obama ethnically Arabic?

Every ancestor on his father's side has an Arabic name, because his
father was officially classified as "Arab African" by the Kenyan
government. 100% African tribal members of western Kenya where his
father was born have Christian names, not Arabic. His father's
decision to name him with an Arabic name is a matter of his father
establishing his ethnic identity in Africa - it is done deliberately
to ethnically separate from the African tribes. Researching his roots
reveal that on his father's side, he is descended from Arab slave
traders. They operated under an extended grant from Queen Victoria,
who gave them the right to continue the slave trade in exchange for
helping the British defeat the Madhi Army in southern Sudan and the
Upper Nile region. Funny how circular is history; now the British
again face the Madhi Army, albeit this time Shiite, not Sunni, as in
nineteenth century Sudan.

http://kennethelamb.blogspot.com/2008/02/barak-obama-questions-about-ethnic.html

Additional Details
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/31/AR2007123101662.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/26/AR2007032601583.html
http://209.85.207.104/search?q=cache:aKUmACK_IFYJ:www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/chi-070325obama-youth-story,1,4006113.story+http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/chi-070325obama-youth-story,1,4006113.story&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us
http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=1f22d28c-ced2-4761-b350-77f3513928ac&k=52616
http://wichita.craigslist.org/pol/552957338.html
http://kennethelamb.blogspot.com/2008/02/barak-obama-questions-about-ethnic.html

Barack Hussein Obama - Arab-American, only 6.25% African

[Extracted from article on Arcade@home]

Barack Hussein Obama is not half black. If elected, he would be
the first Arab-American President, not the first black President.
Barack Hussein Obama is 50% Caucasian from his mother's side and
43.75% Arabic and 6.25% African Negro from his father's side. While
Barack Hussein Obama's father was from Kenya, his father's family was
mainly Arabs. Barack Hussein Obama's father was only 12.5% African
Negro and 87.5% Arab (his father's birth certificate even states he's
Arab, not African Negro).

What does this mean? Maybe nothing. But, why is Obama trying to
hide this? Why does he try to hide is middle name? Why does he try to
hide the religious Muslim school he attended as a child in Indonesia?
Why doesn't he set the record straight that he wouldn't be the first
black President? Why so many cover-ups and hiding of the truth?

Further, at only 6.25% African Negro, would he even be the first
President who was part black? Not at all! Our 3rd President, Thomas
Jefferson was our first part black President. And he's not alone,
Andrew Jackson, Abraham Lincoln, Warren Harding and Calvin Coolidge
were also part black.

President Andrew Jackson was the son of an Irish woman who married
a black man. Andrew Jackson was such a high percentage black that his
oldest brother was sold as a slave!

President Abraham Lincoln was the illegitimate son of an African
man, he had very dark skin and coarse hair and his mother also
allegedly came from an Ethiopian tribe. His heritage fueled so much
controversy that Lincoln was nicknamed "Abraham Africanus the First"
by his opponents.

President Warren Harding never even denied claims that he was
black, because he had black ancestors between both sets of parents and
he attended Iberia College, a school founded to educate fugitive
slaves.

President Calvin Coolidge was proud of his heritage and claimed
his mother was dark because of mixed Indian ancestry. Coolidge's
mother's maiden name was "Moor" and in Europe the name "Moor" was
given to all blacks just as "Negro" was used in America.

etc etc

You really are an ignorant twat arnt you?

Gunner

Sparks

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 2:15:26 AM4/8/13

to

On Apr 7, 1:59 pm, dzweib...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:
> Sparks <energizedconservat...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > On Apr 7, 8:55=A0am, dzweib...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:
> > > Sparks <energizedconservat...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > > > On Apr 6, 4:59=3DA0pm, dzweib...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:
> > > > > Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.org> wrote:
> > > > > > On 4/6/2013 1:49 PM, Sparks wrote:
> > > > > > > On Apr 6, 8:39 am, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
> > > > > > >> On 4/6/2013 12:21 AM, Sparks wrote:
> > > > > > [snip]
> > > > > > >> The left *needs* racism:
> > > > > > >>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405274870467190457519392

> > > > > > >>11=
> > 55
> > > > > > >>42=3D
> > > > .

> > > > > > >> ..
>
> > > > > > > Yes, they need to further divide this nation in order to

> > > > > > > continue to win elections.
>
> > > > > > Hahaha! =3DA0How quickly you forget! =3DA0(or pretend to)

>
> > > > > > Remember the last losing Republican candidate for President, Mitt

> > > > > > Romney, actually running on dividing the nation? =3DA0Have you
> > > > > > alre=

> > ady
> > > > > > forgotten the largely imaginary "47%" that Romney promised to

> > > > > > officiall=3D

> > > > y
> > > > > > and completely forget if he won?
>

> > > > > > Recall, also, what a disastrously losing tactic the Republican

> > > > > > politics of national division proved to be?
>
> > > > > > No? =3DA0I thought not.
>
> > > > > That Romney speech was about class too. Republicans complained
> > > > > about Democrats using "class warfare". Then here comes Mitt. Let us
> > > > > not forget Newt Girgrichhcalling Obama the "Food Stamp" president.
> > > > > Class and race in one phrase. I bet a lot of posters here giggled
> > > > > and jumpe=
> > d
> > > > > up and down when they heard that line.
>
> > > > When are you going to figure out that more white people use food
> > > > stamps than anyone? Food stamps are not about race, except in the
> > > > race conscious minds of racist leftists.
>
> > > I figured it out. It's a well-known fact. That's what Romny was talking
> > > about. He was tailoring his speech for his audience. A goup of wealthy
> > > Georgia guys.
>
> > Is it true that the number of food stamp recipients has increased
> > drastically under President Obama's leadership? Is there something
> > racist in pointing out that fact?
>
> I haven't seen the statistics, but I'll take yur word for it. Maybe you
> remember a brief episode called the Bush recession. That would explain the
> statistics.

Well, except for the fact Obama promised to fix it. He won reelection
with a dwindling majority, when compared to 2008. Compare that to
Ronald Reagan's reelection in 1984. But you see, Reagan really did fix
Carter's crappy economy, so Reagan won in a landslide in 1984.

Sparks

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 2:32:47 AM4/8/13

to

On Apr 7, 10:48 pm, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
> On 4/7/2013 1:20 PM, Sparks wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 7, 8:51 am, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
> >> On 4/7/2013 12:12 AM, Sparks wrote:
>
> >>> On Apr 6, 1:44 pm, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
> >>>> On 4/6/2013 10:48 AM, Bert wrote:
>
> >>>>> Innews:42980$516045b2$414e828e$14...@EVERESTKC.NETGeorgePlimpton
> >>>>> <geo...@si.not> wrote:
>
> >>>>>> On 4/6/2013 8:43 AM, Bert wrote:
> >>>>>>> Innews:b50d5$516041ff$414e828e$12...@EVERESTKC.NETGeorgePlimpton

> >>>>>>> <geo...@si.not> wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>> I don't think we're Israel's "slaves", but our foreign policy is far
> >>>>>>>> too supportive of Israel, against America's interests,
>

> >>>>>>> In what way is the policy "against America's interests?"
>
> >>>>>> In what way is doing *anything* to prop up a state that:
>
> >>>>>> * invades and annexes land
>
> >>>>> When? Israel's "neighbors" have invaded several times, been defeated
> >>>>> each time, and lost territory each time.
>
> >>>> And we don't give billions annually in gifts to Jordan or Syria to
> >>>> reward them for it.
>
> >>>>> A treaty with Egypt resulted in land being returned. Attempts to make
> >>>>> peace with the other factions have proven fruitless.
>
> >>>> We're talking about Israel's illegal land seizures of the West Bank and
> >>>> the construction of Jewish settlements on the illegally seized land.
>
> >>> What was illegal about it?
>
> >> Stop working to appear dumber than you already are.
>
> > It's obvious we're not always going to agree (while it's apparent that
> > we will on other topics), but that's no reason to start name-calling.
>
> But you already knew what was and is illegal about it, so your question
> was stupid, and posing it made you look dumb.

There is nothing illegal about it, unless you think it was illegal for
us to take Okinawa from Japan during World War II.
>
> >> It was part of another sovereign country.
>
> > Do you know how Jordan came into possession of the West Bank? Was that
> > legal?
>
> At the same time as the rest of the carving up of Palestine.

No. The West Bank was a neutral buffer zone. Jordan took it during the
1948 attack on Israel. How interesting that you didn't know that.
>
> It doesn't matter how Jordan came into possession of it. In 1967, it
> was part of Jordan, a sovereign nation, and Israel invaded and annexed
> it and refuses to give it up.

It does matter how Jordan came into possession of it. But then you've
shown you have a double standard. As for giving it up, Jordan doesn't
want it back. They have a peace deal with Israel, and any land
disputes are settled.
>
> > Here's another thing, was it legal for the United States to
> > take possession of Okinawa during World War II?
>
> Who has possession of Okinawa now?

We gave it back to Japan 25 or so years after the war. We didn't have
to, but we did it anyway.
>
> The US took possession of Okinawa
> and a lot of other Japanese territory as part of waging a declared war.

The Arab world was preparing to go to war with Israel. What do you
think Israel should have done?
>
> >>> They offered it back to Jordan when they
> >>> made the peace deal with them, you know. Jordan didn't want it back.
>
> >> Bullshit.
>
> > Are you aware that in 1989 Jordan made a peace deal with Israel, in
> > which Jordan announced its land disputes with Israel were settled?

You don't know that, do you?
>
> >>> And by the way, why didn't Jordan ever give the Palestinians their own
> >>> state prior to 1967?
>
> >> This isn't about Jordan,
>
> > It isn't?
>
> No. It's about unconditional and blind US support for Israel.

I would say it's not unconditional, nor is it blind.
>
> >> upon whom the US does not shower billions
> >> annually in military and economic aid that isn't in our interest.
>
> > Well, actually, through the years we have showered Jordan with
> > billions of dollars in foreign aid.
>
> Actually, US aid to Jordan is a minute fraction of US aid to Israel, and
> you know it. Once again, stop playing dumb.

No, it's not a minute fraction. It's somewhat less, but not by the
proportion you're trying to portray. And if you add up the aid to
Egypt and the Palestinians, it's about equal.
>
> >> It's
> >> about Israel, and the corrupt domestic political process by which the
> >> majority of Americans are gouged to pay for a tiny minority's wish to
> >> prop up a state in a "homeland" to which most of that minority have no
> >> recent ties.
>
> > There have been Jews on that land since the days when that land was
> > the original Israel. I'm really not sure what your point is.
>
> American Jews are engaging in tribalism in their fervent support for a
> Jewish state in Palestine. In what way does the maintenance of a Jewish
> state in Palestine serve American interests? For that matter, other
> than their tribalism, in what way does the maintenance of a Jewish state
> in Palestine serve the interests of American Jews?
>
> Why should the rest of America - some 306 million persons - support the
> tribalism of 6.7 million American Jews?

Did you ever answer my question about the Arabs getting the far larger
share of the Palestine Mandate in the partition plan? Why are you only
bothered by Jews getting a much smaller share of that land?
>
> >>>>> And I repeat:
>
> >>>>> In what way is sending aid to Egypt, including advanced military
> >>>>> equipment, supporting America's interests?
>
> >>>> This is about greater aid to Israel, which should stop. If you want to
> >>>> make a separate case for why aid to Egypt should stop, be my guest.
>
> >>> Why is your outrage so selective?
>
> >> Why shouldn't it be? There's nothing comparable to the massive aid to
> >> Israel that works against our interest.
>
> > We have given billions of dollars to Egypt,
>
> This is about Israel, and how our support for Israel is not in America's
> interest. Support for Egypt *has* been in our interest - we bought
> forty years of Egyptian support for the rest of our Middle East agenda,
> which of course is about secure access to oil. American access to oil,
> and the preservation of states that allow us that access, are our only
> interests in that part of the world.

So everything is about oil, is it? If a people who have been bullied
and slaughtered want a tiny piece of land to set up a democracy for
themselves (and some Arabs as well), after they had spent years buying
up large tracts of that land to farm and turn it into something, you
think we should just turn our backs on them. Well, a majority of the
American people don't agree with you.
>
> >> Why are you so blindly supportive of Israel?
>
> > Nothing blind about it.
>
> Yes, I suppose not. I'm sure you have a highly articulated sense of
> your tribal interests.

Same to you. You're fine with the Arabs getting the larger share of
the Palestine Mandate, but you want the Jews to have nothing.
>
> >> Why do you accept at face
> >> value the lie that giving unconditional US support to a country that
> >> violates the human and civil rights of a people is in our interest, when
> >> it so obviously is not?

>
> > I disagree that Israel has violated the human and civil rights of a
> > people.
>

> You are wrong. Arabs married to Israeli citizens are denied the right
> of entry and settlement. Israel prevents Palestinian Arabs who were
> forced to leave Palestine from returning.

They weren't forced to leave. They left because the surrounding Arab
nations announced they were going to attack Israel, and advised any
Arabs on that land to get out of the way.
>
> Israel is a "democracy" as long as you're Jewish. Arabs, including
> Palestinians, are denied full civil and human rights.

Palestinians were offered citizenship. Most of them refused. Israel
would like nothing more than to live in peace, but the terrorists
won't let that happen.

Sparks

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 2:38:23 AM4/8/13

to

On Apr 7, 10:52 pm, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
> On 4/7/2013 1:33 PM, Sparks wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 7, 8:56 am, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
> >> On 4/7/2013 12:24 AM, Sparks wrote:
>
> >>> On Apr 6, 3:01 pm, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
> >>>> On 4/6/2013 11:59 AM, Sparks wrote:

>
> >>>>> On Apr 6, 8:59 am, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
> >>>>>> On 4/6/2013 8:43 AM, Bert wrote:
>
> >>>>>>> Innews:b50d5$516041ff$414e828e$12...@EVERESTKC.NETGeorgePlimpton
> >>>>>>> <geo...@si.not> wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>> I don't think we're Israel's "slaves", but our foreign policy is far
> >>>>>>>> too supportive of Israel, against America's interests,
>
> >>>>>>> In what way is the policy "against America's interests?"
>
> >>>>>> In what way is doing *anything* to prop up a state that:
>
> >>>>>> * invades and annexes land

> >>>>>> * builds illegal settlements on it
> >>>>>> * bulldozes the houses of families of mere *suspected* terrorists
> >>>>>> * denies basic political rights to millions of people within its
> >>>>>> borders
> >>>>>> * and engages in criminal blockades of Palestinians *outside* its
> >>>>>> borders
>
> >>>>>> in any way *IN* our interest? It clearly isn't. A (relatively)
> >>>>>> peaceful, stable and *secular* Middle East is in America's interest, and
> >>>>>> our blind and reflexive support for Israel works against that interest.
>
> >>>>>> The United States has absolutely *zero* interest in the preservation of
> >>>>>> Israel, still less in enabling Israel to steal land and oppress
> >>>>>> Palestinians. Israel would have to be far more accommodating to
> >>>>>> Palestinians if we didn't prop the country up.
>
> >>>>>> Is Israel a full-fledged sovereign nation? If so, let them stand on
> >>>>>> their own; if not, then let the state collapse. There isn't another
> >>>>>> country on earth whose survival is so dependent on the US. There
> >>>>>> shouldn't be *any* country on earth whose survival is dependent on the
> >>>>>> US to the extent Israel's is. It's not in our interest.
>
> >>>>> I wonder, were you this concerned about the way the Islamic Republican
> >>>>> of Sudan treated its own citizens in the southern part of Sudan for a
> >>>>> couple of decades starting in the 1980s?
>
> >>>> We're not giving billions in aid to Sudan.
>
> >>> So it's all about the *amount* of money we give?
>
> >> It's about the amount of aid, the form of the aid, and the record of the
> >> recipients. It's about the process by which the decision to give the
> >> aid is made. It's about whether the aid really works to promote our
> >> interests.
>
> > Do you feel this way about foreign aid to Egypt, Jordan, and the
> > Palestinians
>
> This is about Israel. Stop trying to cloud the issue.

Your refusal to answer the question is all I needed to know about
you.
>
> >>>>> You talk of Israel invading and annexing land. How do you feel about
> >>>>> the very first days of Israel's existence, when its neighbors attacked
> >>>>> and tried to demolish the brand new state before it could get started?
>
> >>>> I think the state of Israel never should have been created by the
> >>>> western powers.
>
> >>> Oh. That's interesting. Is there a particular reason why you think the
> >>> Jews who bought large tracts of what was mainly wasteland (according
> >>> to Mark Twain), and started farming it and turning it into something
> >>> should not have been allowed to have a tiny slice of the Palestine
> >>> Mandate? The largest part of the Palestine Mandate was given to the
> >>> Arabs to create Jordan. Should that have happened? Or is it only the
> >>> Jews who should not have been allowed to have their own state?
>
> >> The US and the rest of the west should not have got involved at all.
>
> > Well, they did at the end of World War I when the UK took possession
> > of the Palestine Mandate.
>
> We're talking about the formation of the modern Middle East after the
> end of the 1945.

By then, the UK was well established in parts of the Middle East,
including the Palestine Mandate.
>
> I think you have an undisclosed parochial interest in all of this. You
> do not "just happen to know" any of this - you have a very particular
> parochial interest in it that you aren't disclosing.

It's obvious I know a lot more about it than you do. That's because
I've had these kinds of discussions with other anti-semites in the
past.
>
> >> If
> >> Jews in the Middle East had been able to organize and grab the land from
> >> Arabs without any international aid and support, good on them.
>
> > Jews were *buying* land (in what is now Israel) since the 1800s.
>
> I'm not talking about individual ownership of parcels of land, and you
> know full well that isn't the issue. This is about the formation of
> nations, and their legitimacy.

Is Jordan legitimate?
>
> >>>>> How did you feel about Arafat turning down the best offer for a
> >>>>> Palestinian state that he could have ever received from an Israeli
> >>>>> government, and instead he restarted the suicide bombings?
>
> >>>> Because it still was an unacceptable offer.
>
> >>> Not according to Arafat's own negotiators,
>
> >> I don't believe a word you say on this.
>
> > This is recorded history, from President Clinton's chief negotiator at
> > the Camp David summit in the year 2000.

Something else you didn't know, nor do you care to know.
>
> >> You have some unrevealed
> >> special interest in Israel and in the continuation of obscene support
> >> for it.
>
> > I have no special interest whatsoever.
>
> Bullshit. You have a concealed parochial interest. Nothing could be
> more obvious.

Believe whatever you want. My only interest is that I support a people
who have been bullied and slaughtered throughout history. And you'd
like to continue that if you could.
>
> >>>>> And finally, why are so many people SO concerned about one tiny
> >>>>> country in the Middle East, when there are so many more horrible
> >>>>> genocides going on around the world that are ignored? Seriously, why
> >>>>> the intense focus on one little tiny country the size of New Jersey?
>
> >>>> They *aren't* concerned with Israel - that's just the point. They're
> >>>> not concerned with Israel, and they want the US government to stop being
> >>>> so concerned with Israel. Let Israel make it on its own, or not.
>
> >>> You're very concerned with Israel.
>
> >> No.
>
> > Yes,
>
> No.

You're obsessed with Israel, while Jordan (which came into existence
at the same time) is no problem for you. Why is that?
>
> >> But *you* certainly are. State what your interest is.
>
> > My interest is that I don't like seeing a people bullied.
>
> Bullshit. Your interest is far more tribal.

Oh, you think I'm a Jew? I'm not. But believe me, I'd have no problem
telling you if I were. But I'm not.

Sparks

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 2:46:01 AM4/8/13

to

On Apr 7, 10:59 pm, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
> On 4/7/2013 1:35 PM, Sparks wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 7, 8:58 am, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
> >> On 4/7/2013 12:25 AM, Sparks wrote:
>
> >>> On Apr 6, 3:02 pm, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
> >>>> On 4/6/2013 12:31 PM, Sparks wrote:

>
> >>>>> On Apr 6, 11:57 am, Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.org> wrote:
> >>>>>> On 4/6/2013 1:49 PM, Sparks wrote:
>
> >>>>>>> On Apr 6, 8:39 am, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On 4/6/2013 12:21 AM, Sparks wrote:
> >>>>>> [snip]
> >>>>>>>> The left *needs* racism:

> >>>>>>>>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405274870467190457519392115542...

>
> >>>>>>> Yes, they need to further divide this nation in order to continue to
> >>>>>>> win elections.
>

> >>>>>> Hahaha! How quickly you forget! (or pretend to)

>
> >>>>>> Remember the last losing Republican candidate for President, Mitt

> >>>>>> Romney, actually running on dividing the nation? Have you already
> >>>>>> forgotten the largely imaginary "47%" that Romney promised to officially

> >>>>>> and completely forget if he won?
>

> >>>>> He didn't promise to forget them. He said he knew they would not vote
> >>>>> for him, because he knew the Democrats had succeeded in convincing
> >>>>> those people that Romney was the boogeyman.
>

> >>>>>> Recall, also, what a disastrously losing tactic the Republican politics
> >>>>>> of national division proved to be?
>

> >>>>> That's not why he lost the election. He lost the election because
> >>>>> President Obama (and his friends) ran a viciously personal negative

> >>>>> campaign against Romney, in which Obama (and his friends) succeeded in

> >>>>> convincing enough people that Romney was a bad man.
>
> >>>> Romney lost the election because he was a weak candidate.
>
> >>> That's true, he allowed himself to be defined by his opponent and
> >>> refused to defend himself.
>

> >> No, he was just a weak candidate, period.
>
> > As I said just above, that's true. I went on to give an example of how
> > weak he was.
>
> No, that wasn't an example. That was excuse making. In fact, Romney
> was exactly what his opponents portrayed him to be.

No, his opponents lied about him. Even Bill Clinton was embarrassed by
the lies of the left.
>
> >> He exemplified everything the
> >> left was saying about the Republicans being in support of a plutocracy,
> >> even if the party really isn't about that.
>
> > No, you just bought into the lies that were told about him in the
> > negative campaign.
>
> No, Romney really does exemplify the image of the rich, out-of-touch,
> privileged white man the Democrats portrayed him to be. He and Ryan
> really were lying about how they were going to cut spending and reduce
> the debt.

They'd have done far better than Obama is doing.
>
> >> Romney and Ryan lied through
> >> their teeth repeatedly in the debates, and they were clearly seen as lying.
>
> > Give an example.
>
> Start with these:
> http://www.politifact.com/personalities/mitt-romney/statements/byruli...

Politifact is a joke. Every candidate gets things wrong. Obama got a
lot of things wrong. Obama told me my health insurance costs would go
down. My costs have skyrocketed upwards. Obama said he'd fix the
economy. He has made it worse. There's a lot more.
>
> >> The Republicans are bankrupt as an institution, which is strange because
> >> it is the Democrats and the left that are bankrupt intellectually. The
> >> libertarian right has all the good ideas, but the left is far more
> >> effective institutionally.
>
> > The libertarian right will never amount to anything, because there
> > just aren't enough Americans who agree with that philosophy.
>
> The "pure" libertarians might not, but a libertarian-oriented
> conservative movement can. But the current Republican party has even
> less chance. They really do just push the interests of the rich.
> That's a losing electoral philosophy.

Especially when the Democrat runs a dishonest negative campaign, and
the media goes along with it.

Sparks

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 2:46:34 AM4/8/13

to

On Apr 7, 11:02 pm, "Clave" <ChrisClav...@TheMonastery.com> wrote:
> "Sparks" <energizedconservat...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:2a2a2592-b6e1-4e1a...@n7g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 7, 2:48 pm, "Clave" <ChrisClav...@TheMonastery.com> wrote:
> >> "Sparks" <energizedconservat...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> >>news:d4a6fdb8-6620-40a0...@u20g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> > On Apr 7, 2:30 pm, "Clave" <ChrisClav...@TheMonastery.com> wrote:
>
> >> <...>
>
> >> >> You, Dummer and PlimpTard are going to get
> >> >> nothing but laughed at.
>
> >> > Sure, because we challenge you, and you're incapable of an
> >> > intellectual response.
>
> >> LOL -- yeah, that must be it. Same with everyone else who's laughing at
> >> you.
>
> > Such a shame (for you) that it's all you've got.
>
> That and demonstrable reality.

You've demonstrated nothing, other than your lack of intellect.

Clave

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 3:12:58 AM4/8/13

to

"Sparks" <energizedc...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:d3635ca6-fa3b-43e6...@n7g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...

> down. My costs have skyrocketed upwards....

...as the HC insurance companies screw their customers as much as possible
until Obamacare goes into full effect.

Please entertain us with what your HC costs used to be and what they are
now, because I have no reason to believe they've "skyrocketed".

That is to say, I think you're a liar.

Jim

Clave

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 3:14:30 AM4/8/13

to

"Sparks" <energizedc...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:3ca7b036-d9e9-4e72...@b20g2000yqo.googlegroups.com...

LOL -- speaking of intellect, do you know the difference between
"demonstrable" and "demonstrated"?

I somehow have this idea that at one point in your mind's *recent* past, you
were an 18-year-old Libertard, living in Libertoon Square near the heart of
downtown Libertopia. Your real residence resembled more a dorm room with a
hot plate than even a tenement-scale apartment with a stove and a
refrigerator.

Then you sort-of came to enough one day to realize that Real Life ain't
nothing like that, and you went on a Jihad against anyone who didn't share
your view of What Things Should Be Like, and Usenet is the best forum you
could find where people would actually pay some degree of attention to your
quaint, pathetic shit.

God help you if you're actually more than 25 years old.

I'm not here to spread a political ideology -- I'm here to make fun of you.

Jim

Gunner Asch

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 3:59:50 AM4/8/13

to

On 08 Apr 2013 05:56:50 GMT, dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:

>Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> On 07 Apr 2013 22:32:11 GMT, dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:
>>
>> >Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> On Sun, 7 Apr 2013 13:20:49 -0700 (PDT), Sparks

>> >> <energizedc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >I disagree that Israel has violated the human and civil rights of a

>> >> >people. There are Arab Israelis who live in Israel.
>> >>
>> >> Hell...there are Arabs in the Knesset..Israeli Parliment.
>> >>

>> >> Hardy a version of the hundreds of years of American Democrat bigotry
>> >> and bias against blacks.
>> >
>> >The "Israeli" Arabs have the right to vote, and very few other rights.
>>
>> Then trot out those pesky cites before the lads here start asking for
>> them. I know you can do it.
>>
>> Lets have them and see if you are a lying sack of shit, or simply a
>> sack of shit.
>>
>> Bring em ON!!
>
>No need for that. Any educated person knows what's going on in the region.
>
>President Carter has travelled there and reported on the sufferings of the
>Palestinians. Check Youtube. And please dont start ranting about my man
>Jimmy Carter. We've unfortunatly heard all that too many times.

So you dont have any cites?

Gunner

Gunner Asch

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 4:01:07 AM4/8/13

to

On Sun, 7 Apr 2013 23:01:40 -0700 (PDT), Sparks
<energizedc...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Apr 7, 3:32 pm, dzweib...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:

>> Gunner Asch <gunnera...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Sun, 7 Apr 2013 13:20:49 -0700 (PDT), Sparks
>> > <energizedconservat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> > >I disagree that Israel has violated the human and civil rights of a
>> > >people. There are Arab Israelis who live in Israel.
>>
>> > Hell...there are Arabs in the Knesset..Israeli Parliment.
>>
>> > Hardy a version of the hundreds of years of American Democrat bigotry
>> > and bias against blacks.
>>
>> The "Israeli" Arabs have the right to vote, and very few other rights.
>

>They have all the rights of Israeli citizenship.

Indeed they do.

Odd that Denny lies so much.

Well...no its not odd. He is a Leftwinger and as is the nature of
Leftwingers..they are butt stupid and are forced to lie simply because
they frankly...dont know shit.

Gunner

Gunner Asch

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 4:02:52 AM4/8/13

to

On 08 Apr 2013 05:58:38 GMT, dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:

>Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> On 07 Apr 2013 22:38:32 GMT, dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:
>>
>> >Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> >> On Sun, 7 Apr 2013 13:33:38 -0700 (PDT), Sparks
>> >> <energizedc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >> > You're very concerned with Israel.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> No.
>> >> >

>> >> >Yes, you seem to have one standard for Israel, and a completely
>> >> >different one for every other nation on the planet.
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> >> Of course. the wanker is just another Leftwing Anti-Semite. No
>> >> different than the Nazis
>> >>
>> >> Gunner
>> >
>> >What a warped outlook.
>>
>> Indeed. As Ive stated many times, Leftwingers are indeed mentally
>> ill.
>>
>> Gunner
>
>Well I'm not mentally ill. My mother had me tested.

She obviously lied to make you feel better.

Gunner Asch

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 4:11:43 AM4/8/13

to

On 08 Apr 2013 06:00:37 GMT, dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:

>Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> On 08 Apr 2013 00:34:45 GMT, dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:
>>
>> >BeamMeUpScotty <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:
>> >> On 4/7/2013 7:34 PM, Jeff M wrote:
>> >> > On 4/7/2013 6:21 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:
>> >> > [snip]
>> >> >> That's right, we're all Racist Bigots.......
>> >> >
>> >> > Well, not all of you.
>> >> >
>> >> >> And Racist Bigots would never elect a Mormon.
>> >> >
>> >> > Mormonism is a religion, not a race. Even so, many of you were
>> >> > notably fainthearted in your support for his candidacy, probably
>> >> > either because you don't believe that Mormons are really Christians,
>> >> > or from simple religious bigotry within the Republican party.
>> >> >
>> >> > This is nothing new, of course. As far back as 1884, Republicans
>> >> > expressly condemned the Mormon Church by name, resolving â€œthat it
>> >> > is the duty of Congress to enact such laws as shall promptly and
>> >> > effectually suppress the system of polygamy within our Territories;
>> >> > and divorce the political from the ecclesiastical power of the
>> >> > so-called Mormon church,â€ to be enforced â€œby the military, if
>> >> > need be.â€
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> Liberals Hate Mormons.... it was pure and simple, Liberal
>> >> discrimination.
>> >
>> >I know many liberals. Not one hates Mormons.
>>
>> I know many liberals. They think Mormons are scum and dirt.
>>
>> You are a liar and cover up what Lieberals do and say and think.
>>
>> You must be a Lieberal too.
>
>Come to think of it, I've never met any person at all who hates Mormons. I
>think you've make a mistake on the subject.

I think you are not only ignorant..but as dumb as a box of rocks

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Mormonism

http://amplicate.com/hate/mormons

http://blog.beliefnet.com/flunkingsainthood/2010/12/why-are-mormons-the-third-most-hated-religious-group-in-america.html

etc etc..

1,860,000 hits on Google.

You really are a stupid fucker arntcha?

Do you live in your mommas basement and never come out into the real
world? Evidently so.

Gunner

Gunner Asch

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 4:14:00 AM4/8/13

to

On Sun, 7 Apr 2013 23:04:08 -0700 (PDT), Sparks
<energizedc...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>> He lost because his main message was that the economy had gone downhill
>> since Obama came into office.
>
>It has. Unemployment rose for most of Obama's first term. The only
>reason it's going down recently is due to the number of people who
>have given up and left the workforce.
>>

Which means actual unemployment really never went down. It just means
that less people are collecting unemployment. The Unemployment
numbers..U3 numbers...simply shows the number of people collecting
unemplyment insurance. When that runs out...they are no longer on the
U3 numbers anymore. They go into a form of limbo

Gunner

Gunner Asch

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 4:20:59 AM4/8/13

to

On 08 Apr 2013 06:14:15 GMT, dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:

>Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> On 08 Apr 2013 05:15:42 GMT, dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:
>>
>> >"Clave" <ChrisC...@TheMonastery.com> wrote:
>> >> "BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote
>> >> in message news:Feo8t.759211$OJ2.1...@en-nntp-11.dc1.easynews.com...
>> >> > On 4/7/2013 8:27 PM, Clave wrote:
>> >> >> "BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com>
>> >> >> wrote in message
>> >> >> news:PVn8t.759208$OJ2....@en-nntp-11.dc1.easynews.com...
>> >> >>> On 4/7/2013 8:02 PM, Clave wrote:
>> >> >>>> "BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com>
>> >> >>>> wrote in message
>> >> >>>> news:BDn8t.759204$OJ2.2...@en-nntp-11.dc1.easynews.com...

>> >> >>>>> On 4/7/2013 7:39 PM, Denny wrote:
>> >> >>>>>> BeamMeUpScotty <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com>
>> >> >>>>>> wrote:

>> >> >>>>>>> On 4/7/2013 7:22 PM, Jeff M wrote:
>> >> >>>>>>>> On 4/7/2013 6:17 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:
>> >> >>>>>>>> [snip]
>> >> >>>>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>>>>> Obama is the Welfare President.....
>> >> >>>>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>>>> ... and the Republicans are the Corporate Welfare Party.
>> >> >>>>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>>> Fair and equal isn't it.....
>> >> >>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>> Everyone's been screwed by corporations at one time or anohter.
>> >> >>>>>> They fire
>> >> >>>>>> you. They ship your job overseas. Oil companies raise the price
>> >> >>>>>> of gasoline
>> >> >>>>>> while provitting billions. Fair or not, this will always cost
>> >> >>>>>> the Republicans millions of votes.
>> >> >>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> We've all been screwed by the Welfare system and the people that
>> >> >>>>> cheat the system.
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> You mean agribusinesses and defense contractors.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Jim
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>> I mean the drug dealers and crack whore mothers.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> LOL -- the "Welfare Queen" is a myth, ScottyL00n. The US pouring
>> >> >> untold billions into black defense projects is not.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Jim
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> > Right.... there are no drug dealers or crack babies...
>> >>
>> >> Show me how much money the government is giving to them.
>> >>
>> >> Jim
>> >
>> >Why would a drug dealer need welfare money?
>>
>> Because they have no "real job" and can suck on the States tit.
>>
>> And they do.
>>
>> You really have no knowlege of the real world...do you?
>>
>> Stupid boi.
>
>How do you know what drug dealers do? Do you know any personally?

Actually..yes I do. And Ive known drug dealers for 30 yrs. Most of
them are dead or in prison. Ive arrested some 2500 or more of them
over the years.

Are they
>common in your neighborhood?

They certainly used to be. Some died, some are still in prison, some
cleaned up, a bunch moved away.

> Are any of them friends or relatives?

Im friends with at least 3 EX drug dealers, who did their time, got
out, rehabbed and are now straight citizens. Felons..but still
straight. In fact..one of my lady roommates (and her husband) who live
here..the lady did time in state prison for being a dealer. She is now
working on her X-ray tech license and going to school. She has been
clean for over 8 yrs and the State just sealed her record. So she can
get a good job after she graduates.

> Do you
>work in a prison or jail? Did someone just tell you what they are like, and
>you believed it? A reliable source? I'd have to answer no to all thesse
>questions. You got any yesses to offer?

You really are a stupid fuck arent you?

Im an ex cop.

You must really live in your mommas basement and never come out.

Gunner

Jeff M

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 7:30:37 AM4/8/13

to

On 4/8/2013 12:37 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
[snip]

> Stupid boi.

In regard to who is or may be a sock puppet, the ONLY other poster I
EVER recall writing the word "boy" in this silly manner, more
appropriate for a twelve year old girl than a supposedly grown man, is
"Ray Keller."

Admittedly, your average twelve year old is far more literate than
either of them, and certainly a better speller then "Keller," but it's
the question of the peculiar style that's so unintentionally self-revealing.

Just a point to ponder.

George Plimpton

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 10:17:00 AM4/8/13

to

On 4/7/2013 2:25 PM, Clave wrote:
> "George Plimpton" <geo...@si.not> wrote in message
> news:cb945$516197a4$414e828e$41...@EVERESTKC.NET...
>> On 4/7/2013 1:26 AM, Clave wrote:
>>> "George Plimpton" <geo...@si.not> wrote in message
>>> news:ac733$5160414f$414e828e$12...@EVERESTKC.NET...

>>>> On 4/6/2013 12:24 AM, Clave wrote:
>>>>> "Sparks" <energizedc...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

>>>>> news:f623dd00-a71f-4143...@lp19g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...
>>>>>> On Apr 5, 6:48 pm, dzweib...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I know many racists. Not one is a Democrat.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is a person racist who mocks an ethnic accent?
>>>>>
>>>>> Are they in blackface?
>>>>
>>>> You just can't answer the question honestly, can you, snarky little
>>>> faggot
>>>> theater lighting tech?
>>>
>>> You sure get pissy when you've been spanked.
>>
>> No, because that has never happened.
>
> I understand the depth of your need to believe that.

No "spanking."

>> "highly paid software engineer" - ha ha ha ha ha!
>
> Another reality

No.

George Plimpton

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 10:18:01 AM4/8/13

to

On 4/7/2013 2:30 PM, Clave wrote:
> "Sparks" <energizedc...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

> news:4dc5dc3e-4659-499d...@n7g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...

>> On Apr 7, 1:18 am, "Clave" <ChrisClav...@TheMonastery.com> wrote:
>>> "Sparks" <energizedconservat...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>

>>> news:429db2c3-ebee-45fa...@q9g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...

>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Apr 6, 1:04 am, "Clave" <ChrisClav...@TheMonastery.com> wrote:
>>>>> "Sparks" <energizedconservat...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>

>>>>> news:28ed24b6-aba4-43c8...@ou9g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...

>>>
>>>>>> On Apr 6, 12:34 am, "Clave" <ChrisClav...@TheMonastery.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>> "Sparks" <energizedconservat...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>

>>>>>>> <...>
>>>
>>>>>>>> Wouldn't the world be a better place if we stopped focusing so
>>>>>>>> intently on race, and treated each individual the same regardless
>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>> race?
>>>
>>>>>>> If the scales were weighted evenly, yes.
>>>
>>>>>> Those scales would be weighted more evenly a lot faster if
>>>>>> liberals...
>>>
>>>>> Christ, what an asshole.
>>>
>>>> Is that the best you can do? I made some valid points, and if you
>>>> disagree with them. give a rebuttal...
>>>
>>> That would involve taking you seriously.
>>
>> That would involve you actually making an intellectual argument, of
>> which you seem to be incapable.
>
> Depends on whom I'm engaging.

No. You are completely incapable of intellectual argument.

George Plimpton

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 10:23:14 AM4/8/13

to

On 4/7/2013 2:01 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:

> On Sun, 7 Apr 2013 13:20:49 -0700 (PDT), Sparks
> <energizedc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> I disagree that Israel has violated the human and civil rights of a
>> people. There are Arab Israelis who live in Israel.
>
> Hell...there are Arabs in the Knesset..Israeli Parliment.

There are a whopping 12 Arab members of the 120 seat Knesset, and there
have been 69 since Israel was founded. Arabs are over 20% of the
population, but have barely 10% of the representation.

George Plimpton

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 10:25:10 AM4/8/13

to

On 4/7/2013 3:38 PM, Denny wrote:
> Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> On Sun, 7 Apr 2013 13:33:38 -0700 (PDT), Sparks
>> <energizedc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>> You're very concerned with Israel.
>>>>
>>>> No.
>>>
>>> Yes, you seem to have one standard for Israel, and a completely
>>> different one for every other nation on the planet.
>>>>
>>
>> Of course. the wanker is just another Leftwing Anti-Semite. No
>> different than the Nazis
>>
>> Gunner
>
> What a warped outlook.

It's just gummer trying to co-opt the leftists' game. That's what the
left does, and gummer thinks "That looks like fun - think I'll try it!"

George Plimpton

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 10:26:53 AM4/8/13

to

On 4/7/2013 4:01 PM, Jeff M wrote:
> On 4/7/2013 5:41 PM, Denny wrote:

>> Sparks <energizedc...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>>> On Apr 7, 2:01=A0pm, Gunner Asch <gunnera...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 7 Apr 2013 13:20:49 -0700 (PDT), Sparks
>>>> <energizedconservat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I disagree that Israel has violated the human and civil rights of a
>>>>> people. There are Arab Israelis who live in Israel.
>>>>
>>>> Hell...there are Arabs in the Knesset..Israeli Parliment.
>>>

>>> Excellent point.
>>>>
>>>> Hardy a version of the =A0hundreds of years of American Democrat

>>>> bigotry and bias against blacks.
>>>

>>> In that regard, another thing that seems to have escaped today's
>>> liberals and leftists is that the only African-Americans in Congress
>>> who represent white majority districts are African-American
>>> Republicans. Apparently, white Democrats don't elect African-Americans
>>> to represent them.
>>
>> Well there's Obama, as an example.
>

> Beat me to the punch!

Why no black Democrats in Congress representing majority white districts?

George Plimpton

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 10:30:22 AM4/8/13

to

On 4/7/2013 6:04 PM, Jeff M wrote:
>
> About $59 billion is spent on traditional social welfare programs. $92
> billion is spent on corporate subsidies.

Most of what regressive leftists decry as "corporate welfare" is nothing
of the kind.

George Plimpton

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 10:34:24 AM4/8/13

to

On 4/7/2013 7:03 PM, Jeff M wrote:
> On 4/7/2013 8:48 PM, Ray Keller wrote:
>
>> Jeftard the Disbarred lawyer admits he is a lier
>
> The laughably idiotic "Ray Keller" keeps hopelessly trying to spread
> this slander that I'm disbarred, even after it was conclusively proved
> to be merely his own intentional lie. Anyone can access the Florida Bar
> web page and quickly confirm this for themselves. I am simply
> temporarily on the inactive list due to a medical disability, not
> disciplined, and certainly not disbarred, as he knows perfectly well,
> but he foolishly keep trying to spread that lie by reposting it repeatedly.

Why would you be "inactive" due to a medical disability? Are you
compulsively unethical and dishonest, and were facing disbarment, and
you're claiming it's "medical"? Doesn't ADA cover that sort of thing?

George Plimpton

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 10:54:21 AM4/8/13

to

On 4/7/2013 11:00 PM, Denny wrote:
> Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> On 08 Apr 2013 00:34:45 GMT, dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:
>>
>>> BeamMeUpScotty <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:

During the election campaign, leftists definitely were disparaging
Romney for being Mormon. The general theme was that Mormonism is a
weird cult, and its members are /ipso facto/ unsuited to holding high
office. It might not be hatred, but it absolutely was bigotry and
intolerance - no surprise.

Message has been deleted

George Plimpton

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 10:55:41 AM4/8/13

to

On 4/7/2013 11:14 PM, Denny wrote:
> Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> On 08 Apr 2013 05:15:42 GMT, dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:
>>
>>> "Clave" <ChrisC...@TheMonastery.com> wrote:
>>>> "BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote
>>>> in message news:Feo8t.759211$OJ2.1...@en-nntp-11.dc1.easynews.com...
>>>>> On 4/7/2013 8:27 PM, Clave wrote:
>>>>>> "BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com>
>>>>>> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:PVn8t.759208$OJ2....@en-nntp-11.dc1.easynews.com...
>>>>>>> On 4/7/2013 8:02 PM, Clave wrote:
>>>>>>>> "BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:BDn8t.759204$OJ2.2...@en-nntp-11.dc1.easynews.com...

>>>>>>>>> On 4/7/2013 7:39 PM, Denny wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> BeamMeUpScotty <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:

His son is a meth addict. He probably knows a little more about drug
dealing than most of us.

Message has been deleted

George Plimpton

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 11:18:09 AM4/8/13

to

On 4/7/2013 11:32 PM, Sparks wrote:
> On Apr 7, 10:48 pm, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
>> On 4/7/2013 1:20 PM, Sparks wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Apr 7, 8:51 am, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
>>>> On 4/7/2013 12:12 AM, Sparks wrote:
>>
>>>>> On Apr 6, 1:44 pm, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
>>>>>> On 4/6/2013 10:48 AM, Bert wrote:
>>
>>>>>>> Innews:42980$516045b2$414e828e$14...@EVERESTKC.NETGeorgePlimpton

>>>>>>> <geo...@si.not> wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>> On 4/6/2013 8:43 AM, Bert wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Innews:b50d5$516041ff$414e828e$12...@EVERESTKC.NETGeorgePlimpton
>>>>>>>>> <geo...@si.not> wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>>>> I don't think we're Israel's "slaves", but our foreign policy is far
>>>>>>>>>> too supportive of Israel, against America's interests,
>>
>>>>>>>>> In what way is the policy "against America's interests?"
>>
>>>>>>>> In what way is doing *anything* to prop up a state that:
>>
>>>>>>>> * invades and annexes land
>>

>>>>>>> When? Israel's "neighbors" have invaded several times, been defeated
>>>>>>> each time, and lost territory each time.
>>
>>>>>> And we don't give billions annually in gifts to Jordan or Syria to
>>>>>> reward them for it.
>>
>>>>>>> A treaty with Egypt resulted in land being returned. Attempts to make
>>>>>>> peace with the other factions have proven fruitless.
>>
>>>>>> We're talking about Israel's illegal land seizures of the West Bank and
>>>>>> the construction of Jewish settlements on the illegally seized land.
>>
>>>>> What was illegal about it?
>>
>>>> Stop working to appear dumber than you already are.
>>
>>> It's obvious we're not always going to agree (while it's apparent that
>>> we will on other topics), but that's no reason to start name-calling.
>>
>> But you already knew what was and is illegal about it, so your question
>> was stupid, and posing it made you look dumb.
>
> There is nothing illegal about it, unless you think it was illegal for
> us to take Okinawa from Japan during World War II.

I already dismissed that canard. The two cases are not comparable, not
least because the US returned Okinawa to Japanese control more than 40
years ago, and well less than 30 years after the end of the war. Israel
has illegally occupied the West Bank for nearly 46 years.

>>>> It was part of another sovereign country.
>>
>>> Do you know how Jordan came into possession of the West Bank? Was that
>>> legal?
>>
>> At the same time as the rest of the carving up of Palestine.
>
> No. The West Bank was a neutral buffer zone. Jordan took it during the
> 1948 attack on Israel. How interesting that you didn't know that.

I said "At the same time as the rest of the carving up of Palestine."
That is correct.

>> It doesn't matter how Jordan came into possession of it. In 1967, it
>> was part of Jordan, a sovereign nation, and Israel invaded and annexed
>> it and refuses to give it up.
>
> It does matter how Jordan came into possession of it.

No, what matters is that Israel is illegally occupying it.
International law considers it to be illegal, and the Jewish settlements
built on it are illegal.

>>> Here's another thing, was it legal for the United States to
>>> take possession of Okinawa during World War II?
>>
>> Who has possession of Okinawa now?
>
> We gave it back to Japan 25 or so years after the war. We didn't have
> to, but we did it anyway.

We did have to give it back, legally.

>> The US took possession of Okinawa
>> and a lot of other Japanese territory as part of waging a declared war.
>
> The Arab world was preparing to go to war with Israel. What do you
> think Israel should have done?

Israel should not have occupied the West Bank. Originally, Israel
didn't even intend to occupy it, but Moshe Dayan felt he could get away
with it.

>>>>> They offered it back to Jordan when they
>>>>> made the peace deal with them, you know. Jordan didn't want it back.
>>
>>>> Bullshit.
>>
>>> Are you aware that in 1989 Jordan made a peace deal with Israel, in
>>> which Jordan announced its land disputes with Israel were settled?
>
> You don't know that, do you?
>>
>>>>> And by the way, why didn't Jordan ever give the Palestinians their own
>>>>> state prior to 1967?
>>
>>>> This isn't about Jordan,
>>
>>> It isn't?
>>
>> No. It's about unconditional and blind US support for Israel.
>
> I would say it's not unconditional, nor is it blind.

It's both. No matter what atrocity Israel commits against the
Palestinians and international law, the US keeps the massive aid inflow
going. The US has never seriously twisted Israel's arm.

>>>> upon whom the US does not shower billions
>>>> annually in military and economic aid that isn't in our interest.
>>
>>> Well, actually, through the years we have showered Jordan with
>>> billions of dollars in foreign aid.
>>
>> Actually, US aid to Jordan is a minute fraction of US aid to Israel, and
>> you know it. Once again, stop playing dumb.
>
> No, it's not a minute fraction.

Aid to Jordan isn't even 1/5 our aid to Israel. Aid to Israel, of
course, is more than double our aid to Egypt, a country with more than
10 times Israel's population.

Jordan is a poor country made poorer in part by US actions that
destabilize the Middle East. Most of our assistance to Jordan is
economic assistance: $363 million vs $300 million military.

The US provides "security" (military) gifts to Israel of $3.1 billion a
year. That's more than all the aid given to Jordan and Egypt combined.

Israel is a client state of the US. They ought to do what we tell them
to do, and if the domestic pro-Israel lobby weren't so powerful, we
would tell Israel to withdraw from the West Bank.

>>>> It's
>>>> about Israel, and the corrupt domestic political process by which the
>>>> majority of Americans are gouged to pay for a tiny minority's wish to
>>>> prop up a state in a "homeland" to which most of that minority have no
>>>> recent ties.
>>
>>> There have been Jews on that land since the days when that land was
>>> the original Israel. I'm really not sure what your point is.
>>
>> American Jews are engaging in tribalism in their fervent support for a
>> Jewish state in Palestine. In what way does the maintenance of a Jewish
>> state in Palestine serve American interests? For that matter, other
>> than their tribalism, in what way does the maintenance of a Jewish state
>> in Palestine serve the interests of American Jews?
>>
>> Why should the rest of America - some 306 million persons - support the
>> tribalism of 6.7 million American Jews?
>
> Did you ever answer my question about the Arabs getting the far larger
> share of the Palestine Mandate in the partition plan? Why are you only
> bothered by Jews getting a much smaller share of that land?

Why won't you answer my question about America being held hostage to the
tribalism of barely 2% of our population?

>>>>>>> And I repeat:
>>
>>>>>>> In what way is sending aid to Egypt, including advanced military
>>>>>>> equipment, supporting America's interests?
>>
>>>>>> This is about greater aid to Israel, which should stop. If you want to
>>>>>> make a separate case for why aid to Egypt should stop, be my guest.
>>
>>>>> Why is your outrage so selective?
>>
>>>> Why shouldn't it be? There's nothing comparable to the massive aid to
>>>> Israel that works against our interest.
>>
>>> We have given billions of dollars to Egypt,
>>
>> This is about Israel, and how our support for Israel is not in America's
>> interest. Support for Egypt *has* been in our interest - we bought
>> forty years of Egyptian support for the rest of our Middle East agenda,
>> which of course is about secure access to oil. American access to oil,
>> and the preservation of states that allow us that access, are our only
>> interests in that part of the world.
>
> So everything is about oil, is it?

That's our only material interest in the Middle East. Secondarily, we
have an interest in suppressing terrorism that threatens our access to
the oil.

> If a people who have been bullied
> and slaughtered want a tiny piece of land to set up a democracy for
> themselves

Let them take care of that themselves. If they're a sovereign nation,
they shouldn't need our help.

It isn't because they're a (limited) democracy that we shower them with
aid. You know this.

>>>> Why are you so blindly supportive of Israel?
>>
>>> Nothing blind about it.
>>
>> Yes, I suppose not. I'm sure you have a highly articulated sense of
>> your tribal interests.
>
> Same to you. You're fine with the Arabs getting the larger share of
> the Palestine Mandate, but you want the Jews to have nothing.

I have no tribal or parochial interest in the area, as you clearly have.

>>>> Why do you accept at face
>>>> value the lie that giving unconditional US support to a country that
>>>> violates the human and civil rights of a people is in our interest, when
>>>> it so obviously is not?

>>
>>> I disagree that Israel has violated the human and civil rights of a
>>> people.
>>

>> You are wrong. Arabs married to Israeli citizens are denied the right
>> of entry and settlement. Israel prevents Palestinian Arabs who were
>> forced to leave Palestine from returning.
>
> They weren't forced to leave.

They were forced to leave, and now Israel prevents their return. They
aren't citizens of any other country. It's their homeland.

>> Israel is a "democracy" as long as you're Jewish. Arabs, including
>> Palestinians, are denied full civil and human rights.
>
> Palestinians were offered citizenship. Most of them refused.

With good reason.

Message has been deleted

George Plimpton

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 11:26:20 AM4/8/13

to

On 4/7/2013 11:38 PM, Sparks wrote:
> On Apr 7, 10:52 pm, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
>> On 4/7/2013 1:33 PM, Sparks wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Apr 7, 8:56 am, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
>>>> On 4/7/2013 12:24 AM, Sparks wrote:
>>
>>>>> On Apr 6, 3:01 pm, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
>>>>>> On 4/6/2013 11:59 AM, Sparks wrote:

>>
>>>>>>> On Apr 6, 8:59 am, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 4/6/2013 8:43 AM, Bert wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>>> Innews:b50d5$516041ff$414e828e$12...@EVERESTKC.NETGeorgePlimpton
>>>>>>>>> <geo...@si.not> wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>>>> I don't think we're Israel's "slaves", but our foreign policy is far
>>>>>>>>>> too supportive of Israel, against America's interests,
>>
>>>>>>>>> In what way is the policy "against America's interests?"
>>
>>>>>>>> In what way is doing *anything* to prop up a state that:
>>
>>>>>>>> * invades and annexes land

>>>>>>>> * builds illegal settlements on it
>>>>>>>> * bulldozes the houses of families of mere *suspected* terrorists
>>>>>>>> * denies basic political rights to millions of people within its
>>>>>>>> borders
>>>>>>>> * and engages in criminal blockades of Palestinians *outside* its
>>>>>>>> borders
>>
>>>>>>>> in any way *IN* our interest? It clearly isn't. A (relatively)
>>>>>>>> peaceful, stable and *secular* Middle East is in America's interest, and
>>>>>>>> our blind and reflexive support for Israel works against that interest.
>>
>>>>>>>> The United States has absolutely *zero* interest in the preservation of
>>>>>>>> Israel, still less in enabling Israel to steal land and oppress
>>>>>>>> Palestinians. Israel would have to be far more accommodating to
>>>>>>>> Palestinians if we didn't prop the country up.
>>
>>>>>>>> Is Israel a full-fledged sovereign nation? If so, let them stand on
>>>>>>>> their own; if not, then let the state collapse. There isn't another
>>>>>>>> country on earth whose survival is so dependent on the US. There
>>>>>>>> shouldn't be *any* country on earth whose survival is dependent on the
>>>>>>>> US to the extent Israel's is. It's not in our interest.
>>
>>>>>>> I wonder, were you this concerned about the way the Islamic Republican
>>>>>>> of Sudan treated its own citizens in the southern part of Sudan for a
>>>>>>> couple of decades starting in the 1980s?
>>
>>>>>> We're not giving billions in aid to Sudan.
>>
>>>>> So it's all about the *amount* of money we give?
>>
>>>> It's about the amount of aid, the form of the aid, and the record of the
>>>> recipients. It's about the process by which the decision to give the
>>>> aid is made. It's about whether the aid really works to promote our
>>>> interests.
>>
>>> Do you feel this way about foreign aid to Egypt, Jordan, and the
>>> Palestinians
>>
>> This is about Israel. Stop trying to cloud the issue.
>
> Your refusal to answer the question is all I needed to know about
> you.

Your question is rhetorically invalid. It's merely an attempt to cloud
the issue, and I prevent you from clouding the issue. The issue is
Israel and its illegal occupation of Palestinian land, and its racist
refusal to allow a viable Palestinian state. Israel maintains a double
standard: it claims a right to a "Jewish" state, but denies
Palestinians a viable state. Israel conducts a travesty of faking
negotiations for a Palestinian state, while its real policy is to
prevent one.

>>>>>>> You talk of Israel invading and annexing land. How do you feel about
>>>>>>> the very first days of Israel's existence, when its neighbors attacked
>>>>>>> and tried to demolish the brand new state before it could get started?
>>
>>>>>> I think the state of Israel never should have been created by the
>>>>>> western powers.
>>
>>>>> Oh. That's interesting. Is there a particular reason why you think the
>>>>> Jews who bought large tracts of what was mainly wasteland (according
>>>>> to Mark Twain), and started farming it and turning it into something
>>>>> should not have been allowed to have a tiny slice of the Palestine
>>>>> Mandate? The largest part of the Palestine Mandate was given to the
>>>>> Arabs to create Jordan. Should that have happened? Or is it only the
>>>>> Jews who should not have been allowed to have their own state?
>>
>>>> The US and the rest of the west should not have got involved at all.
>>
>>> Well, they did at the end of World War I when the UK took possession
>>> of the Palestine Mandate.
>>
>> We're talking about the formation of the modern Middle East after the
>> end of the 1945.
>
> By then, the UK was well established in parts of the Middle East,
> including the Palestine Mandate.

They should have just withdrawn and let the locals settle it among
themselves. Before that, of course, they should have executed all the
members of the Stern Gang.

>> I think you have an undisclosed parochial interest in all of this. You
>> do not "just happen to know" any of this - you have a very particular
>> parochial interest in it that you aren't disclosing.
>
> It's obvious I know a lot more about it than you do.

It's obvious that your knowledge of this is parochial and based on
tribal loyalty.

>>>> If
>>>> Jews in the Middle East had been able to organize and grab the land from
>>>> Arabs without any international aid and support, good on them.
>>
>>> Jews were *buying* land (in what is now Israel) since the 1800s.
>>
>> I'm not talking about individual ownership of parcels of land, and you
>> know full well that isn't the issue. This is about the formation of
>> nations, and their legitimacy.
>
> Is Jordan legitimate?

This is about Israel's legitimacy. Your attempts at diversion and
clouding the issue will always be deflected.

>>>>>>> How did you feel about Arafat turning down the best offer for a
>>>>>>> Palestinian state that he could have ever received from an Israeli
>>>>>>> government, and instead he restarted the suicide bombings?
>>
>>>>>> Because it still was an unacceptable offer.
>>
>>>>> Not according to Arafat's own negotiators,
>>
>>>> I don't believe a word you say on this.
>>
>>> This is recorded history, from President Clinton's chief negotiator at
>>> the Camp David summit in the year 2000.
>
> Something else you didn't know, nor do you care to know.
>>
>>>> You have some unrevealed
>>>> special interest in Israel and in the continuation of obscene support
>>>> for it.
>>
>>> I have no special interest whatsoever.
>>
>> Bullshit. You have a concealed parochial interest. Nothing could be
>> more obvious.
>
> Believe whatever you want. My only interest is

It's a tribal and parochial interest.

>>>>>>> And finally, why are so many people SO concerned about one tiny
>>>>>>> country in the Middle East, when there are so many more horrible
>>>>>>> genocides going on around the world that are ignored? Seriously, why
>>>>>>> the intense focus on one little tiny country the size of New Jersey?
>>
>>>>>> They *aren't* concerned with Israel - that's just the point. They're
>>>>>> not concerned with Israel, and they want the US government to stop being
>>>>>> so concerned with Israel. Let Israel make it on its own, or not.

>>
>>>>> You're very concerned with Israel.
>>
>>>> No.
>>
>>> Yes,
>>

>> No.
>
> You're obsessed with Israel,

No. I'm outraged by unqualified US support for Israel, due solely to a
powerful domestic lobby that does not speak for American interests, but
rather for parochial and tribal interests.

>>>> But *you* certainly are. State what your interest is.
>>
>>> My interest is that I don't like seeing a people bullied.
>>
>> Bullshit. Your interest is far more tribal.

Mr. B1ack

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 11:27:10 AM4/8/13

to

Human and corporate welfare kind of go
hand in hand. People need decent-paying
jobs and corporations (can) provide a
lot of them IF they're healthy and
profitable.

The trick is to avoid screwing one group
while trying to help the other. "Welfare"
initiatives need to be balanced.

George Plimpton

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 11:31:02 AM4/8/13

to

On 4/7/2013 11:46 PM, Sparks wrote:
> On Apr 7, 10:59 pm, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
>> On 4/7/2013 1:35 PM, Sparks wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Apr 7, 8:58 am, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
>>>> On 4/7/2013 12:25 AM, Sparks wrote:
>>
>>>>> On Apr 6, 3:02 pm, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
>>>>>> On 4/6/2013 12:31 PM, Sparks wrote:
>>
>>>>>>> On Apr 6, 11:57 am, Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 4/6/2013 1:49 PM, Sparks wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>>> On Apr 6, 8:39 am, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 4/6/2013 12:21 AM, Sparks wrote:
>>>>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>>>>>> The left *needs* racism:
>>>>>>>>>> http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405274870467190457519392115542...
>>
>>>>>>>>> Yes, they need to further divide this nation in order to continue to
>>>>>>>>> win elections.
>>
>>>>>>>> Hahaha! How quickly you forget! (or pretend to)
>>
>>>>>>>> Remember the last losing Republican candidate for President, Mitt
>>>>>>>> Romney, actually running on dividing the nation? Have you already
>>>>>>>> forgotten the largely imaginary "47%" that Romney promised to officially
>>>>>>>> and completely forget if he won?
>>
>>>>>>> He didn't promise to forget them. He said he knew they would not vote
>>>>>>> for him, because he knew the Democrats had succeeded in convincing
>>>>>>> those people that Romney was the boogeyman.
>>
>>>>>>>> Recall, also, what a disastrously losing tactic the Republican politics
>>>>>>>> of national division proved to be?
>>
>>>>>>> That's not why he lost the election. He lost the election because
>>>>>>> President Obama (and his friends) ran a viciously personal negative
>>>>>>> campaign against Romney, in which Obama (and his friends) succeeded in
>>>>>>> convincing enough people that Romney was a bad man.
>>
>>>>>> Romney lost the election because he was a weak candidate.
>>
>>>>> That's true, he allowed himself to be defined by his opponent and
>>>>> refused to defend himself.
>>
>>>> No, he was just a weak candidate, period.
>>
>>> As I said just above, that's true. I went on to give an example of how
>>> weak he was.
>>
>> No, that wasn't an example. That was excuse making. In fact, Romney
>> was exactly what his opponents portrayed him to be.
>
> No, his opponents lied about him.

Their portrayal of him as a rich white man who earned his fortune in
financial manipulations and as the water boy for the rest of that line
of business was accurate. Romney never did anything to persuade the
electorate that he represented the interests of Main Street businesses
and their employees, because he *didn't* represent those interests.
There are plenty of people who aren't Wall Street plutocrats and
corporate tycoons who would vote for a Republican if he could
demonstrate that he represented their interests. Romney didn't even try.

>>
>>>> He exemplified everything the
>>>> left was saying about the Republicans being in support of a plutocracy,
>>>> even if the party really isn't about that.
>>
>>> No, you just bought into the lies that were told about him in the
>>> negative campaign.
>>
>> No, Romney really does exemplify the image of the rich, out-of-touch,
>> privileged white man the Democrats portrayed him to be. He and Ryan
>> really were lying about how they were going to cut spending and reduce
>> the debt.
>
> They'd have done far better than Obama is doing.

No, they wouldn't have - they never could have done what they said in
their campaign lies they were going to do.

>>>> Romney and Ryan lied through
>>>> their teeth repeatedly in the debates, and they were clearly seen as lying.
>>
>>> Give an example.
>>
>> Start with these:
>> http://www.politifact.com/personalities/mitt-romney/statements/byruli...
>
> Politifact is a joke.

You just don't like it, but you can't refute it.

>>>> The Republicans are bankrupt as an institution, which is strange because
>>>> it is the Democrats and the left that are bankrupt intellectually. The
>>>> libertarian right has all the good ideas, but the left is far more
>>>> effective institutionally.
>>
>>> The libertarian right will never amount to anything, because there
>>> just aren't enough Americans who agree with that philosophy.
>>
>> The "pure" libertarians might not, but a libertarian-oriented
>> conservative movement can. But the current Republican party has even
>> less chance. They really do just push the interests of the rich.
>> That's a losing electoral philosophy.
>
> Especially when the Democrat runs a dishonest negative campaign, and
> the media goes along with it.

Negative campaigning is just a fact of political life, and the
Democrats' was no more dishonest than the Republicans'.

George Plimpton

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 11:31:48 AM4/8/13

to

On 4/8/2013 1:01 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
> On Sun, 7 Apr 2013 23:01:40 -0700 (PDT), Sparks
> <energizedc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> On Apr 7, 3:32 pm, dzweib...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:
>>> Gunner Asch <gunnera...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 7 Apr 2013 13:20:49 -0700 (PDT), Sparks
>>>> <energizedconservat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> I disagree that Israel has violated the human and civil rights of a
>>>>> people. There are Arab Israelis who live in Israel.
>>>
>>>> Hell...there are Arabs in the Knesset..Israeli Parliment.
>>>
>>>> Hardy a version of the hundreds of years of American Democrat bigotry
>>>> and bias against blacks.
>>>
>>> The "Israeli" Arabs have the right to vote, and very few other rights.
>>
>> They have all the rights of Israeli citizenship.
>
> Indeed they do.

No, they dno't.

George Plimpton

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 11:34:07 AM4/8/13

to

On 4/8/2013 4:30 AM, Jeff M wrote:
> On 4/8/2013 12:37 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
> [snip]
>
>> Stupid boi.
>
> In regard to who is or may be a sock puppet, the ONLY other poster I
> EVER recall writing the word "boy" in this silly manner, more
> appropriate for a twelve year old girl than a supposedly grown man, is
> "Ray Keller."

No, that's not so. I have written it to apply it to gummer. He stomped
off in a hissy fit.

MANFRED the heat seeking OBOE

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 11:43:28 AM4/8/13

to

Mr. B1ack

Is there any compromise between
FOOD and POISON that results in anything BUT Death?

Productive Men will not stagnate, Ambitious Men will not be Ruled.

LIB. (And LOOTERS).
Seek to Pit Man against other men until we exist no more.
Give them Convenience or Give them Death. Guess What!
They've found a way to achieve BOTH!

LIBs in their mournful plea for acceptance
expect (and, in fact, NEED) you to go quietly to your graves.

LIBs. What PRICE their Vision?
---
LIBs plead for a Morality which holds COMPROMISE as its standard of
Value, making it possible to judge Virtue on the basis of the number of
Values which one is willing to Betray.

Nobody appreciates what is MUST FEEL LIKE to be the Joker.
http://io9.com/5418487/the-existential-loneliness-that-unites-batman-and-
the-joker

hdddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd-
dddyoo+++++++++++++++++++++ooossssooo+//++/+++++++++++++++++++oooooosmddd-
dhd/...........-.-..-/oydmNMMMMMMMMMMNNdhyo+:-...................---:mddd-
ddh:............-+sdNMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMmdyo:................-.:ddhd-
dhd:........-/sdNMMMMMMMNNNmhhhhhddNMNMMNMMMMMMMMMho:...............-ydhd-
dhd:....../hNMMNs/:::---...........-..-..--/+sydNMMMNd/...-..........ohhd-
dhd-.....:mMMd/-..``````````````````````.`````..+symMMMd/............ohdd-
ddd-..../mNMd-``````````````````````````.`````````.+MMMMN+...........ohhd-
dhd-...:NMNm+.````````````````````````````````````.:mMMMMN/..........odhh-
dhd-...hNMNs.``````````````````````````````````````.:yNMMMs..........ohhh-
ddd-.`.NNNs-`````````````````````````````````````````.:hMMh..........odhh-
ddh..`.NMo.`````----::/++::..``````````.----:--:-.```..:mMo..........odhd-
hdh.:-.dN-..-/ydmmmmmmmNNNNmdo.`````./ymNmNmmmmNNmdy+:..mM/..........+dhd-
ddy-oo/+d-`-omMMMMmydmddshdMMd-`````.sMMhodddmdNMMMMNo-`ds:+s`.......+ddd-
hds...-+y-.-odMMMMmdddmmmmNms:.``````:ymmmmmmNNMMMdhy:``+/-.-``......+dhd-
ddo...`.+-`../ydddhdddhyho+-```````````-++/+soo+o+:--.``:.`````......oddd-
ddo....`.-`````.----:-.`..```````````````````````````````````........ohhd-
hdo....`.-.````````````````````````````````````````````.````.........ohhh-
hh+......-.`````````````.-::/:.`.`.:///:`````````....`..````.........ohhd-
hh+.......`.:+:--.`.````.:++/+osss++++/:`````..+/oyyo.`````..........oddd-
dh+..........ommmss+--....`.....-...........-/sdmNh+:..```...........sdhd-
dh/..........:hNNdNmhhysyyhhhhyyyyhhhhyhyyyhdmNmss-`````.............ydhh-
dh/.........../ys/ssssyhhdddhyyyyyyydddhhsoosso/--.````.............-ydhh-
dh/............o+-...-:/++ossyyyyhyssoo+//:://:::.`````.............-ddhd-
dd/.........-+/sNho:.....://++/++++//:.....`.:os..````..............-ddhd-
dh/.......:smh.-hMMms-``````.......```````.-odNo:ms:..`.............-ddhd-
dd+.--:/shNMN/...+hmNmyo:-..```````..--:/ohNNd+-.mMNds+/:--.........-mdhd-
ddshdmNMMMMMm:.....-+hmNNNdhsss+ossyhddNNNmy/--..oMMMMMMNNmdhso/::--:mdhd-
dmyNMMMMMMMMMo......`.-/ymNMMMMMMMMMMMNmy/-.....:sMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMNNmdmdhd-
dmhMMMMMMMMMMm-...```....-+ydNMMMMNNds/-...```..-hMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMNNddd.
ddhmNNNNNNNNNNs-------------+ymmmdo/:--....----::mNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNmddd.
dddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddhhddhhhhhhhdddddddddddddddddddddddddddhd`
:::::////:::://///:/:://+/////////:////://///:::/::::///:::::::::::-----.
/dyyds -hhyyho` -yhyhd/ om` -md` -N- `N/ odyhd+ .Nmy `mmh
yNo///`.No .Ns.No -: sN` `mydy :M: `M+ mdo:/: .MyM.+Nhd
`/oydm-:M: mh-M/ `` oN` yN/+M+ :M: `M+ ./oymd..M/mymsyd
`dh:-+N/ ym+-:ym- sm+/+my oN`+No++sN-:Mo///-`M+.my::sN-.M/+MM.yd
`:+o+. -+o+:` `/+/. -/`/: /:`+++++: +. `/oo/. `+.`+/ :/

Message has been deleted

George Plimpton

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 11:55:15 AM4/8/13

to

On 4/8/2013 8:06 AM, Denny wrote:
> Sparks <energizedc...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>> On Apr 7, 1:59=A0pm, dzweib...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:
>>> Sparks <energizedconservat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> On Apr 7, 8:55=3DA0am, dzweib...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:
>>>>> Sparks <energizedconservat...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>>>>>> On Apr 6, 4:59=3D3DA0pm, dzweib...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:
>>>>>>> Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 4/6/2013 1:49 PM, Sparks wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Apr 6, 8:39 am, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 4/6/2013 12:21 AM, Sparks wrote:
>>>>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>>>>>> The left *needs* racism:
>>>>>>>>>> http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100014240527487046719045751

>>>>>>>>>> 93=
>> 92
>>>>>>>>>> 11=3D
>>>> 55
>>>>>>>>>> 42=3D3D
>>>>>> .

>>>>>>>>>> ..
>>>
>>>>>>>>> Yes, they need to further divide this nation in order to
>>>>>>>>> continue to win elections.
>>>

>>>>>>>> Hahaha! =3D3DA0How quickly you forget! =3D3DA0(or pretend to)

>>>
>>>>>>>> Remember the last losing Republican candidate for President,

>>>>>>>> Mi=
>> tt
>>>>>>>> Romney, actually running on dividing the nation? =3D3DA0Have
>>>>>>>> yo=
>> u
>>>>>>>> alre=3D

>>>> ady
>>>>>>>> forgotten the largely imaginary "47%" that Romney promised to

>>>>>>>> officiall=3D3D

>>>>>> y
>>>>>>>> and completely forget if he won?
>>>

>>>>>>>> Recall, also, what a disastrously losing tactic the
>>>>>>>> Republican politics of national division proved to be?
>>>

>>>>>>>> No? =3D3DA0I thought not.
>>>
>>>>>>> That Romney speech was about class too. Republicans complained
>>>>>>> about Democrats using "class warfare". Then here comes Mitt.
>>>>>>> Let =
>> us
>>>>>>> not forget Newt Girgrichhcalling Obama the "Food Stamp"
>>>>>>> president=
>> .
>>>>>>> Class and race in one phrase. I bet a lot of posters here
>>>>>>> giggled and jumpe=3D
>>>> d
>>>>>>> up and down when they heard that line.
>>>
>>>>>> When are you going to figure out that more white people use food
>>>>>> stamps than anyone? Food stamps are not about race, except in the
>>>>>> race conscious minds of racist leftists.
>>>
>>>>> I figured it out. It's a well-known fact. That's what Romny was
>>>>> talki=
>> ng
>>>>> about. He was tailoring his speech for his audience. A goup of
>>>>> wealth=
>> y
>>>>> Georgia guys.
>>>
>>>> Is it true that the number of food stamp recipients has increased
>>>> drastically under President Obama's leadership? Is there something
>>>> racist in pointing out that fact?
>>>
>>> I haven't seen the statistics, but I'll take yur word for it. Maybe you
>>> remember a brief episode called the Bush recession. That would explain
>>> th=
>> e
>>> statistics.
>>
>> Well, except for the fact Obama promised to fix it. He won reelection
>> with a dwindling majority, when compared to 2008. Compare that to
>> Ronald Reagan's reelection in 1984. But you see, Reagan really did fix
>> Carter's crappy economy, so Reagan won in a landslide in 1984.
>
> Republican mythology.

It's not a myth. The economy grew dramatically from 1982-1984 and
continued growing for the rest of his term. Real economic growth from
1983 to 1990 was over 35%.

> But Reagans election was a landslide, like last
> years.

Last year's election was not a landslide. Obama got 51% of the popular
vote in his reelection. He received a smaller percentage than he did in
2008. Obama is the only president running for reelection in over 60
years who received a smaller popular vote percentage in being reelected
than he did in his initial election.

Ronald Reagan obtained nearly 59% of the popular vote in 1984, versus
just under 51% in 1980. He carried 49 states in 1984, versus 44 in
1980. Obama's states carried total dropped by two, and his electoral
vote total dropped by 33.

Obama did not win in a landslide in 2012.

George Plimpton

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 11:59:38 AM4/8/13

to

On 4/8/2013 8:45 AM, Denny wrote:
> Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> Actually..yes I do. And Ive known drug dealers for 30 yrs. Most of
>> them are dead or in prison. Ive arrested some 2500 or more of them
>> over the years.

HA HA HA HA HA! You arrested 2500 "or more" of them in your two year
"career" as a *reserve* deputy sheriff in Fresno County.

No, you didn't.

BeamMeUpScotty

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 12:01:53 PM4/8/13

to

On 4/7/2013 9:07 PM, Clave wrote:
> "BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote in

> message news:aGo8t.759216$OJ2.3...@en-nntp-11.dc1.easynews.com...

>> On 4/7/2013 8:54 PM, Clave wrote:
>>> "BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote in

>>> message news:eto8t.759214$OJ2.4...@en-nntp-11.dc1.easynews.com...

>>>> On 4/7/2013 8:40 PM, Denny wrote:
>>>>> BeamMeUpScotty <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:

>>>>>> On 4/7/2013 7:42 PM, Clave wrote:
>>>>>>> "BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote
>>>>>>> in

>>>>>>> message news:Yjn8t.759199$OJ2....@en-nntp-11.dc1.easynews.com...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <...>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Obama begged us to let him fix the problem, now all he does is make
>>>>>>>> excuses for being too incompetent to fix any of the problems.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Excuses like an intransigently obstructionist House, you mean. An
>>>>>>> opposition party whose primary goal of preventing him from
>>>>>>> accomplishing anything is more important to them than the health of
>>>>>>> our
>>>>>>> citizens and our economy.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Did you or Obama expect the Republicans to lay down and put their legs
>>>>>> in the air for you? How stupid are you two?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> OOOohhhhh the mean nasty Republicans won't let me have my way!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What will you do, buzz a drone over the House of representative and
>>>>>> rename them all terrorists?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What whining little shits you and Obama are.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Paid to do a JOB and Obama can't get it done.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Little things like that.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jim
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The honorable Senator McConnell said that his main goal was to defeat
>>>>> President Obama. Not create jobs, That shows you where the Republica
>>>>> priorties are.
>>>>>
>>>> Who has time to create JOBS when Obama is violating the constitution
>>>> every week.
>>>
>>> You are quite simply out of your tiny little mind.
>>>
>>> You probably see Socialists in your soup.
>>>
>>> Jim
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Signing statements and unconstitutional regime appointments during a
>> session of congress and Obamacare(remember it was unconstitutional until
>> the courts changed that "spending bill" into a "TAX BILL" and that is
>> also unconstitutional) and there are so many other unconstitutional
>> example of deciding *NOT* to enforce a law when Obama is
>> constitutionally directed to enforce *ALL* laws of the federal
>> Government... the laws you enforce are not optional.
>>
>>
>> Everyday Obama neglects to enforce those laws is another violation of
>> the constitution.
>
> What a lucky thing it is for the rest of America that no one gives two shits
> about what you think is and isn't Constitutional.
>
> Jim
>
>
>

It doesn't matter what you care about when it's a fact and the fact is
Obama is Violating the constitution.

The constitution doesn't care whether you care, the fact you don't care
only means you lose freedom.

The fact I care is the only reason thet the constitution is of any value
at all, because as a citizen you are a total fucking failure just as bad
as Obama is a total failure, you for supporting Obama's unconstitutional
behavior and his for being an unconstitutional Socialist sack of shit.

--

*Rumination*
#69 - you have the right to remain silent, and it's NOT just a right,
it's a good idea.

George Plimpton

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 12:02:59 PM4/8/13

to

You boys aren't going to give gummer a pass on this one, are you?
You're all going to chide him for his comically extravagant lie, aren't you?

Ed Huntress

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 12:08:26 PM4/8/13

to

On Mon, 08 Apr 2013 09:02:59 -0700, George Plimpton <geo...@si.not>
wrote:

If Whoyakidding was going to write a book, this one could be the
subtitle. Maybe he already has a title in mind.

And here's the lead for the preface:

=============================================

Some psychologists theorize that a chronic liar is trying to deceive
herself as much as she is trying to deceive others. Because of poor
self-esteem, she wants to believe her lies, and often does believe
them, at least while she�s telling them.

Some of the hallmarks of pathological liars include telling
outrageously dramatic stories, telling fibs that are easily disputed,
changing stories when challenged and, most importantly, lying even
when there�s no apparent benefit in telling the lie. Compulsive liars
lie for many reasons, including no reason at all, but most often they
lie to:

�feel admired
�gain popularity
�control and manipulate
�compensate for feelings of inadequacy and low self-esteem
�cover up failures

============================================

--
Ed Huntress

BeamMeUpScotty

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 12:14:04 PM4/8/13

to

On 4/7/2013 9:38 PM, Jeff M wrote:
> On 4/7/2013 8:09 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:
> [snip]
>> Agribusiness subsidies are usually stuff that ends up with FREE CHEESE
>> going out as welfare [snip]
>
> Just so you know, there hasn't been any "FREE CHEESE going out as
> welfare" for last two decades or thereabouts. Also, as a factual
> matter, not one cent of the corporate agribusiness subsidies was ever
> diverted from those recipients' pockets to either the eventual human
> recipients or to the cost of distributing any foodstuffs to them.
>
> The government simply had bought up so much dairy product to
> artificially inflate their prices and agribusiness profits, and
> certainly not with either the intent or purpose to later give it away,
> that its storage warehouses were simply overflowing with the stuff, at
> some additional cost to the taxpayers. So the government decided it
> either had to pay to dispose of it or give some of it away to the needy.

And there it is, you admit I am correct....

I need not say any more, you confirmed the FACT.

Message has been deleted

Clave

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 12:22:23 PM4/8/13

to

"BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote in
message news:TRB8t.759489$OJ2.6...@en-nntp-11.dc1.easynews.com...

<...>

> It doesn't matter what you care about when it's a fact and the fact

> is Obama is Violating the constitution, bark bark woof woof.

Go lie by your dish, ScottyL00n.

Jim

BeamMeUpScotty

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 12:28:44 PM4/8/13

to

On 4/8/2013 1:15 AM, Denny wrote:

> "Clave" <ChrisC...@TheMonastery.com> wrote:
>> "BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote in

>> message news:Feo8t.759211$OJ2.1...@en-nntp-11.dc1.easynews.com...
>>> On 4/7/2013 8:27 PM, Clave wrote:

>>>> "BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote

>>>> in message news:PVn8t.759208$OJ2....@en-nntp-11.dc1.easynews.com...
>>>>> On 4/7/2013 8:02 PM, Clave wrote:

>>>>>> "BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote
>>>>>> in message

Why would you presume all drug dealers are successful when all people
that work for PRESCRIPTION DRUG companies are NOT always rich.

They need a free/cheap unconnected place to sell their drugs from and I
ran a motel once that (when I got there) had drug dealers that would
have their girlfriends (crack whores) rent a room and they (the drug
dealer) would come in and sell drugs from that room until I saw it and
ran them out. Which was me doing the job of the police and the Feds
that should be hunting down all that welfare fraud.

The welfare food stamps money card and other programs were subsidizing
the drug dealers, the women did it to get drugs. Some of the
housekeeping were taking and doing drugs and they were on welfare and or
food stamps and WIC and were getting subsidized apartments to live in.

Not to mention that the food stamp cards can be use to buy almost
anything as the store clerks simply ring up food to get the $50 for the
beer and cigarettes or the cash back.

Message has been deleted

whoyakidding's ghost

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 12:30:18 PM4/8/13

to

There's at least one more thing that list doesn't include: lying
because it's easier than working for a living. :)

BeamMeUpScotty

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 12:31:27 PM4/8/13

to

On 4/8/2013 1:30 AM, Denny wrote:
> Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.org> wrote:

>> On 4/7/2013 7:34 PM, Denny wrote:
>>> BeamMeUpScotty <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:

>>>> On 4/7/2013 7:34 PM, Jeff M wrote:
>>>>> On 4/7/2013 6:21 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:
>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>> That's right, we're all Racist Bigots.......
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, not all of you.
>>>>>
>>>>>> And Racist Bigots would never elect a Mormon.
>>>>>
>>>>> Mormonism is a religion, not a race. Even so, many of you were
>>>>> notably fainthearted in your support for his candidacy, probably
>>>>> either because you don't believe that Mormons are really Christians,
>>>>> or from simple religious bigotry within the Republican party.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is nothing new, of course. As far back as 1884, Republicans
>>>>> expressly condemned the Mormon Church by name, resolving ï¿½that it is
>>>>> the duty of Congress to enact such laws as shall promptly and
>>>>> effectually suppress the system of polygamy within our Territories;
>>>>> and divorce the political from the ecclesiastical power of the
>>>>> so-called Mormon church,ï¿½ to be enforced ï¿½by the military, if need
>>>>> be.ï¿½
>>>>>
>>>> Liberals Hate Mormons.... it was pure and simple, Liberal
>>>> discrimination.
>>>
>>> I know many liberals. Not one hates Mormons.
>>
>> Mormons generally are good neighbors, good citizens and good employees.
>> They take care of themselves, their families and their friends. I
>> really like and respect my Mormon friends and co-workers. They are
>> also, of course, among the first and the best of all survival preppers.
>
> Yeah the best. I wonder if they are into Ar15s and that stuff.
>

Why would we care, they are less dangerous than a car, which we know
they have.

BeamMeUpScotty

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 12:32:36 PM4/8/13

to

You're more likely to kill a family member with your car than you are to
kill them with your gun.

BeamMeUpScotty

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 12:35:19 PM4/8/13

to

On 4/8/2013 1:37 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
> On 08 Apr 2013 05:15:42 GMT, dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:
>

>> "Clave" <ChrisC...@TheMonastery.com> wrote:
>>> "BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote in
>>> message news:Feo8t.759211$OJ2.1...@en-nntp-11.dc1.easynews.com...
>>>> On 4/7/2013 8:27 PM, Clave wrote:
>>>>> "BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote
>>>>> in message news:PVn8t.759208$OJ2....@en-nntp-11.dc1.easynews.com...
>>>>>> On 4/7/2013 8:02 PM, Clave wrote:
>>>>>>> "BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote
>>>>>>> in message
>>>>>>> news:BDn8t.759204$OJ2.2...@en-nntp-11.dc1.easynews.com...

>>>>>>>> On 4/7/2013 7:39 PM, Denny wrote:
>>>>>>>>> BeamMeUpScotty <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:

> Because they have no "real job" and can suck on the States tit.
>
> And they do.
>
> You really have no knowlege of the real world...do you?
>
> Stupid boi.
>
>

Manny of their customers, use welfare money to buy the drugs.

many sell drugs from a government paid for residence.

All government subsidizing the drug dealers.

The government gets no federal income tax from those drug dealers.

George Plimpton

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 12:35:50 PM4/8/13

to

> them, at least while sheï¿½s telling them.

>
> Some of the hallmarks of pathological liars include telling
> outrageously dramatic stories, telling fibs that are easily disputed,
> changing stories when challenged and, most importantly, lying even

> when thereï¿½s no apparent benefit in telling the lie. Compulsive liars

> lie for many reasons, including no reason at all, but most often they
> lie to:
>

> ï¿½feel admired
> ï¿½gain popularity
> ï¿½control and manipulate
> ï¿½compensate for feelings of inadequacy and low self-esteem
> ï¿½cover up failures

I've thought of all of this with regard to gummer, and to me, the lies
are simply too extravagant to think that even he could possibly believe
them. What's really bizarre is that he continues to tell them here,
even though he knows that a) many of them are mutually contradictory,
and b) there is more than one person here who often points out both the
near impossibility and contradictory nature of them.

I have a strong hunch that the lies he tells to people face to face are
much less extravagant than the ones he tells here.

George Plimpton

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 12:41:23 PM4/8/13

to

On 4/8/2013 9:22 AM, Denny wrote:

> George Plimpton <geo...@si.not> wrote:

>>
>> Negative campaigning is just a fact of political life, and the
>> Democrats' was no more dishonest than the Republicans'.
>

> I think when future history books are written, the chapter on negative
> campaigning will start with what Romney did to Gingrich and Sanorum in the
> primaries. Brutal lies. I saw Gingrich on a news show soon after. He said
> "What does Gov. Romney say to his grandchildren when they ask him about
> it?" That told the world what Romney was and what Repblicans are.

Democrats are no more honest. Politicians lie, and they especially lie
about their opponents.

BeamMeUpScotty

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 12:50:15 PM4/8/13

to

On 4/8/2013 1:40 AM, Denny wrote:
> BeamMeUpScotty <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:

>> On 4/7/2013 8:47 PM, Clave wrote:
>>> "BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote in

>>> message news:Qno8t.759213$OJ2.4...@en-nntp-11.dc1.easynews.com...

>>>> Show me how much the government is giving illegally to Agribusiness
>>>> and Defense contractors?
>>>
>>> What does "illegally" have to do with it, other than giving you a way
>>> to weasel out of an issue you brought up?
>>>
>>> Jim
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Cheating fraud abuse.... that's what the welfare cheats are you pegged
>> them as corporate cheats I said they are crack whores and drug dealers
>> that lie and commit fraud, are you stupid?
>>
>> I was clear enough why don't you understand English? Are you retarded?
>> or maybe "slow"?
>
> Poor taste there. Some of your readers might have a relative with such a
> problem. Find another stupid lying insult.
>

Is reality an insult is the truth an insult?

If the truth insults you, you must be a Liberal.

I feel sad for people that deal with such things I have friends that are
mentally lacking.... or retarded and it's the truth so I don't see a
problem with telling the truth.

The 20 old kid I know was stupid got drunk and drove a car and now he's
basically retarded as he has brain damage and isn't all there. His
brother is physically OK but Liberal teachers turned him into a Social
retard that looks to me to have Aspberger's and their mother is popping
psyc drugs to the point she runs in circles like a crazy lady, all of
them are hanging on to reality by a thread.

Nothing they, you or I can do will change that. these young men will be
retarded and never get better. The mother is a write off.

I don't see any problem with admitting he is retarded/brain damaged,
he's just plain lucky to be alive.

I didn't call any of them whack jobs.... I reserve that for the likes
of you. Stupid and you are proud of it.

BeamMeUpScotty

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 1:00:30 PM4/8/13

to

> If anything the President has done in unconstitutional, why doesn't someone
> appeal it to the Roberts Supreme Court?
>
The list of reasons is too long.....

For one thing Roberts is a nut that produces ruling that are NOT logical
or even sane.

Roberts is a whack job.

Message has been deleted

BeamMeUpScotty

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 2:08:02 PM4/8/13

to

> Well it would be hard to delberatly kill someone with a car. Run them over,
> back up, do it again. Then again. But a goon? Bang bang. Guns are so
> conveinient for murderers. Especially school children.
>
Yet more die in cars don't they.

BeamMeUpScotty

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 2:15:00 PM4/8/13

to

On 4/8/2013 10:55 AM, George Plimpton wrote:

> On 4/7/2013 11:14 PM, Denny wrote:
>> Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 08 Apr 2013 05:15:42 GMT, dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:
>>>

>>>> "Clave" <ChrisC...@TheMonastery.com> wrote:
>>>>> "BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote

>>>>> in message news:Feo8t.759211$OJ2.1...@en-nntp-11.dc1.easynews.com...

>>>>>> On 4/7/2013 8:27 PM, Clave wrote:
>>>>>>> "BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com>
>>>>>>> wrote in message

>>>>>>> news:PVn8t.759208$OJ2....@en-nntp-11.dc1.easynews.com...

>>>>>>>> On 4/7/2013 8:02 PM, Clave wrote:
>>>>>>>>> "BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com>
>>>>>>>>> wrote in message

>>>>>>>>> news:BDn8t.759204$OJ2.2...@en-nntp-11.dc1.easynews.com...

>>>>>>>>>> On 4/7/2013 7:39 PM, Denny wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> BeamMeUpScotty <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/7/2013 7:22 PM, Jeff M wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/7/2013 6:17 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama is the Welfare President.....
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ... and the Republicans are the Corporate Welfare Party.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Fair and equal isn't it.....
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Everyone's been screwed by corporations at one time or anohter.
>>>>>>>>>>> They fire
>>>>>>>>>>> you. They ship your job overseas. Oil companies raise the price
>>>>>>>>>>> of gasoline
>>>>>>>>>>> while provitting billions. Fair or not, this will always cost
>>>>>>>>>>> the Republicans millions of votes.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> We've all been screwed by the Welfare system and the people that
>>>>>>>>>> cheat the system.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You mean agribusinesses and defense contractors.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Jim
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I mean the drug dealers and crack whore mothers.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> LOL -- the "Welfare Queen" is a myth, ScottyL00n. The US pouring
>>>>>>> untold billions into black defense projects is not.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jim
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Right.... there are no drug dealers or crack babies...
>>>>>
>>>>> Show me how much money the government is giving to them.
>>>>>
>>>>> Jim
>>>>

>>>> Why would a drug dealer need welfare money?
>>>
>>> Because they have no "real job" and can suck on the States tit.
>>>
>>> And they do.
>>>
>>> You really have no knowlege of the real world...do you?
>>>
>>> Stupid boi.
>>
>> How do you know what drug dealers do? Do you know any personally?
>

> His son is a meth addict. He probably knows a little more about drug
> dealing than most of us.
>

How many drug dealers have you chased out of hotel rooms?

How many crack houses have you been in to service their plumbing?

I've dealt with drug dealers and crack whores in a bunch of ways and
different settings.

BeamMeUpScotty

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 2:16:57 PM4/8/13

to

On 4/8/2013 10:54 AM, George Plimpton wrote:

> On 4/7/2013 11:00 PM, Denny wrote:
>> Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote:

>>> On 08 Apr 2013 00:34:45 GMT, dzwe...@REMOVEyahoo.com (Denny) wrote:
>>>
>>>> BeamMeUpScotty <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:

>>>>> On 4/7/2013 7:34 PM, Jeff M wrote:
>>>>>> On 4/7/2013 6:21 PM, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:
>>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>>> That's right, we're all Racist Bigots.......
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well, not all of you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And Racist Bigots would never elect a Mormon.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mormonism is a religion, not a race. Even so, many of you were
>>>>>> notably fainthearted in your support for his candidacy, probably
>>>>>> either because you don't believe that Mormons are really Christians,
>>>>>> or from simple religious bigotry within the Republican party.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is nothing new, of course. As far back as 1884, Republicans

>>>>>> expressly condemned the Mormon Church by name, resolving â€œthat it

>>>>>> is the duty of Congress to enact such laws as shall promptly and
>>>>>> effectually suppress the system of polygamy within our Territories;
>>>>>> and divorce the political from the ecclesiastical power of the

>>>>>> so-called Mormon church,â€ to be enforced â€œby the military, if
>>>>>> need be.â€

>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Liberals Hate Mormons.... it was pure and simple, Liberal
>>>>> discrimination.
>>>>
>>>> I know many liberals. Not one hates Mormons.
>>>

>>> I know many liberals. They think Mormons are scum and dirt.
>>>
>>> You are a liar and cover up what Lieberals do and say and think.
>>>
>>> You must be a Lieberal too.
>>
>> Come to think of it, I've never met any person at all who hates
>> Mormons. I
>> think you've make a mistake on the subject.
>
> During the election campaign, leftists definitely were disparaging
> Romney for being Mormon. The general theme was that Mormonism is a
> weird cult, and its members are /ipso facto/ unsuited to holding high
> office. It might not be hatred, but it absolutely was bigotry and
> intolerance - no surprise.
>

Liberals have selective amnesia.... to be more succinct, they lie to
you and themselves.

Jeff M

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 2:19:46 PM4/8/13

to

On 4/8/2013 9:30 AM, George Plimpton wrote:
> On 4/7/2013 6:04 PM, Jeff M wrote:
>>
>> About $59 billion is spent on traditional social welfare programs. $92
>> billion is spent on corporate subsidies.
>
> Most of what regressive leftists decry as "corporate welfare" is nothing
> of the kind.

But facts are facts, independent of what either "leftists" call them, or
self-deluding idiots want to believe. These are facts, well documented
and cited at their source, your usual attempt to substitute your own
completely made up fictions for objective reality notwithstanding.

George Plimpton

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 2:25:54 PM4/8/13

to

On 4/8/2013 11:19 AM, Jeff M wrote:
> On 4/8/2013 9:30 AM, George Plimpton wrote:
>> On 4/7/2013 6:04 PM, Jeff M wrote:
>>>
>>> About $59 billion is spent on traditional social welfare programs. $92
>>> billion is spent on corporate subsidies.
>>
>> Most of what regressive leftists decry as "corporate welfare" is nothing
>> of the kind.
>
> But facts are facts

But calling tax and spending policy originated by *your* side "corporate
welfare" is not a fact. It's a knee-jerk regressive view.

BeamMeUpScotty

unread,

Apr 8, 2013, 2:27:22 PM4/8/13

to

On 4/8/2013 10:26 AM, George Plimpton wrote:
> On 4/7/2013 4:01 PM, Jeff M wrote:

>> On 4/7/2013 5:41 PM, Denny wrote:
>>> Sparks <energizedc...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>>>> On Apr 7, 2:01=A0pm, Gunner Asch <gunnera...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 7 Apr 2013 13:20:49 -0700 (PDT), Sparks
>>>>> <energizedconservat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I disagree that Israel has violated the human and civil rights of a
>>>>>> people. There are Arab Israelis who live in Israel.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hell...there are Arabs in the Knesset..Israeli Parliment.
>>>>
>>>> Excellent point.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hardy a version of the =A0hundreds of years of American Democrat
>>>>> bigotry and bias against blacks.
>>>>
>>>> In that regard, another thing that seems to have escaped today's
>>>> liberals and leftists is that the only African-Americans in Congress
>>>> who represent white majority districts are African-American
>>>> Republicans. Apparently, white Democrats don't elect African-Americans
>>>> to represent them.
>>>
>>> Well there's Obama, as an example.
>>
>> Beat me to the punch!
>
> Why no black Democrats in Congress representing majority white districts?
>
Because you Liberals lie and commit voter fraud, there was a black guy
in palm beach named Allen West as an example. Then your lies were
spread to get him out and your voter fraud war room was set in motion to
steal the election.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qh--BSjtSZk
--

*Rumination*
.....to the last I grapple with thee; from hell's heart I stab at
thee; for hate's sake I spit my last breath at thee.
?Moby-Dick, Chapter 135. "The Chase.?Third Day"