| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Guest
|
 Posted: Mon Jul 14, 2008 7:19 pm Post subject: You're Goddamned" says Non-black hiring "RACE PATRIOT POOPY |
 |
|
| Quote: |
================================================================================
|
On Sat, 14 Jul 2007 08:37:00 -0700, rightwinghank Skank Defended PAJAMALOON:
| Quote: |
On Jul 14, 11:27 am, pyjamarama <pyjamaram...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Yeah I know....
That Idiot gets on my case for a few of my harmless jokes about
negros... |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
me
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 14, 2008 7:52 pm Post subject: Re: Sen.Nelson bill would abolish Electoral College |
|
|
On Jun 28, 11:19 pm, Rich Travsky <traRvE...@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
me wrote:
[snip]
Therefor, the procedures in California, could be challenged in California, even though
the vote was overwhelmingly for Candidate A, because the magitude of
the disputed votes would influence the NATIONWIDE margins.
Another non objection. How is this any different for any other office? It isn't.
Because problems in Miami don't affect LA mayoral elections.
You're learning. Almost. Would a problem in Miami would affect Tallahassee? Careful
now...
|
A problem in Miami has the potential to swamp anything that
happens in
Tallahassee. A problem in Tallahassee is probably meaningless unless
the margins
in Miami are close.
This is the larger point I'm making. In the EC/State based
election system,
in order for a problem to exist, there need to be disputable problems
of
a size large enough to affect the result in that state. Since most
states
have large margins in the out comes, there are rarely disputable
issues
worth pursuing. Furthermore, the state in question must have enough
EC votes to matter over all. That's three conditions that must all
exist
simultaneously. In a nationwide popular poll, you don't have that
trifecta
condition. Large population centers can effect the entire outcome of
the
election all by themselves. All that is required is that the contest
be
sufficiently close on a national basis. So a dispute in the LA area,
or several other large population centers could hinder an election,
regardless of margin in that larger area. It could hinder it because
a change in the margin, even if it did not change the outcome in that
area, could affect the national election.
The reason Florida was the fiasco that it was happened because three
things
happened simultaneously. 1) It was a close race on an EC basis. 2)
It was a close race in the state (500+ margin). 3) Florida was a
big
enough state to matter. Change any one (or just have Gore win
Tennessee)
and Florida doesn't matter. Now, change it to a popular vote, and
Florida
(Well, probably Miami predominately) and LA and NYC, and a few other
population areas matter in every modererately close race we have.
[snip]
| Quote: |
[snip]
ALll of this is an admission the EC is in dire need of tweaking - better
to scrap it.
Throw out the baby with the bath water? I don't think so.
Your own post showed the need for tweaking!!!!
|
Altering yes, scrapping, no.
[snip]
| Quote: |
ALll of this is an admission the EC is in dire need of tweaking - better
to scrap it.
***
|
The two are not equivalent and I've made the case that tweaking is
preferable to scrapping. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Clay
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 14, 2008 8:13 pm Post subject: Re: Should Bush be Prosecuted for Murder? If so, then Cronie |
|
|
On Jul 14, 3:11 pm, David Hartung wrote:
...
| Quote: |
Clay wrote:
On Jul 14, 2:05 pm, David Hartung wrote:
...
Youre Another wrote:
----------------------------------------------------
The Docket for War Crimes Trials should include all those Neocons and
their suckers-up whose deception and falsehoods drew the U.S. into the
Iraq war. Indictment, trial, conviction -- and hanging-- is in order;
although I tend to prefer the Guillotine set up in front of the
Capitol.
THERE MUST BE AN ACCOUNTING FOR ALL THOSE WHO REAPED PROFIT AND POWER
BY PERVERTING THE CONSTITUTION.
THERE MUST BE NO AMNESTY WITHOUT FULL CONFESSION AND RESTITUTION.
----------------------------------------------------
Interesting.
I thought that the left opposed capitol punishment.
By the way, in the above issue, there is no evidence to support
indictment, let alone trial and conviction.
This is the same insane notion that GWBush will be impeached and that
the US government actually had something to do with 9/11.
It's pretty sick, actually.
Which describes most of the left on this forum.
|
It's like something from "Invasion of the Body Snatchers".
The only mystery is... were they the brain-dead moronic lemmings
BEFORE or AFTER the plant transformation?
-C- |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Clay
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 14, 2008 8:30 pm Post subject: Re: A Note to the Peace Movement |
|
|
On Jul 14, 1:10 pm, "Taylor" wrote:
...
| Quote: |
"GG" <vasalinoATgaymail.com> posted nonsense:
|
<nonsense snip>
| Quote: |
Note to the peace movement: what are you doing to stop Al Quaeda?
|
Definition of a *coward* - a Western leftist willing to stand by and
watch his/her spouse, offspring, family members and friends
slaughtered... all for the sake of "cool white wine and cheese"
parties and saving their own asses.
Disgraceful !!!
-C- |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Clay
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 14, 2008 8:42 pm Post subject: Re: A Note to the Peace Movement |
|
|
On Jul 14, 4:02 pm, David Hartung wrote:
...
| Quote: |
GG wrote:
"Jim Austin" <b...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:da6ef1ee-7a3d-45dd-b966-8ace0d5ceab8@y38g2000hsy.googlegroups.com....
On Jul 14, 9:39 am, "GG" <vasalinoATgaymail.com> posted more nonsense:
A Note to the Peace Movement
By David Swanson
Created Jul 13 2008 - 10:58am
The peace movement has stood for peace and justice, for ending wars,
preventing new ones, and building peace.
No. The peace movement has stood for dictatorship and terrorism.
Actually, the GOP has stood for dictatorship and terrorism.
Not in my lifetime.
|
I C O N S O F T H E L E F T ...
Castro (only the brutal ones)
Hugo (they like him now, they'll love him once he becomes the South
American Castro)
Mugabe (they just love this monster)
Islamic Savage Dictatorships (this is what's called "a Western lestist
orgasm)
It's disgraceful !!!
-C- |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
David Hartung
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 12:11 am Post subject: Re: Should Bush be Prosecuted for Murder? If so, then Cronie |
|
|
Clay wrote:
| Quote: |
On Jul 14, 2:05 pm, David Hartung wrote:
...
Youre Another wrote:
----------------------------------------------------
The Docket for War Crimes Trials should include all those Neocons and
their suckers-up whose deception and falsehoods drew the U.S. into the
Iraq war. Indictment, trial, conviction -- and hanging-- is in order;
although I tend to prefer the Guillotine set up in front of the
Capitol.
THERE MUST BE AN ACCOUNTING FOR ALL THOSE WHO REAPED PROFIT AND POWER
BY PERVERTING THE CONSTITUTION.
THERE MUST BE NO AMNESTY WITHOUT FULL CONFESSION AND RESTITUTION.
----------------------------------------------------
Interesting.
I thought that the left opposed capitol punishment.
By the way, in the above issue, there is no evidence to support
indictment, let alone trial and conviction.
This is the same insane notion that GWBush will be impeached and that
the US government actually had something to do with 9/11.
It's pretty sick, actually.
|
Which describes most of the left on this forum. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Gandalf Grey
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 12:36 am Post subject: Re: Should Bush be Prosecuted for Murder? If so, then Cronie |
|
|
"David Hartung" <d_hartung@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:KbWdnY51QshpOebVnZ2dnUVZ_o3inZ2d@comcast.com...
| Quote: |
Clay wrote:
On Jul 14, 2:05 pm, David Hartung wrote:
...
Youre Another wrote:
----------------------------------------------------
The Docket for War Crimes Trials should include all those Neocons and
their suckers-up whose deception and falsehoods drew the U.S. into the
Iraq war. Indictment, trial, conviction -- and hanging-- is in order;
although I tend to prefer the Guillotine set up in front of the
Capitol.
THERE MUST BE AN ACCOUNTING FOR ALL THOSE WHO REAPED PROFIT AND POWER
BY PERVERTING THE CONSTITUTION.
THERE MUST BE NO AMNESTY WITHOUT FULL CONFESSION AND RESTITUTION.
----------------------------------------------------
Interesting.
I thought that the left opposed capitol punishment.
By the way, in the above issue, there is no evidence to support
indictment, let alone trial and conviction.
This is the same insane notion that GWBush will be impeached and that
the US government actually had something to do with 9/11.
It's pretty sick, actually.
Which describes most of the left on this forum.
|
And all of the right on this forum. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Proteus
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 1:26 am Post subject: Re: Darwinists stumped by 270 million year old fossils |
|
|
Kelley Eidem <awthrawthr@yahoo.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
Okay, let's say you're a dumbass liberal...sorry for the
redundancy...you so you rejected the movie "Expelled" out of hand.
|
We all know that God created us in 6 days, 6000 years ago by blowing into a
handful of dirt.
That's why I'm a member of a Cult that worships Ed Conrad. We want to suck
his penis dry and then erect a giant statue of him, with him buried alive
inside because we believe that he is the second coming of Jesus and the
apocalypse is nigh!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Sebastian Rector
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 2:16 pm Post subject: Re: More NeoCon Dishonesty (was Anti Obama Bloggers And Webs |
|
|
On Jul 15, 11:36 am, Jack <agamemnon...@yahoo.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
On Jul 15, 11:09 am, Sebastian Rector <cicer...@rogers.com> wrote:
On Jul 15, 10:32 am, C Man <cy_pur...@excite.com> wrote:
Looks like the lying, dishonest right wing clown fails to possess the
ability to comprehend English because the title he has to this thread
does not reflect the content of his Fox News link.
On Jul 15, 10:24 am, "Proteus" <prot...@ambiance.com> wrote:
Sure it does you moron. I just brought up the title of the Fox
article:
"Anti-Obama Bloggers Question Why Google Froze Their Accounts". Is the
cause of your poor reading comprehension
skills your low I.Q. or is it due to the poor instruction you received
in Canada's flawed education system?
Imbecile. Where does it say that Google deliberately silenced the
anti-Obama bloggers as you claim?
It says that they suspect as much, but suspicions are not evidence or
proof.
It looks like your boozing has lowered your I. Q. to the point where
you cannot comprehend the difference between paranoid suspicion and
genuine facts.
What a pathetic waste of a human being. You are clearly a victim
your substandard Canadian education, including that junk liberal arts
degree you claim to have. And don't forget your self evident severe
drug and alcohol abuse which manifests itself daily in these
newsgroups. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Sebastian Rector
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 2:26 pm Post subject: Re: More NeoCon Dishonesty (was Anti Obama Bloggers And Webs |
|
|
On Jul 15, 11:36 am, Jack <agamemnon...@yahoo.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
On Jul 15, 11:09 am, Sebastian Rector <cicer...@rogers.com> wrote:
On Jul 15, 10:32 am, C Man <cy_pur...@excite.com> wrote:
Looks like the lying, dishonest right wing clown fails to possess the
ability to comprehend English because the title he has to this thread
does not reflect the content of his Fox News link.
On Jul 15, 10:24 am, "Proteus" <prot...@ambiance.com> wrote:
Sure it does you moron. I just brought up the title of the Fox
article:
"Anti-Obama Bloggers Question Why Google Froze Their Accounts". Is the
cause of your poor reading comprehension
skills your low I.Q. or is it due to the poor instruction you received
in Canada's flawed education system?
Imbecile. Where does it say that Google deliberately silenced the
anti-Obama bloggers as you claim?
It says that they suspect as much, but suspicions are not evidence or
proof.
It looks like your boozing has lowered your I. Q. to the point where
you cannot comprehend the difference between paranoid suspicion and
genuine facts.
What a pathetic waste of a human being. You are clearly a victim
your substandard Canadian education, including that junk liberal arts
degree you claim to have. And don't forget your self evident severe
drug and alcohol abuse which manifests itself daily in these
newsgroups.
|
How do you define proof or evidence, imbecile? "The world is my
idea".--Schopenhauer. Now you would have no
fucking idea whatsoever of what Schopenhauer means by this statement.
"All knowledge is uncertain".--Montaigne
Of course, an ill-educated barely literate clown like you would never
have heard of the great philosophers Schopenhauer and Montaigne. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Sebastian Rector
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 7:24 pm Post subject: freaked out - lots of bright red blood and pain |
|
|
Sebastian Rector, ye monotonic common friend that's without faith or
love, die and be damned, ye gnarled:
> I'm not wearing pants. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Rich Travsky
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 8:06 am Post subject: Re: Sen.Nelson bill would abolish Electoral College |
|
|
me wrote:
| Quote: |
On Jun 28, 11:19 pm, Rich Travsky <traRvE...@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote:
me wrote:
[snip]
Therefor, the procedures in California, could be challenged in California, even though
the vote was overwhelmingly for Candidate A, because the magitude of
the disputed votes would influence the NATIONWIDE margins.
Another non objection. How is this any different for any other office? It isn't.
Because problems in Miami don't affect LA mayoral elections.
You're learning. Almost. Would a problem in Miami would affect Tallahassee? Careful
now...
A problem in Miami has the potential to swamp anything that
happens in
Tallahassee. A problem in Tallahassee is probably meaningless unless
the margins
in Miami are close.
|
You claim without explaining how...
| Quote: |
This is the larger point I'm making. In the EC/State based
election system,
in order for a problem to exist, there need to be disputable problems
of
a size large enough to affect the result in that state. Since most
states
have large margins in the out comes, there are rarely disputable
issues
worth pursuing. Furthermore, the state in question must have enough
EC votes to matter over all. That's three conditions that must all
exist
simultaneously. In a nationwide popular poll, you don't have that
trifecta
condition. Large population centers can effect the entire outcome of
the
election all by themselves. All that is required is that the contest
be
sufficiently close on a national basis. So a dispute in the LA area,
or several other large population centers could hinder an election,
regardless of margin in that larger area. It could hinder it because
a change in the margin, even if it did not change the outcome in that
area, could affect the national election.
|
Get rid of the EC, and a problem in one city doesn't hold up the rest
of the country.
| Quote: |
The reason Florida was the fiasco that it was happened because three
things
happened simultaneously. 1) It was a close race on an EC basis. 2)
|
Another reason to get of the EC since then it would not affect the
whole country.
| Quote: |
It was a close race in the state (500+ margin). 3) Florida was a
|
Ditto.
| Quote: |
big
enough state to matter. Change any one (or just have Gore win
|
Ditto again since the way the electoral math works you only have to take the
big states - just a dozen.
| Quote: |
Tennessee)
and Florida doesn't matter. Now, change it to a popular vote, and
Florida
(Well, probably Miami predominately) and LA and NYC, and a few other
population areas matter in every modererately close race we have.
|
Ditto some more since by getting rid of the EC you don't have to worry about
taking states .
| Quote: |
[snip]
[snip]
ALll of this is an admission the EC is in dire need of tweaking - better
to scrap it.
Throw out the baby with the bath water? I don't think so.
Your own post showed the need for tweaking!!!!
Altering yes, scrapping, no.
[snip]
ALll of this is an admission the EC is in dire need of tweaking - better
to scrap it.
***
The two are not equivalent and I've made the case that tweaking is
preferable to scrapping.
|
You did nothing but present more reasons for scrapping the EC.
RT |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
CB
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 11:22 am Post subject: Re: What the Left Considers Civil, Cogent, Intelligent Disco |
|
|
"fargo116" <fargo116@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:0d7c0ee9-1307-45bc-b02e-029761e1cd39@z66g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
On Jul 9, 5:04 pm, genie <margen...@yahoo.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
On Jul 9, 10:52 am, fargo116 <fargo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Jul 8, 5:37 pm, "CB" <C...@PrayForMe.com> wrote:
"Lamont Cranston" <Lamont.Crans...@intheshadows.com> wrote in message
news:g4vsc0$dmm$1@news.datemas.de...
CB wrote:
"Lamont Cranston" <Lamont.Crans...@intheshadows.com> wrote in
message
news:g4tlkh$dkg$1@news.datemas.de...
CB wrote:
"Lamont Cranston" <Lamont.Crans...@intheshadows.com> wrote in
messagenews:g4te7f$vou$1@news.datemas.de...
CB wrote:
"robw" <noddy...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Y8edncS9BYjfPfLVnZ2dnUVZ_oWdnZ2d@comcast.com...
Our message is that the "war" is unjust and your president is
a
criminal.
Bush's mistake was that he didn't do as Clinton did in Bosnia,
bomb
"But, Clinton...but, Clinton..."
ROTFL!
7+ years that Clinton has been out of office and the wingnuts
are
still at it. Pitiful.
If we forget the past we may be condemned to relive it.
Reagan had to clean up Carters appeasement
...by cutting and running from Lebanon after the attack on the
embassy. LOL!
Lesson learned by Bush 43.
Really? When did Iraq attack us? Bush 43 hasn't learned a fucking
thing.
Iraq wasn't a threat, moron it was Saddamn, his torturous sons and his
Baathist Party Butchers.
I don't reacall Saddam, his boys or his 'Baathist party butchers'
marching down the streets of any American city. I don't reacall them
flying planes into the World Trade Center either. Do you?
Saddamn (SIC) 'had' WMD,
Not any that WE were worried about or claimed he had. Not one.
he used them on his own f'ing
people, the Kurds and on Iranians.
Yes, those were the OLD WMD's not the ones we were worried about in
2003.
He was ordered to destroy them and record
their destruction, he never did. 17 UNSC resolutions were ignored.
How come all that junk filled with Clorox that guys like you CLAIMED
were the WMDs we wen't to war over was there all disabled? As for
record-keeping, ol Saddam was trying to get the Iranians to THINK he
still had WMDs so they wouldn't invade him again. It's called
'deterrence by deception.' You fell for it too.
Saddamn
had bribed most of the members of the security council and could get
most
anything he wanted that was prohibited
Except WMDs.LOL
For all that and more, he got
thumped....boo hoo.
For nothing then. I certainly hope he got thumped. I would hate to
think we invaded and then occupied his country, got over 4,100 of our
kids killed, spent more than half a trillion dollars and couldn't even
overthrow the fucking guy
He, nore America can no longer afford to
appease Babylonian tin horns
Babylonian? ROTFL! You are a fucking moron!
You're ignorant to history and Babylon
Guy can't determine between one set of WMDs and another and he calls
*Lamont* ignorant. LMAO!
S. Olson- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Why was Clinton worried about it?
|
Gee, was Clinton so worried that he got over 4,100 of our kids killed
in Iraq and blew more than half a trillion bucks there? Doesn't sound
too worried about it me, now does he?
Clinton told (Larry) King: "People can quarrel with whether we should have
more troops in Afghanistan or internationalize Iraq or whatever, but it is
incontestable that on the day I left office, there were unaccounted for
stocks of biological and chemical weapons."
http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/07/23/clinton.iraq.sotu/index.html
--
CB
"Bill Clinton was a small man for a small time, a panderer and pollster and
not a leader, a man who was not up to the challenge of a major war against
terrorism"
--Brent Bozell
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/brentbozell/bb20011022.shtml |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
147 Attacks blocked
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
