Discussion:
The TRUTH Revealed About The GOP Debate - Ron Paul Is LEADING In Every Single Post-Debate Poll - We Have Proof
(too old to reply)
Möbius Pretzel
2011-06-17 14:41:27 UTC
Permalink
The TRUTH Revealed About The GOP Debate - Ron Paul Is LEADING In Every
Single Post-Debate Poll - We Have Proof

9 POLLS - Guess who is DOMINATING in every one?

And his name is not warmonger Romney.

Links to all 9 are inside.

See it for yourself.

http://dailybail.com/home/ron-paul-embarrasses-mitt-romney-as-he-demonstrates-true-lea.html
Bret Cahill
2011-06-17 17:17:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Möbius Pretzel
The TRUTH Revealed About The GOP Debate - Ron Paul Is LEADING In Every
Single Post-Debate Poll - We Have Proof
9 POLLS - Guess who is DOMINATING in every one?
And his name is not warmonger Romney.
Links to all 9 are inside.
See it for yourself.
http://dailybail.com/home/ron-paul-embarrasses-mitt-romney-as-he-demo...
Jerry Okamura
2011-06-19 18:16:55 UTC
Permalink
Is individual freedom important or not important at all?
Post by Möbius Pretzel
The TRUTH Revealed About The GOP Debate - Ron Paul Is LEADING In Every
Single Post-Debate Poll - We Have Proof
9 POLLS - Guess who is DOMINATING in every one?
And his name is not warmonger Romney.
Links to all 9 are inside.
See it for yourself.
http://dailybail.com/home/ron-paul-embarrasses-mitt-romney-as-he-demo...
Bret Cahill
2011-06-19 18:47:03 UTC
Permalink
Is individual freedom important enough for "market" economists to
answer The Question:

"Does free speech for the individual a precondition of each and every
free trade by that individual?"
Post by Jerry Okamura
Is individual freedom important or not important at all?
Post by Möbius Pretzel
The TRUTH Revealed About The GOP Debate - Ron Paul Is LEADING In Every
Single Post-Debate Poll - We Have Proof
9 POLLS - Guess who is DOMINATING in every one?
And his name is not warmonger Romney.
Links to all 9 are inside.
See it for yourself.
http://dailybail.com/home/ron-paul-embarrasses-mitt-romney-as-he-demo...- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Jerry Okamura
2011-06-20 18:13:38 UTC
Permalink
I answered that question more that once, and not once did you tell me that
you did not think my answer was the wrong answer....so why do you keep
asking the same question, when you don't provide an answer, when we do
answer your question?

"Bret Cahill" wrote in message news:4f7b7ae5-2e08-417d-9575-***@22g2000prx.googlegroups.com...

Is individual freedom important enough for "market" economists to
answer The Question:

"Does free speech for the individual a precondition of each and every
free trade by that individual?"
Post by Jerry Okamura
Is individual freedom important or not important at all?
Post by Möbius Pretzel
The TRUTH Revealed About The GOP Debate - Ron Paul Is LEADING In Every
Single Post-Debate Poll - We Have Proof
9 POLLS - Guess who is DOMINATING in every one?
And his name is not warmonger Romney.
Links to all 9 are inside.
See it for yourself.
http://dailybail.com/home/ron-paul-embarrasses-mitt-romney-as-he-demo...-
Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Mr.B1ack
2011-06-20 22:53:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Okamura
I answered that question more that once, and not once did you tell me that
you did not think my answer was the wrong answer....so why do you keep
asking the same question, when you don't provide an answer, when we do
answer your question?
Is individual freedom important enough for "market" economists to
"Does free speech for the individual a precondition of each and every
free trade by that individual?"
If the individuals INSIST upon it, then Yes.

Giving the customer what he wants is an important
part of business. Satisfied customers steer more
customers your way. Treat customers like shit, like
slaves, and you won't last long.

This applies to employees too. If nobody will put
up with your shit then your company ceases to exist.

Americans have long since forgotten what "land of the free"
was supposed to mean ... and settle for slaving at Wal-Mart.
Doesn't mean they can't be REMINDED though ....
Bret Cahill
2011-06-21 06:04:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Okamura
I answered that question more that once, and not once did you tell me that
you did not think my answer was the wrong answer....so why do you keep
asking the same question, when you don't provide an answer, when we do
answer your question?
Is individual freedom important enough for "market" economists to
"Does free speech for the individual a precondition of each and every
free trade by that individual?"
   If the individuals INSIST upon it, then Yes.
Supposing the individuals don't know that they _can_ insist upon it?

That is the real issue, the issue that the Corp. media, all
Republicans and a lot of judiciary wish would go away.


Bret Cahill
Jerry Okamura
2011-06-21 17:21:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mr.B1ack
Post by Jerry Okamura
I answered that question more that once, and not once did you tell me that
you did not think my answer was the wrong answer....so why do you keep
asking the same question, when you don't provide an answer, when we do
answer your question?
Is individual freedom important enough for "market" economists to
"Does free speech for the individual a precondition of each and every
free trade by that individual?"
If the individuals INSIST upon it, then Yes.
Supposing the individuals don't know that they _can_ insist upon it?

then they are their own worst enemy....
Bret Cahill
2011-06-21 17:26:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bret Cahill
Post by Jerry Okamura
I answered that question more that once, and not once did you tell me that
you did not think my answer was the wrong answer....so why do you keep
asking the same question, when you don't provide an answer, when we do
answer your question?
Is individual freedom important enough for "market" economists to
"Does free speech for the individual a precondition of each and every
free trade by that individual?"
   If the individuals INSIST upon it, then Yes.
Supposing the individuals don't know that they _can_ insist upon it?
then they are their own worst enemy....
In _Plato's Republic_ the enlightened free people above ground free
the ignorant slaves below ground.


Bret Cahill
Nickname unavailable
2011-06-21 18:00:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bret Cahill
Post by Bret Cahill
Post by Jerry Okamura
I answered that question more that once, and not once did you tell me that
you did not think my answer was the wrong answer....so why do you keep
asking the same question, when you don't provide an answer, when we do
answer your question?
Is individual freedom important enough for "market" economists to
"Does free speech for the individual a precondition of each and every
free trade by that individual?"
   If the individuals INSIST upon it, then Yes.
Supposing the individuals don't know that they _can_ insist upon it?
then they are their own worst enemy....
In _Plato's Republic_ the enlightened free people above ground free
the ignorant slaves below ground.
Bret Cahill
Aristotle identified the evils of usury and the barrenness of
prosperity based on speculation:austerity does not work it only
benefits wealthy parasites:The last time the world threw off the
chains of private wealth was in the 1930s:only the fascist economies
remained in thrall to private wealth
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ann-pettifor/greece-drachma-crisis_b_88...
Ann Pettifor
New economist; Author, "The Economic Consequences of Mr. Osborne"
An Open Letter to the People of Greece: Restore the Drachma
Posted: 06/21/11 10:03 AM ET
We write to encourage you -- to urge you on in your resistance.
In your defiance, you understand Greece is slave to the interests of
private wealth.
You must understand too that it is private wealth that needs Greece.
Greece does not need private wealth.
As is obvious to you -- if not to EU finance ministers -- Greek and
other EU taxpayers are asked to shore up the immense wealth and
reckless lending of private French, German, British and American
banks.
Without your taxes, your sacrifices, the privatisation of your
government's assets, these bankers once again face Armageddon -- as
they did in autumn of 2008.
Just as then, so now they have rushed behind the 'skirts' of their
defenders at the IMF and the EU. On their behalf, these unelected
officials and some elected politicians demand that Greek and EU
taxpayers shield private sector risk-takers from the consequences of
their risks. The very antipathy of market principles.

In the
process,
the European Union is torn apart. Politicians, backed by officials,
now defy the founding goals of the community and, in the interests of
private wealth, set the peoples of Europe against each other.
On 20 June, 2011 the acting head of the IMF called for "immediate and
far-reaching structural reforms, privatization, and the opening of
markets to foreign ownership and competition."
Which proves our point: private wealth needs Greece. Greece does not
need private wealth.
Greece's elected politicians have plunged the country into a spiral
of
decline, as austerity leads to greater economic crisis, more severe
failure of public finances and social and economic hardship on a
scale
unknown since the inter-war years.
Is there anybody on earth who seriously believes that austerity will
restore the prosperity of Greece? The idea is ludicrous.
But equally ludicrous is the idea that there is no alternative.
There is an alternative.

In reality, austerity marks the final
failure of the existing arrangement between public interests and the
interests of private wealth. Financial liberalisation has failed. The
only way forward is a new arrangement, based on ones that have better
served societies since the dawn of civilisation: since Aristotle
identified the evils of usury and the barrenness of prosperity based
on speculation.
The first step must be the abandoning of the Euro.
The Euro must be understood not as a currency of the peoples, but as
an ideal of private wealth.
The Euro is a perversion of the greatest monies in history. These
arose as a relation between people and the state. Through the
institutional development of central banks, domestic banks, state
borrowing, paper currency and double-entry book keeping, national
monies have underpinned all of the greatest societies of the world.
Money has been aimed at the interests of society, of productive
labour, and vibrant state and private activity alike.
But the Euro is a money aimed only at the interests of private
wealth.
It is divorced from individual nation states. Its statutes explicitly
prohibit the support of state activity through money creation, while
its foundation in monetarist doctrine inhibits private activity and
has led to a world devoid of markets, at the mercy of large financial
monopolies.
Greece must restore the Drachma.
If Greece restores the Drachma, social, private and financial
interests can be re-aligned; prosperity can be reignited. Issued
through the central bank and domestic retail banks, the Drachma can
underpin a programme of public works expenditures, and in parallel,
through multiplier processes, the spending of newly earned income to
revive private activity in Greece. Through the Drachma, jobs and
prosperity can be restored. The expertise to facilitate such a
transition exists, moreover the very nature of money guarantees
precedent on which action can be based.
It has been done before -- successfully

The last time the world
threw
off the chains of private wealth was in the 1930s. Then, Britain led
the way. In September 1931, financial interests demanded high
interest
rates and austerity as the impact of the Great Depression hammered
the
people. At this point Britain, like Greece today, became defiant. The
UK threw off its fetters and left the gold standard -- the Euro of a
century ago.
Under Keynes's tutelage, Sterling was revived as a money managed by
the Bank of England and protected from speculative and vested
interest. Then in 1934, President Roosevelt freed the dollar, and
with
it, the people of the United States, who then embarked on the finest
programme of public works expenditures known in modern history.
Great public buildings were erected, symphony orchestras established,
writers were sponsored -- not least John Steinbeck -- fantastic
murals
created, swimming pools built. When, in 1935, a socialist government
took power in France and freed the Franc from the fetters of the gold
standard, only the fascist economies remained in thrall to private
wealth.
Interrupted by war, and diluted at Bretton Woods in 1947, finance was
still restrained as servant not master through the age of economic
and
social advance from 1945-1970.
Today, the likelihood of the UK or US once again taking this lead --
and defending society from the predations of private wealth -- is
slim
indeed. But there is no theoretical reason why the lead should not be
taken by a smaller nation -- like Greece.
The history of the world teaches us the ebb and flow of prosperity
between nations. It would be fitting too if a new era was to arise
from the cradle of western civilisation.
Certainly Greece would feel the full force of the anger of private
wealth, through their allies in the media, academia and politics. But
this will follow from fear -- not reason.
Because Greece will show the world not only that there is an
alternative, but that the alternative is very good.
To read more, visit PRIME -- Policy Research in Macroeconomics.
Bret Cahill
2011-06-21 20:22:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Nickname unavailable
Post by Bret Cahill
Post by Bret Cahill
Post by Jerry Okamura
I answered that question more that once, and not once did you tell me that
you did not think my answer was the wrong answer....so why do you keep
asking the same question, when you don't provide an answer, when we do
answer your question?
Is individual freedom important enough for "market" economists to
"Does free speech for the individual a precondition of each and every
free trade by that individual?"
   If the individuals INSIST upon it, then Yes.
Supposing the individuals don't know that they _can_ insist upon it?
then they are their own worst enemy....
In _Plato's Republic_ the enlightened free people above ground free
the ignorant slaves below ground.
Bret Cahill
Aristotle identified the evils of usury and the barrenness of
prosperity based on speculation:austerity does not work it only
Michelle Obama gets a lot of flack every time she takes a trip so
asterity applies to public servants -- even the president -- as well
as to the public.

Austerity does not, however, apply to the rich who are making even
_more_ money.

The fact that the rich get away with this nonsense should give
everyone a clue as to the extent the media are working for the rich.
Post by Nickname unavailable
The last time the world threw off the
chains of private wealth was in the 1930s:only the fascist economies
remained in thrall to private wealthhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/ann-pettifor/greece-drachma-crisis_b_88...
Ann Pettifor
New economist; Author, "The Economic Consequences of Mr. Osborne"
An Open Letter to the People of Greece: Restore the Drachma
Posted: 06/21/11 10:03 AM ET
We write to encourage you -- to urge you on in your resistance.
In your defiance, you understand Greece is slave to the interests of
private wealth.
You must understand too that it is private wealth that needs Greece.
Greece does not need private wealth.
As is obvious to you -- if not to EU finance ministers -- Greek and
other EU taxpayers are asked to shore up the immense wealth and
reckless lending of private French, German, British and American
banks.
Without your taxes, your sacrifices, the privatisation of your
government's assets, these bankers once again face Armageddon -- as
they did in autumn of 2008.
Just as then, so now they have rushed behind the 'skirts' of their
defenders at the IMF and the EU. On their behalf, these unelected
officials and some elected politicians demand that Greek and EU
taxpayers shield private sector risk-takers from the consequences of
their risks. The very antipathy of market principles.

In the
process,
the European Union is torn apart. Politicians, backed by officials,
now defy the founding goals of the community and, in the interests of
private wealth, set the peoples of Europe against each other.
On 20 June, 2011 the acting head of the IMF called for "immediate and
far-reaching structural reforms, privatization, and the opening of
markets to foreign ownership and competition."
Which proves our point: private wealth needs Greece. Greece does not
need private wealth.
Greece's elected politicians have plunged the country into a spiral
of
decline, as austerity leads to greater economic crisis, more severe
failure of public finances and social and economic hardship on a
scale
unknown since the inter-war years.
Is there anybody on earth who seriously believes that austerity will
restore the prosperity of Greece? The idea is ludicrous.
But equally ludicrous is the idea that there is no alternative.
There is an alternative.

In reality, austerity marks the final
failure of the existing arrangement between public interests and the
interests of private wealth. Financial liberalisation has failed. The
only way forward is a new arrangement, based on ones that have better
served societies since the dawn of civilisation: since Aristotle
identified the evils of usury and the barrenness of prosperity based
on speculation.
The first step must be the abandoning of the Euro.
The Euro must be understood not as a currency of the peoples, but as
an ideal of private wealth.
The Euro is a perversion of the greatest monies in history. These
arose as a relation between people and the state. Through the
institutional development of central banks, domestic banks, state
borrowing, paper currency and double-entry book keeping, national
monies have underpinned all of the greatest societies of the world.
Money has been aimed at the interests of society, of productive
labour, and vibrant state and private activity alike.
But the Euro is a money aimed only at the interests of private
wealth.
It is divorced from individual nation states. Its statutes explicitly
prohibit the support of state activity through money creation, while
its foundation in monetarist doctrine inhibits private activity and
has led to a world devoid of markets, at the mercy of large financial
monopolies.
Greece must restore the Drachma.
If Greece restores the Drachma, social, private and financial
interests can be re-aligned; prosperity can be reignited. Issued
through the central bank and domestic retail banks, the Drachma can
underpin a programme of public works expenditures, and in parallel,
through multiplier processes, the spending of newly earned income to
revive private activity in Greece. Through the Drachma, jobs and
prosperity can be restored. The expertise to facilitate such a
transition exists, moreover the very nature of money guarantees
precedent on which action can be based.
It has been done before -- successfully

The last time the world
threw
off the chains of private wealth was in the 1930s. Then, Britain led
the way. In September 1931, financial interests demanded high
interest
rates and austerity as the impact of the Great Depression hammered
the
people. At this point Britain, like Greece today, became defiant. The
UK threw off its fetters and left the gold standard -- the Euro of a
century ago.
Under Keynes's tutelage, Sterling was revived as a money managed by
the Bank of England and protected from speculative and vested
interest. Then in 1934, President Roosevelt freed the dollar, and
with
it, the people of the United States, who then embarked on the finest
programme of public works expenditures known in modern history.
Great public buildings were erected, symphony orchestras established,
writers were sponsored -- not least John Steinbeck -- fantastic
murals
created, swimming pools built. When, in 1935, a socialist government
took power in France and freed the Franc from the fetters of the gold
standard, only the fascist economies remained in thrall to private
wealth.
Interrupted by war, and diluted at Bretton Woods in 1947, finance was
still restrained as servant not master through the age of economic
and
social advance from 1945-1970.
Today, the likelihood of the UK or US once again taking this lead --
and defending society from the predations of private wealth -- is
slim
indeed. But there is no theoretical reason why the lead should not be
taken by a smaller nation -- like Greece.
The history of the world teaches us the ebb and flow of prosperity
between nations. It would be fitting too if a new era was to arise
from the cradle of western civilisation.
Certainly Greece would feel the full force of the anger of private
wealth, through their allies in the media, academia and politics. But
this will follow from fear -- not reason.
Because Greece will show the world not only that there is an
alternative, but that the alternative is very good.
To read more, visit PRIME -- Policy Research in Macroeconomics.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Bret Cahill
2011-06-21 19:08:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Okamura
I answered that question more that once, and not once did you tell me that
you did not think my answer was the wrong answer....so why do you keep
asking the same question, when you don't provide an answer, when we do
answer your question?
Is individual freedom important enough for "market" economists to
"Does free speech for the individual a precondition of each and every
free trade by that individual?"
   If the individuals INSIST upon it, then Yes.
   Giving the customer what he wants is an important
   part of business. Satisfied customers steer more
   customers your way. Treat customers like shit, like
   slaves, and you won't last long.
   This applies to employees too.
That is what is causing all the dodging and dodging of The Question by
"libertarians" and GOP "market" economists. Every last GOP "market"
economist knows better than to answer The Question.

Work can only get done one of two ways, the free market free trade of
employment at will or some form of servitude. There is no 3rd
direction.

If they really loved freedom "libertarians" and GOP "market"
economists would be falling all over themselves to encourage free
marketry and to discuss free speech but their fear of The Question
gives them away.

They aren't for liberty. They are for servitude.
If nobody will put
   up with your shit then your company ceases to exist.
To be sure that will occasionally happen but the primary benefit to
the economy will not just be a matter of blackballing "bad" places.

What is bad for one person is OK or good for another.

The real issue should be getting the right people to the right places
and even more important, restoring free speech on economic issues to
U. S. jurisprudence and the rest of American society.

Of the thousands of published opinions concerning free speech, not
_one_ is about free speech on vital economic issues.

They are all on naked nazi flagburner parades.
   Americans have long since forgotten what "land of the free"
   was supposed to mean ...
Except for some octogenarians, they never knew it in the first
place.
and settle for slaving at Wal-Mart.
   Doesn't mean they can't be REMINDED though ....
The media are fighting it tooth and nail. They are even more
disreputable than GOP "market" economists.


Bret Cahill
Tim Crowley
2011-06-25 09:17:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Okamura
I answered that question more that once, and not once did you tell me that
you did not think my answer was the wrong answer....so why do you keep
asking the same question, when you don't provide an answer, when we do
answer your question?
What question? Fucking stupid top poster.

hint: you're retarded.
Jerry Okamura
2011-06-25 17:06:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Okamura
I answered that question more that once, and not once did you tell me that
you did not think my answer was the wrong answer....so why do you keep
asking the same question, when you don't provide an answer, when we do
answer your question?
What question? Fucking stupid top poster.

hint: you're retarded.

Can't read?
Tim Crowley
2011-06-25 20:31:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Okamura
I answered that question more that once, and not once did you tell me that
you did not think my answer was the wrong answer....so why do you keep
asking the same question, when you don't provide an answer, when we do
answer your question?
What question?   Fucking stupid top poster.
hint: you're retarded.
Can't read?
No, no you can't.
Tim Crowley
2011-06-25 09:16:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Okamura
Is individual freedom important or not important at all?
Not the freedom to have slaves, for example.

hint: tops posting is STILL rude and stupid - but you don't care - you
love being known as the rude, stupid bitch that can't post to usenet.
Jerry Okamura
2011-06-25 17:07:51 UTC
Permalink
just because you don't like it, I am purposely putting this response on the
top of this message.....
Post by Jerry Okamura
Is individual freedom important or not important at all?
Not the freedom to have slaves, for example.

hint: tops posting is STILL rude and stupid - but you don't care - you
love being known as the rude, stupid bitch that can't post to usenet.
Tim Crowley
2011-06-25 20:31:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Okamura
just because you don't like it, I am purposely putting this response on the
top of this message.....
You do it all the time. It's rude and stupid and you don't care -
that's what your opinion is worth. gargbage.

It's so funny to watch someone who's so proud of being a stupid ass.
Ray Fischer
2011-06-18 19:40:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Möbius Pretzel
The TRUTH Revealed About The GOP Debate - Ron Paul Is LEADING In Every
Single Post-Debate Poll - We Have Proof
9 POLLS - Guess who is DOMINATING in every one?
And his name is not warmonger Romney.
Links to all 9 are inside.
See it for yourself.
http://dailybail.com/home/ron-paul-embarrasses-mitt-romney-as-he-demonstrates-true-lea.html
How to eliminate Paul's chances:

"Ron Paul wants to eliminate Social Security and Medicare"
--
Ray Fischer | Mendocracy (n.) government by lying
***@sonic.net | The new GOP ideal
Bret Cahill
2011-06-18 22:50:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Möbius Pretzel
The TRUTH Revealed About The GOP Debate - Ron Paul Is LEADING In Every
Single Post-Debate Poll - We Have Proof
9 POLLS - Guess who is DOMINATING in every one?
And his name is not warmonger Romney.
Links to all 9 are inside.
See it for yourself.
http://dailybail.com/home/ron-paul-embarrasses-mitt-romney-as-he-demo...
    "Ron Paul wants to eliminate Social Security and Medicare"
Sane folk will be avoing the 2012 GOP Nat'l convention.


Bret Cahill
Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking head
2011-06-21 18:05:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Möbius Pretzel
The TRUTH Revealed About The GOP Debate - Ron Paul Is LEADING In Every
Single Post-Debate Poll - We Have Proof
9 POLLS - Guess who is DOMINATING in every one?
And his name is not warmonger Romney.
Links to all 9 are inside.
See it for yourself.
http://dailybail.com/home/ron-paul-embarrasses-mitt-romney-as-he-demo...
    "Ron Paul wants to eliminate Social Security
So you think people are not going to vote for him because he believes
that we should honor our commitments to the people who are currently
in the system while allowing kids the opportunity to opt out?
http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Ron_Paul_Social_Security.htm

Doesn't Obama want to do the same?
and Medicare
He thinks only the poor should get free health care. (He wants to
transfer funds from debt & empire-building to pay for it)
http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Ron_Paul_Health_Care.htm

Doesn't Obama want to do the same?
Y***@Jurgis.net
2011-06-21 20:33:22 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 11:05:46 -0700 (PDT), Anonymous Infidel - the
Post by Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking head
Doesn't Obama want to do the same?
Obama isn't a ineffectual clown like Paul
Post by Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking head
=============================================================
On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 16:32:34 -0700 (PDT),
Kurtis T. Nicklas
Post by Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking head
I don't pay much attention to him these days, but I'd wager he's not
happy.
You sure as shit paid attention when you got caught
making all those late-night hang-up phone calls, didn't
ya, Nickkkkers?

CLICK ! ! !
Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking head
2011-06-21 22:48:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Y***@Jurgis.net
On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 11:05:46 -0700 (PDT), Anonymous Infidel - the
Post by Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking head
Doesn't Obama want to do the same?
Obama isn't a
Nobody gives a shit about what a foreign Obamatard thinks. (Go to the
WH and suck Obama's cock till you die)
Y***@Jurgis.net
2011-06-22 00:32:56 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 15:48:09 -0700 (PDT), Anonymous Infidel - the
Post by Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking head
Nobody gives a shit about what a foreign Obamatard thinks.
If you define "nobody" as the tinhat madwhackoffs, you might have
something.

Good for a laugh.
Post by Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking head
=============================================================
On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 16:32:34 -0700 (PDT),
Kurtis T. Nicklas
Post by Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking head
I don't pay much attention to him these days, but I'd wager he's not
happy.
You sure as shit paid attention when you got caught
making all those late-night hang-up phone calls, didn't
ya, Nickkkkers?

CLICK ! ! !
Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking head
2011-06-22 05:13:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Y***@Jurgis.net
If you define
Nobody gives a shit, you foreign trash obamatard.

Obama's one and only accomplishment that he can brag about: he gets
these foreign losers to blow him like 24/7. They just suck and suck,
swallowing load after load...They don't even stop while he's bombing
them to shit in his five wars or when he's making their investments
worthless. (It's priceless)
Y***@Jurgis.net
2011-06-22 16:54:57 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 22:13:09 -0700 (PDT), Anonymous Infidel - the
Post by Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking head
Post by Y***@Jurgis.net
If you define
Nobody gives a shit, you foreign trash obamatard.
YOu must

I'm Forcing you to snip out anything you can't rebut---a sure sign of
intellecual cowardice.
More than one.

a) whipped republicans

b) best Lame duck session in history

c) Got Bin Laden

d) whipped republicans

e) forced republicans to ignore jobs, economic disaster and pander to
their base by focusing on abortion, prayer, and nonsense winger
things.
Post by Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking head
=============================================================
On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 16:32:34 -0700 (PDT),
Kurtis T. Nicklas
Post by Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking head
I don't pay much attention to him these days, but I'd wager he's not
happy.
You sure as shit paid attention when you got caught
making all those late-night hang-up phone calls, didn't
ya, Nickkkkers?

CLICK ! ! !
Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking head
2011-06-23 06:49:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Y***@Jurgis.net
On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 22:13:09 -0700 (PDT), Anonymous Infidel - the
Post by Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking head
Post by Y***@Jurgis.net
If you define
Nobody gives a shit, you foreign trash obamatard.
YOu must
I enjoy verbally slapping you around.
Post by Y***@Jurgis.net
I'm Forcing you to snip
A) Your not forcing anything.
B) Why should I keep what you yourself are not willing to archive?
(You delete your own stupid crap because you're ashamed of it)
Post by Y***@Jurgis.net
More than one.
No, everything he's done as president has been fucked up and amateur
hour.
Post by Y***@Jurgis.net
a) whipped progressive republicans
And he whipped this country.

Obama achievement: He has entrenched the US in five wars(Iraq,
Afghanistan, Libya, Somalia, Yemen). When are you going to enlist?
Post by Y***@Jurgis.net
b) best Lame duck session in history
If your goal is to destroy the economy, the US Constitution, this
country...Then yeah, he did what progressives do and he historically
wrecked everything.

Obama achievement: Obamacare, which is more expensive and offers less
choice, has a waiver count of 1372+ and counting.
Post by Y***@Jurgis.net
c) Got Bin Laden
And then had the troops execute unarmed Bin Hiding, which is against
US law and international law, all because he believed it would make
his polls go up and guarantee him a second term. (He was undone when
his lackeys told 20 different stories and demonstrated to America what
a lying crminal he was)

Imagine what we could have gained by taking him alive.

Obama achievement: Project Gunwalker. Obama Armed Narco Terrorist.
(Nothing new)
Post by Y***@Jurgis.net
d) whipped progressive republicans
No, he hasn't won anything in a long time. (The referendum is on him
and his polls are going to shit. Americans are rejecting him and the
progressive movement. You would know this if you were American)

Obama achievement: After spending trillions of dollars unemployment is
9.1 percent. All that spending did nothing but devalue our currency.
Post by Y***@Jurgis.net
e) forced republicans to
The referendum is on Obama. The only thing he's forced...Is for
Americans to hate him and the progressive movement even more. He's a
one term president.

Obama achievement: His war on whistle blowers, transparency, his
cronyism of awarding government contracts to big donors, etc.
Obama's future achievement: He's going to under staff and underfund
(even more) the Afghanistan war during the fighting season. (Now we
know why you're too afraid to enlist)
Jerry Okamura
2011-06-21 23:33:22 UTC
Permalink
wrote in message news:***@4ax.com...

On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 11:05:46 -0700 (PDT), Anonymous Infidel - the
Post by Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking head
Doesn't Obama want to do the same?
Obama isn't a ineffectual clown like Paul




Doesn't Paul have to be the President before we really know?
Y***@Jurgis.net
2011-06-22 00:34:04 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 13:33:22 -1000, "Jerry Okamura"
Post by Y***@Jurgis.net
Obama isn't a ineffectual clown like Paul
Doesn't Paul have to be the President before we really know?
Obama hasn't spent the last decade whining and mewlinig on an empty
house floor railing and spouting failed loonytarinan gibberish.
Post by Y***@Jurgis.net
=============================================================
On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 16:32:34 -0700 (PDT),
Kurtis T. Nicklas
Post by Y***@Jurgis.net
I don't pay much attention to him these days, but I'd wager he's not
happy.
You sure as shit paid attention when you got caught
making all those late-night hang-up phone calls, didn't
ya, Nickkkkers?

CLICK ! ! !
Jerry Okamura
2011-06-22 02:16:46 UTC
Permalink
wrote in message news:***@4ax.com...

On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 13:33:22 -1000, "Jerry Okamura"
Post by Y***@Jurgis.net
Obama isn't a ineffectual clown like Paul
Doesn't Paul have to be the President before we really know?
Obama hasn't spent the last decade whining and mewlinig on an empty
house floor railing and spouting failed loonytarinan gibberish.



Well, that is because he really was an unknown, until fairly recently. Ron
Paul has been in the Congress for an awful long time.
Y***@Jurgis.net
2011-06-22 02:33:19 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 16:16:46 -1000, "Jerry Okamura"
Post by Y***@Jurgis.net
On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 13:33:22 -1000, "Jerry Okamura"
Post by Y***@Jurgis.net
Obama isn't a ineffectual clown like Paul
Doesn't Paul have to be the President before we really know?
Obama hasn't spent the last decade whining and mewlinig on an empty
house floor railing and spouting failed loonytarinan gibberish.
Well, that is because he really was an unknown, until fairly recently.
You COULD have watched him on the House floor several times a week for
2hrs railing and whining.

How is it that you can say "he was unknown"?
Post by Y***@Jurgis.net
=============================================================
On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 16:32:34 -0700 (PDT),
Kurtis T. Nicklas
Post by Y***@Jurgis.net
I don't pay much attention to him these days, but I'd wager he's not
happy.
You sure as shit paid attention when you got caught
making all those late-night hang-up phone calls, didn't
ya, Nickkkkers?

CLICK ! ! !
Tim Crowley
2011-06-25 09:19:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Okamura
Doesn't Paul have to be the President before we really know?
Paul will never be president and you will never learn to post to
usenet.

hint: you're dumb and your opinion doesn't count.
Jerry Okamura
2011-06-25 16:41:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Okamura
Doesn't Paul have to be the President before we really know?
Paul will never be president and you will never learn to post to
usenet.

Probably true, but the question still remains on the table...
Y***@Jurgis.net
2011-06-25 20:04:19 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 25 Jun 2011 06:41:31 -1000, "Jerry Okamura"
Post by Tim Crowley
Paul will never be president and you will never learn to post to
usenet.
Probably true, but the question still remains on the table...
The question is bullshit

Anything connected to Ron Paul is bullshit

Well---decriminalization of pot would solve a massive prison and crime
problem.
Post by Tim Crowley
=============================================================
On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 16:32:34 -0700 (PDT),
Kurtis T. Nicklas
Post by Tim Crowley
I don't pay much attention to him these days, but I'd wager he's not
happy.
You sure as shit paid attention when you got caught
making all those late-night hang-up phone calls, didn't
ya, Nickkkkers?

CLICK ! ! !
Tim Crowley
2011-06-25 20:32:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tim Crowley
Post by Jerry Okamura
Doesn't Paul have to be the President before we really know?
Paul will never be president and you will never learn to post to
usenet.
Probably true, but the question still remains on the table...
You have no valid questions, retard. You don''t care. Just soak it
in - you're a stupid ass and ohhhh so proud of it. Congratulations.
Ray Fischer
2011-06-23 06:44:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking head
Post by Möbius Pretzel
The TRUTH Revealed About The GOP Debate - Ron Paul Is LEADING In Every
Single Post-Debate Poll - We Have Proof
9 POLLS - Guess who is DOMINATING in every one?
And his name is not warmonger Romney.
Links to all 9 are inside.
See it for yourself.
http://dailybail.com/home/ron-paul-embarrasses-mitt-romney-as-he-demo...
    "Ron Paul wants to eliminate Social Security
So you think people are not going to vote for him because he believes
that we should honor our commitments to the people who are currently
in the system
No evidence of that.
Post by Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking head
while allowing kids the opportunity to opt out?
Q.E.D. He wants to destroy Social Security.
--
Ray Fischer | Mendocracy (n.) government by lying
***@sonic.net | The new GOP ideal
Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking head
2011-06-23 08:21:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking head
    "Ron Paul wants to eliminate Social Security
So you think people are not going to vote for him because he believes
that we should honor our commitments to the people who are currently
in the system while allowing kids the opportunity to opt out?
Q.E.D.  He wants to destroy Social Security.
Its destruction, under his plan, would only happen if people opted
out. Seeing as how progressives are always telling us how much people
love it, I don't know how you can say with certainty that this would
happen. (Unless their lying and people actually hate it, that is)
Ray Fischer
2011-06-23 17:15:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking head
Post by Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking head
    "Ron Paul wants to eliminate Social Security
So you think people are not going to vote for him because he believes
that we should honor our commitments to the people who are currently
in the system while allowing kids the opportunity to opt out?
Q.E.D.  He wants to destroy Social Security.
Its destruction, under his plan, would only happen if people opted
out.
"Tragedy of the commons".

Look it up, rightard.
--
Ray Fischer | Mendocracy (n.) government by lying
***@sonic.net | The new GOP ideal
Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking head
2011-06-23 19:36:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking head
Post by Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking head
    "Ron Paul wants to eliminate Social Security
So you think people are not going to vote for him because he believes
that we should honor our commitments to the people who are currently
in the system while allowing kids the opportunity to opt out?
Q.E.D.  He wants to destroy Social Security.
Its destruction, under his plan, would only happen if people opted
out.
"Tragedy of the commons".
I guess they were lying then. (If given a choice most
Americans(progressives, democrats, etc) would drop this ponzi
scheme(your description) like a bad habit)
Post by Ray Fischer
Look it up,
Oh no I got you, you're saying that most Americans would leave this
unpopular ponzi scheme if given a choice. (And you would prefer they
have no choice at all)

Seeing as how you love these government programs so much...When are
you going to enlist to go to Afghanistan?
Post by Ray Fischer
rightard.
No, I'm not your imaginary boogeyman...Which, going by your
description, sounds a lot like you.
Post by Ray Fischer
--
Ray Fischer         |  Socialism (n.) government by lying
Ray Fischer
2011-06-24 05:26:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking head
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking head
Post by Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking head
    "Ron Paul wants to eliminate Social Security
So you think people are not going to vote for him because he believes
that we should honor our commitments to the people who are currently
in the system while allowing kids the opportunity to opt out?
Q.E.D.  He wants to destroy Social Security.
Its destruction, under his plan, would only happen if people opted
out.
"Tragedy of the commons".
I guess they were lying then. (If given a choice most
Americans(progressives, democrats, etc) would drop this ponzi
scheme
Liar.
--
Ray Fischer | Mendocracy (n.) government by lying
***@sonic.net | The new GOP ideal
Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking head
2011-06-24 06:09:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking head
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking head
Post by Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking head
    "Ron Paul wants to eliminate Social Security
So you think people are not going to vote for him because he believes
that we should honor our commitments to the people who are currently
in the system while allowing kids the opportunity to opt out?
Q.E.D.  He wants to destroy Social Security.
Its destruction, under his plan, would only happen if people opted
out.
"Tragedy of the commons".
I guess they were lying then. (If given a choice most
Americans(progressives, democrats, etc) would drop this ponzi
scheme
Liar.
If I did tell a lie...it would only be the parts where I quoted your
lies word for word, you dishonest rightard.

Fact: SS is an unpopular, unsustainable, nearly bankrupt ponzi scheme
that only exist because people are forced to use it. Without a massive
cut in benefits, a raising of the retirement age and a tax increase it
will be completely bankrupt. And lets not even mention what our
devalued currency is doing to those shit payouts. (Free choice, the
enemy of the progressive movement, would destroy this crappy program.
And it would be a good thing)

Ron Paul is right on about the fact that we should allow future
generations to opt out.
--
Ray Fischer         |  Socialism (n.) government by force and fraud
Ray Fischer
2011-06-25 03:49:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking head
Post by Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking head
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking head
Post by Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking head
    "Ron Paul wants to eliminate Social Security
So you think people are not going to vote for him because he believes
that we should honor our commitments to the people who are currently
in the system while allowing kids the opportunity to opt out?
Q.E.D.  He wants to destroy Social Security.
Its destruction, under his plan, would only happen if people opted
out.
"Tragedy of the commons".
I guess they were lying then. (If given a choice most
Americans(progressives, democrats, etc) would drop this ponzi
scheme
Liar.
If I did tell a lie
No "if".
--
Ray Fischer | Mendocracy (n.) government by lying
***@sonic.net | The new GOP ideal
Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking head
2011-06-26 05:43:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking head
Post by Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking head
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking head
Post by Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking head
    "Ron Paul wants to eliminate Social Security
So you think people are not going to vote for him because he believes
that we should honor our commitments to the people who are currently
in the system while allowing kids the opportunity to opt out?
Q.E.D.  He wants to destroy Social Security.
Its destruction, under his plan, would only happen if people opted
out. Seeing as how progressives are always telling us how much people
love it, I don't know how you can say with certainty that this would
happen. (Unless their lying and people actually hate it, that is)
"Tragedy of the commons".
I guess they were lying then. (If given a choice most
Americans(progressives, democrats, etc) would drop this ponzi
scheme(your description) like a bad habit)
<Ray 'The Stupid Bitch" Fischer can't argue with what I've written so
he's playing his typical Saul Alinsky games>
Post by Ray Fischer
Post by Anonymous Infidel - the anti-political talking head
Liar.
If I did tell a lie...it would only be the parts where I quoted your
lies word for word, you dishonest rightard.
No "if".
Then it was 100% due to the fact that I was repeating your lie. Now
why don't you get a brain, an argument, etc so you don't have to
resort to lying, you stupid bitch. (Or better yet, why don't you stop
being a chickenhawk and do your beloved government/boy king the honor
of enlisting to go to Afghanistan)

Loading...