On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 19:04:16 -0600, Alex DeLarge
wrote:

Clave wrote:
"RD (The Sandman)" wrote in message
...

...

You said the Courts ruled that FOX can tell their people to lie...

Are you denying it?

Jim


Are you PROVING IT, clammie dear?

It's funny that you all have to tag team one poster to have half a
chance at making any sense.

Too bad you're overmatched even with three.

Doesn't help that you talk like Eddy Haskell.

jps wrote:
On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 19:04:16 -0600, Alex DeLarge
wrote:

Clave wrote:
"RD (The Sandman)" wrote in message
...

...

You said the Courts ruled that FOX can tell their people to lie...
Are you denying it?

Jim


Are you PROVING IT, clammie dear?

It's funny that you all have to tag team one poster

What, is your gaping asshole seeking relief too?

On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 20:20:49 -0600, Alex DeLarge
wrote:

jps wrote:
On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 19:04:16 -0600, Alex DeLarge
wrote:

Clave wrote:
"RD (The Sandman)" wrote in message
...

...

You said the Courts ruled that FOX can tell their people to lie...
Are you denying it?

Jim


Are you PROVING IT, clammie dear?

It's funny that you all have to tag team one poster

What, is your gaping asshole seeking relief too?

Why didn't you wait for one of your butt buddies to chime in. Pretty
brave for a little squeaker toy.

jps wrote:
On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 20:20:49 -0600, Alex DeLarge
wrote:

jps wrote:
On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 19:04:16 -0600, Alex DeLarge
wrote:

Clave wrote:
"RD (The Sandman)" wrote in message
...

...

You said the Courts ruled that FOX can tell their people to lie...
Are you denying it?

Jim


Are you PROVING IT, clammie dear?
It's funny that you all have to tag team one poster
What, is your gaping asshole seeking relief too?

Why didn't you wait

Because you asked with your eyes, faggot.

On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 22:50:39 -0600, Alex DeLarge
wrote:

jps wrote:
On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 20:20:49 -0600, Alex DeLarge
wrote:

jps wrote:
On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 19:04:16 -0600, Alex DeLarge
wrote:

Clave wrote:
"RD (The Sandman)" wrote in message
...

...

You said the Courts ruled that FOX can tell their people to lie...
Are you denying it?

Jim


Are you PROVING IT, clammie dear?
It's funny that you all have to tag team one poster
What, is your gaping asshole seeking relief too?

Why didn't you wait

Because you asked with your eyes, faggot.

Wow. You've just self-identified as a seriously creepy asshole.

What a waste of life.

Plonk!

On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 15:33:08 -0400, queenie
puked:

On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 08:13:31 -0400, "lab~rat :-)"
wrote:

On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 18:59:14 -0400, queenie
puked:

On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 14:18:18 -0500, "RD (The Sandman)"
wrote:

queenie wrote in
m:


That mess was caused by both sides of the aisle, not just one.

Bush tax cuts among other things. Still, Obama is doing what he can
to fix things.

He's not. He has an agenda that runs counter to fixing things. You
don't spend billions upon billions on pointless bull**** when you
inherit a deficit and fix anything.


First, I wouldn't have spent all that money on the stimulus package.
It hasn't netted a single job. I would have attached stipulations to
the bank bailout that they couldn't sit on the money, but had to get
it responsibly into the private sector to stimulate business and home
buying. I would target small businesses instead of using trickle down
economics and handing big bucks to huge corporations. I would keep
taxes low until the recession started heading up. Health care would
be off the table until we got a handle on Afghanistan and the economy.

That's for starters.
--
lab~rat :-)
Do you want polite or do you want sincere?

On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 08:07:09 -0400, lab~rat :-) wrote:

On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 15:33:08 -0400, queenie puked:

On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 08:13:31 -0400, "lab~rat :-)"
wrote:

On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 18:59:14 -0400, queenie puked:

On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 14:18:18 -0500, "RD (The Sandman)"
wrote:

queenie wrote in
om:


That mess was caused by both sides of the aisle, not just one.

Bush tax cuts among other things. Still, Obama is doing what he can
to fix things.

He's not. He has an agenda that runs counter to fixing things. You
don't spend billions upon billions on pointless bull**** when you
inherit a deficit and fix anything.


First, I wouldn't have spent all that money on the stimulus package. It
hasn't netted a single job. I would have attached stipulations to the
bank bailout that they couldn't sit on the money, but had to get it
responsibly into the private sector to stimulate business and home
buying. I would target small businesses instead of using trickle down
economics and handing big bucks to huge corporations. I would keep
taxes low until the recession started heading up. Health care would be
off the table until we got a handle on Afghanistan and the economy.

That's for starters.

I'd vote for you.

jps wrote in news:valud5thjtqeip36977gdd8c5smk8am1et@
4ax.com:

On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 18:35:19 GMT, KK wrote:

On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 11:01:58 -0700, jps wrote:

On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 15:36:16 GMT, KK wrote:

On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 16:12:25 -0700, jps wrote:


Yeah, that was the money Bush insisted was ours and proceeded to give
it to the wealthiest 1%.

That's a lie. 70% of people in the second-lowest quintile benefited
from the cuts. Even 16% of those in the *lowest* 20% benefited - and
most of them don't pay income tax.

The share of total federal taxes paid by the 80-99th percentile of
earners *increased* by half a percent (you're welcome).

Those in the top 1% had the greatest absolute benefit, yes - because
they pay more in taxes than anyone else.

And they need the money more than anyone else.

It's astounding that you place no significance whatsoever on the fact
that it's theirs in the first place. They've worked or risked or
invested to obtain it.

What's astounding is that folks like you don't recognize the middle
class is getting wiped out while the wealthy increase their lot.

What you don't recognize is fair play or perhaps we just have
radically different views on parity.

Evidently so.


Since the "rich" need a comsumption oriented middle class to buy thier
products and services, how do you figure?

If anyone is destroying the middle class it's the government.

"Clave" wrote in
news:fvOdnQFn4oHVMkLXnZ2dnUVZ_rCdnZ2d@cablespeedmi .com:

"RD (The Sandman)" wrote in message
...

...

You said the Courts ruled that FOX can tell their people to lie...

Are you denying it?

Jim




My you are a agitator aren't you?

It is clear the "reporters" didn't make thier case convincingly enough.
Apparently you think that just becuase they brought the charges they are
automatically true.

Let's try that on you. Yes officer this pervert was seen touching little
boys. Arrest him.

The charge is certainly serious enough to warrant action irrespective of the
truth of it.

jps wrote in
:

On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 22:50:39 -0600, Alex DeLarge
wrote:

jps wrote:
On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 20:20:49 -0600, Alex DeLarge
wrote:

jps wrote:
On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 19:04:16 -0600, Alex DeLarge
wrote:

Clave wrote:
"RD (The Sandman)" wrote in
message ...

...

You said the Courts ruled that FOX can tell their people to lie...
Are you denying it?

Jim


Are you PROVING IT, clammie dear?
It's funny that you all have to tag team one poster
What, is your gaping asshole seeking relief too?

Why didn't you wait

Because you asked with your eyes, faggot.

Wow. You've just self-identified as a seriously creepy asshole.

What a waste of life.

Plonk!


I especially like how the conversation went from the credibility of the
original poster, who failing to post anything besides blog vomit about this
case to attacking the doubters.

Again are you claiming that the reporters cases was absolutely foolproof and
that the court somehow subverted that? Post some actual proof.

It appears, based on the blog vomit posted so far, that they simply had a
weak case, which kinda puts thier allegations into question.

No more, no less.