On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 10:17:45 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker
wrote:

On Dec 31, 1:14*pm, John H wrote:
On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 07:28:43 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker





wrote:
On Dec 30, 3:54 pm, John H wrote:
On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 11:15:05 -0800 (PST), "JustWaitAFrekinMinute!"

wrote:
On Dec 30, 1:35 pm, Loogypicker wrote:
On Dec 30, 1:21 pm, John H wrote:

On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 08:20:40 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker

wrote:
On Dec 28, 5:54 pm, John H wrote:
On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 12:59:03 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker

wrote:
On Dec 28, 3:22 pm, John H wrote:
On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 10:19:46 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker

wrote:
On Dec 28, 1:09 pm, I am Tosk wrote:
In article a8e218c8-4ede-497f-937c-a4e158ccb983
@e27g2000yqd.googlegroups.com, says...

On Dec 27, 11:52 am, I am Tosk
wrote:
In article ,
says...

On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 10:48:18 -0500, wrote:

On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 06:49:48 -0500, Harry
wrote:

Jon Stewart pointed out that these climate savers managed to lease
every limo in western europe, some couriered in from as far away as
Germany so nobody had to share a ride.

Well, you can't have people who are interested in saving the planet have to
ride two to a limo or two to a jet, now can you. It's just not done.

I wonder how many heating oil tanks could have been filled for what was
spent on that extravaganza.

BTW, what's a caviar wedge? I understand they ate a lot of caviar. That
would have bought a lot of turkeys at the shelters.

I bet they had expensive cognac and real Cuban cigars, too.

Nothing too good for our tax dollars.

Steve

Does anyone recall "stevie" objecting when bush was spending like a
drunken sailor, and cutting taxes for the wealthy at the same time?

Hypocrisy, thy real name is republican/conservative. Nothing is piled
higher than republican/conservative b.s.

I was complaining about the Bush/Clinton/Bush war long before it
became Obama's war. Is that the spending you are talking about?

Just because it was bad then doesn't mean it's bad now. Obama is doing
it now, therefore it's a good thing. He's just emulating a bad
precedent, but since it *is* a precedent, it's a good thing to
emulate.

I think this is the correct loogic.

"Loogic", I like it...- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Try this. Ask the liar where I EVER said such. I know he won't
apologize for his out and out lie, Harry doesn't either.

Yeah, but Loogic works, it's a new word. It is when someone uses the
idea of proving a negative as proof soemthing exists in the first place.
It's like asking "did you beat your wife last night", or asking Harry
about his Lobsta' boat as a method of debate...- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Show me ONE PLACE where I've asked someone to prove a negative. If you
are talking about when Bill stated that something was NOT the cause of
global warming and I asked him to prove that, that's not a negative.
Bill stated that as FACT. And John DID lie about me.

So show me the quoted lie. Otherwise STFU.
--

John H

Here you go, are you going to apologize now? I'm guessing not, Harry
on the unhinged left side doesn't either. Notice, "according to
Loogy"? Where did I state that?

"Hey, they set a precedent. There's good ones and bad ones. According
to Loogy, they should all be emulated just 'cause they're precedents."

I said this:

"Just because it was bad then doesn't mean it's bad now. Obama is
doing it now, therefore it's a good thing. He's just emulating a bad
precedent, but since it *is* a precedent, it's a good thing to
emulate."

Your name isn't mentioned. You're making up ****, just like Harry.
--

John H

"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the
gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery."

Churchill- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I'm done. You are a lying sack of ****. I don't like liars. You were
talking about ME, and everyone here knows that. Have a nice life,
lying asshole.

I'm a lying asshole because I didn't say what you said I said? Where's
the quote, Loogy? It doesn't exist because I didn't say it.

If, in your mind, your inability to back up your statement makes me a
lying asshole, so be it. Now there's two big name-callers here - Harry
and Loogy.
--
John H

All decisions, even those of liberals, are the result of binary thinking.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

One more time, just to show everyone how ****ing dishonest you are,
you forgot this ending to the above blather:
I think this is the correct loogic

Now who in hell is that referring to? I'm sure, just like Harry you'll
figure out another lie to cover your previous lie, ad nausem, like a
cat trying to cover **** on concrete.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I think I am the one who coined "loogic", or at least made it main
stream. It is by defintion an ability to use tangent thinking to bring
a debate to an absured level of confusion... Either way, I am just
pullin' your chain;p)

bs. That one was mine, but you did say you liked it.

I just thought it was appropriate and showed that a significant level
of thought had gone in to the 'precedent' theories espoused by 'you
know who'.
--
John H

All decisions, even those of liberals, are the result of binary thinking.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

John, another lie? You're going off the deep end. Where did I
"espouse" anything? You are getting so that you lie more than Harry!

Loogy, go read your posts. Let us know how many times you've used the
word 'precedent' when 'Bama's behavior has been questioned.

Until then, you're acting like ...
--
John H

"The problem with Socialism is that you eventually run out of other people s money." --Margaret Thatcher- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Twice. Once to make a damned good point, and another to show that you
are an unhinged liar.

Bull****.
--
John H

"The problem with Socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money."
--Margaret Thatcher

On Dec 31, 1:56*pm, John H wrote:
On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 10:17:45 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker





wrote:
On Dec 31, 1:14 pm, John H wrote:
On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 07:28:43 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker

wrote:
On Dec 30, 3:54 pm, John H wrote:
On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 11:15:05 -0800 (PST), "JustWaitAFrekinMinute!"

wrote:
On Dec 30, 1:35 pm, Loogypicker wrote:
On Dec 30, 1:21 pm, John H wrote:

On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 08:20:40 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker

wrote:
On Dec 28, 5:54 pm, John H wrote:
On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 12:59:03 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker

wrote:
On Dec 28, 3:22 pm, John H wrote:
On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 10:19:46 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker

wrote:
On Dec 28, 1:09 pm, I am Tosk wrote:
In article a8e218c8-4ede-497f-937c-a4e158ccb983
@e27g2000yqd.googlegroups.com, says...

On Dec 27, 11:52 am, I am Tosk
wrote:
In article ,
says...

On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 10:48:18 -0500, wrote:

On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 06:49:48 -0500, Harry
wrote:

Jon Stewart pointed out that these climate savers managed to lease
every limo in western europe, some couriered in from as far away as
Germany so nobody had to share a ride.

Well, you can't have people who are interested in saving the planet have to
ride two to a limo or two to a jet, now can you. It's just not done.

I wonder how many heating oil tanks could have been filled for what was
spent on that extravaganza.

BTW, what's a caviar wedge? I understand they ate a lot of caviar. That
would have bought a lot of turkeys at the shelters.

I bet they had expensive cognac and real Cuban cigars, too.

Nothing too good for our tax dollars.

Steve

Does anyone recall "stevie" objecting when bush was spending like a
drunken sailor, and cutting taxes for the wealthy at the same time?

Hypocrisy, thy real name is republican/conservative. Nothing is piled
higher than republican/conservative b.s.

I was complaining about the Bush/Clinton/Bush war long before it
became Obama's war. Is that the spending you are talking about?

Just because it was bad then doesn't mean it's bad now. Obama is doing
it now, therefore it's a good thing. He's just emulating a bad
precedent, but since it *is* a precedent, it's a good thing to
emulate.

I think this is the correct loogic.

"Loogic", I like it...- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Try this. Ask the liar where I EVER said such. I know he won't
apologize for his out and out lie, Harry doesn't either.

Yeah, but Loogic works, it's a new word. It is when someone uses the
idea of proving a negative as proof soemthing exists in the first place.
It's like asking "did you beat your wife last night", or asking Harry
about his Lobsta' boat as a method of debate...- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Show me ONE PLACE where I've asked someone to prove a negative. If you
are talking about when Bill stated that something was NOT the cause of
global warming and I asked him to prove that, that's not a negative.
Bill stated that as FACT. And John DID lie about me.

So show me the quoted lie. Otherwise STFU.
--

John H

Here you go, are you going to apologize now? I'm guessing not, Harry
on the unhinged left side doesn't either. Notice, "according to
Loogy"? Where did I state that?

"Hey, they set a precedent. There's good ones and bad ones.. According
to Loogy, they should all be emulated just 'cause they're precedents."

I said this:

"Just because it was bad then doesn't mean it's bad now. Obama is
doing it now, therefore it's a good thing. He's just emulating a bad
precedent, but since it *is* a precedent, it's a good thing to
emulate."

Your name isn't mentioned. You're making up ****, just like Harry.
--

John H

"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the
gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery."

Churchill- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I'm done. You are a lying sack of ****. I don't like liars. You were
talking about ME, and everyone here knows that. Have a nice life,
lying asshole.

I'm a lying asshole because I didn't say what you said I said? Where's
the quote, Loogy? It doesn't exist because I didn't say it.

If, in your mind, your inability to back up your statement makes me a
lying asshole, so be it. Now there's two big name-callers here - Harry
and Loogy.
--
John H

All decisions, even those of liberals, are the result of binary thinking.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

One more time, just to show everyone how ****ing dishonest you are,
you forgot this ending to the above blather:
I think this is the correct loogic

Now who in hell is that referring to? I'm sure, just like Harry you'll
figure out another lie to cover your previous lie, ad nausem, like a
cat trying to cover **** on concrete.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I think I am the one who coined "loogic", or at least made it main
stream. It is by defintion an ability to use tangent thinking to bring
a debate to an absured level of confusion... Either way, I am just
pullin' your chain;p)

bs. That one was mine, but you did say you liked it.

I just thought it was appropriate and showed that a significant level
of thought had gone in to the 'precedent' theories espoused by 'you
know who'.
--
John H

All decisions, even those of liberals, are the result of binary thinking.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

John, another lie? You're going off the deep end. Where did I
"espouse" anything? You are getting so that you lie more than Harry!

Loogy, go read your posts. Let us know how many times you've used the
word 'precedent' when 'Bama's behavior has been questioned.

Until then, you're acting like ...
--
John H

"The problem with Socialism is that you eventually run out of other people s money." --Margaret Thatcher- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Twice. Once to make a damned good point, and another to show that you
are an unhinged liar.

Bull****.
--
John H

"The problem with Socialism is that you eventually run out of other people s money."
*--Margaret Thatcher- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Prove me wrong, liar.

On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 10:58:23 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker
wrote:

On Dec 31, 1:56*pm, John H wrote:
On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 10:17:45 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker





wrote:
On Dec 31, 1:14 pm, John H wrote:
On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 07:28:43 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker

wrote:
On Dec 30, 3:54 pm, John H wrote:
On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 11:15:05 -0800 (PST), "JustWaitAFrekinMinute!"

wrote:
On Dec 30, 1:35 pm, Loogypicker wrote:
On Dec 30, 1:21 pm, John H wrote:

On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 08:20:40 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker

wrote:
On Dec 28, 5:54 pm, John H wrote:
On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 12:59:03 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker

wrote:
On Dec 28, 3:22 pm, John H wrote:
On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 10:19:46 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker

wrote:
On Dec 28, 1:09 pm, I am Tosk wrote:
In article a8e218c8-4ede-497f-937c-a4e158ccb983
@e27g2000yqd.googlegroups.com, says...

On Dec 27, 11:52 am, I am Tosk
wrote:
In article ,
says...

On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 10:48:18 -0500, wrote:

On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 06:49:48 -0500, Harry
wrote:

Jon Stewart pointed out that these climate savers managed to lease
every limo in western europe, some couriered in from as far away as
Germany so nobody had to share a ride.

Well, you can't have people who are interested in saving the planet have to
ride two to a limo or two to a jet, now can you. It's just not done.

I wonder how many heating oil tanks could have been filled for what was
spent on that extravaganza.

BTW, what's a caviar wedge? I understand they ate a lot of caviar. That
would have bought a lot of turkeys at the shelters.

I bet they had expensive cognac and real Cuban cigars, too.

Nothing too good for our tax dollars.

Steve

Does anyone recall "stevie" objecting when bush was spending like a
drunken sailor, and cutting taxes for the wealthy at the same time?

Hypocrisy, thy real name is republican/conservative. Nothing is piled
higher than republican/conservative b.s.

I was complaining about the Bush/Clinton/Bush war long before it
became Obama's war. Is that the spending you are talking about?

Just because it was bad then doesn't mean it's bad now. Obama is doing
it now, therefore it's a good thing. He's just emulating a bad
precedent, but since it *is* a precedent, it's a good thing to
emulate.

I think this is the correct loogic.

"Loogic", I like it...- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Try this. Ask the liar where I EVER said such. I know he won't
apologize for his out and out lie, Harry doesn't either.

Yeah, but Loogic works, it's a new word. It is when someone uses the
idea of proving a negative as proof soemthing exists in the first place.
It's like asking "did you beat your wife last night", or asking Harry
about his Lobsta' boat as a method of debate...- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Show me ONE PLACE where I've asked someone to prove a negative. If you
are talking about when Bill stated that something was NOT the cause of
global warming and I asked him to prove that, that's not a negative.
Bill stated that as FACT. And John DID lie about me.

So show me the quoted lie. Otherwise STFU.
--

John H

Here you go, are you going to apologize now? I'm guessing not, Harry
on the unhinged left side doesn't either. Notice, "according to
Loogy"? Where did I state that?

"Hey, they set a precedent. There's good ones and bad ones. According
to Loogy, they should all be emulated just 'cause they're precedents."

I said this:

"Just because it was bad then doesn't mean it's bad now. Obama is
doing it now, therefore it's a good thing. He's just emulating a bad
precedent, but since it *is* a precedent, it's a good thing to
emulate."

Your name isn't mentioned. You're making up ****, just like Harry.
--

John H

"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the
gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery."

Churchill- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I'm done. You are a lying sack of ****. I don't like liars. You were
talking about ME, and everyone here knows that. Have a nice life,
lying asshole.

I'm a lying asshole because I didn't say what you said I said? Where's
the quote, Loogy? It doesn't exist because I didn't say it.

If, in your mind, your inability to back up your statement makes me a
lying asshole, so be it. Now there's two big name-callers here - Harry
and Loogy.
--
John H

All decisions, even those of liberals, are the result of binary thinking.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

One more time, just to show everyone how ****ing dishonest you are,
you forgot this ending to the above blather:
I think this is the correct loogic

Now who in hell is that referring to? I'm sure, just like Harry you'll
figure out another lie to cover your previous lie, ad nausem, like a
cat trying to cover **** on concrete.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I think I am the one who coined "loogic", or at least made it main
stream. It is by defintion an ability to use tangent thinking to bring
a debate to an absured level of confusion... Either way, I am just
pullin' your chain;p)

bs. That one was mine, but you did say you liked it.

I just thought it was appropriate and showed that a significant level
of thought had gone in to the 'precedent' theories espoused by 'you
know who'.
--
John H

All decisions, even those of liberals, are the result of binary thinking.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

John, another lie? You're going off the deep end. Where did I
"espouse" anything? You are getting so that you lie more than Harry!

Loogy, go read your posts. Let us know how many times you've used the
word 'precedent' when 'Bama's behavior has been questioned.

Until then, you're acting like ...
--
John H

"The problem with Socialism is that you eventually run out of other people s money." --Margaret Thatcher- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Twice. Once to make a damned good point, and another to show that you
are an unhinged liar.

Bull****.
--
John H

"The problem with Socialism is that you eventually run out of other people s money."
*--Margaret Thatcher- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Prove me wrong, liar.

Prove you've not said it at least twenty-seven times. Otherwise you
must be a liar.

That's called 'loogic'.
--
John H

"The problem with Socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money."
--Margaret Thatcher

On Dec 31, 2:45*pm, John H wrote:
On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 10:58:23 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker





wrote:
On Dec 31, 1:56 pm, John H wrote:
On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 10:17:45 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker

wrote:
On Dec 31, 1:14 pm, John H wrote:
On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 07:28:43 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker

wrote:
On Dec 30, 3:54 pm, John H wrote:
On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 11:15:05 -0800 (PST), "JustWaitAFrekinMinute!"

wrote:
On Dec 30, 1:35 pm, Loogypicker wrote:
On Dec 30, 1:21 pm, John H wrote:

On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 08:20:40 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker

wrote:
On Dec 28, 5:54 pm, John H wrote:
On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 12:59:03 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker

wrote:
On Dec 28, 3:22 pm, John H wrote:
On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 10:19:46 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker

wrote:
On Dec 28, 1:09 pm, I am Tosk wrote:
In article a8e218c8-4ede-497f-937c-a4e158ccb983
@e27g2000yqd.googlegroups.com, says...

On Dec 27, 11:52 am, I am Tosk
wrote:
In article ,
says...

On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 10:48:18 -0500, wrote:

On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 06:49:48 -0500, Harry
wrote:

Jon Stewart pointed out that these climate savers managed to lease
every limo in western europe, some couriered in from as far away as
Germany so nobody had to share a ride.

Well, you can't have people who are interested in saving the planet have to
ride two to a limo or two to a jet, now can you. It's just not done.

I wonder how many heating oil tanks could have been filled for what was
spent on that extravaganza.

BTW, what's a caviar wedge? I understand they ate a lot of caviar. That
would have bought a lot of turkeys at the shelters.

I bet they had expensive cognac and real Cuban cigars, too.

Nothing too good for our tax dollars.

Steve

Does anyone recall "stevie" objecting when bush was spending like a
drunken sailor, and cutting taxes for the wealthy at the same time?

Hypocrisy, thy real name is republican/conservative. Nothing is piled
higher than republican/conservative b.s.

I was complaining about the Bush/Clinton/Bush war long before it
became Obama's war. Is that the spending you are talking about?

Just because it was bad then doesn't mean it's bad now. Obama is doing
it now, therefore it's a good thing. He's just emulating a bad
precedent, but since it *is* a precedent, it's a good thing to
emulate.

I think this is the correct loogic.

"Loogic", I like it...- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Try this. Ask the liar where I EVER said such. I know he won't
apologize for his out and out lie, Harry doesn't either.

Yeah, but Loogic works, it's a new word. It is when someone uses the
idea of proving a negative as proof soemthing exists in the first place.
It's like asking "did you beat your wife last night", or asking Harry
about his Lobsta' boat as a method of debate...- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Show me ONE PLACE where I've asked someone to prove a negative. If you
are talking about when Bill stated that something was NOT the cause of
global warming and I asked him to prove that, that's not a negative.
Bill stated that as FACT. And John DID lie about me.

So show me the quoted lie. Otherwise STFU.
--

John H

Here you go, are you going to apologize now? I'm guessing not, Harry
on the unhinged left side doesn't either. Notice, "according to
Loogy"? Where did I state that?

"Hey, they set a precedent. There's good ones and bad ones. According
to Loogy, they should all be emulated just 'cause they're precedents."

I said this:

"Just because it was bad then doesn't mean it's bad now. Obama is
doing it now, therefore it's a good thing. He's just emulating a bad
precedent, but since it *is* a precedent, it's a good thing to
emulate."

Your name isn't mentioned. You're making up ****, just like Harry.
--

John H

"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the
gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery."

Churchill- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I'm done. You are a lying sack of ****. I don't like liars.. You were
talking about ME, and everyone here knows that. Have a nice life,
lying asshole.

I'm a lying asshole because I didn't say what you said I said? Where's
the quote, Loogy? It doesn't exist because I didn't say it.

If, in your mind, your inability to back up your statement makes me a
lying asshole, so be it. Now there's two big name-callers here - Harry
and Loogy.
--
John H

All decisions, even those of liberals, are the result of binary thinking.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

One more time, just to show everyone how ****ing dishonest you are,
you forgot this ending to the above blather:
I think this is the correct loogic

Now who in hell is that referring to? I'm sure, just like Harry you'll
figure out another lie to cover your previous lie, ad nausem, like a
cat trying to cover **** on concrete.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I think I am the one who coined "loogic", or at least made it main
stream. It is by defintion an ability to use tangent thinking to bring
a debate to an absured level of confusion... Either way, I am just
pullin' your chain;p)

bs. That one was mine, but you did say you liked it.

I just thought it was appropriate and showed that a significant level
of thought had gone in to the 'precedent' theories espoused by 'you
know who'.
--
John H

All decisions, even those of liberals, are the result of binary thinking.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

John, another lie? You're going off the deep end. Where did I
"espouse" anything? You are getting so that you lie more than Harry!

Loogy, go read your posts. Let us know how many times you've used the
word 'precedent' when 'Bama's behavior has been questioned.

Until then, you're acting like ...
--
John H

"The problem with Socialism is that you eventually run out of other people s money." --Margaret Thatcher- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Twice. Once to make a damned good point, and another to show that you
are an unhinged liar.

Bull****.
--
John H

"The problem with Socialism is that you eventually run out of other people s money."
--Margaret Thatcher- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Prove me wrong, liar.

Prove you've not said it at least twenty-seven times. Otherwise you
must be a liar.

That's called 'loogic'.
--
John H

"The problem with Socialism is that you eventually run out of other people s money."
*--Margaret Thatcher- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

My you ARE stupid.......show me where I EVER asked someone to prove a
negative.....go ahead, asshole.

On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 13:17:44 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker
wrote:


Prove you've not said it at least twenty-seven times. Otherwise you
must be a liar.

That's called 'loogic'.
--
John H

"The problem with Socialism is that you eventually run out of other people s money."
*--Margaret Thatcher- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

My you ARE stupid.......show me where I EVER asked someone to prove a
negative.....go ahead, asshole.

Nope. First you have to show you didn't say 'precedent' at least
twenty-seven times.

And, I won't stoop to calling you any unjustified names.

--
John H

"The problem with Socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money."
--Margaret Thatcher

On Dec 31, 4:23*pm, John H wrote:
On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 13:17:44 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker





wrote:

Prove you've not said it at least twenty-seven times. Otherwise you
must be a liar.

That's called 'loogic'.
--
John H

"The problem with Socialism is that you eventually run out of other people s money."
*--Margaret Thatcher- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

My you ARE stupid.......show me where I EVER asked someone to prove a
negative.....go ahead, asshole.

Nope. First you have to show you didn't say 'precedent' at least
twenty-seven times.

And, I won't stoop to calling you any unjustified names.

--
John H

"The problem with Socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money."
*--Margaret Thatcher- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

As expected, liar.

On Dec 31 2009, 4:23*pm, John H wrote:
On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 13:17:44 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker





wrote:

Prove you've not said it at least twenty-seven times. Otherwise you
must be a liar.

That's called 'loogic'.
--
John H

"The problem with Socialism is that you eventually run out of other people s money."
*--Margaret Thatcher- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

My you ARE stupid.......show me where I EVER asked someone to prove a
negative.....go ahead, asshole.

Nope. First you have to show you didn't say 'precedent' at least
twenty-seven times.

And, I won't stoop to calling you any unjustified names.

--
John H

"The problem with Socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money."
*--Margaret Thatcher- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I've never called you any unjustified names. You are a liar.

Loogypicker wrote:
On Dec 31 2009, 4:23 pm, John H wrote:
On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 13:17:44 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker





wrote:

Prove you've not said it at least twenty-seven times. Otherwise you
must be a liar.
That's called 'loogic'.
--
John H
"The problem with Socialism is that you eventually run out of other people s money."
--Margaret Thatcher- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
My you ARE stupid.......show me where I EVER asked someone to prove a
negative.....go ahead, asshole.
Nope. First you have to show you didn't say 'precedent' at least
twenty-seven times.

And, I won't stoop to calling you any unjustified names.

--
John H

"The problem with Socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money."
--Margaret Thatcher- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I've never called you any unjustified names. You are a liar.


Wow... *even* loogy knows herring is a liar.

Loogypicker wrote:
-

- Show quoted text -

My you ARE stupid.......show me where I EVER asked someone to prove a
negative.....go ahead, asshole.


Toto jumped away from him in alarm and tipped over the screen that stood
in a corner. As it fell with a crash they looked that way, and the next
moment all of them were filled with wonder. For they saw, standing in
just the spot the screen had hidden, a little, old man, with a bald head
and a wrinkled face, who seemed to be as much surprised as they were.
The Tin Woodman, raising his axe, rushed toward the little man and cried
out,

"Who are you?"

"I am Harry, the Great and Terrible," said the little man, in a
trembling voice, "but don't strike me--please don't!--and I'll do
anything you want me to."

In article 07e4052c-add7-4a50-8660-
,
says...

On Dec 31, 2:45*pm, John H wrote:
On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 10:58:23 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker





wrote:
On Dec 31, 1:56 pm, John H wrote:
On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 10:17:45 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker

wrote:
On Dec 31, 1:14 pm, John H wrote:
On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 07:28:43 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker

wrote:
On Dec 30, 3:54 pm, John H wrote:
On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 11:15:05 -0800 (PST), "JustWaitAFrekinMinute!"

wrote:
On Dec 30, 1:35 pm, Loogypicker wrote:
On Dec 30, 1:21 pm, John H wrote:

On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 08:20:40 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker

wrote:
On Dec 28, 5:54 pm, John H wrote:
On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 12:59:03 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker

wrote:
On Dec 28, 3:22 pm, John H wrote:
On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 10:19:46 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker

wrote:
On Dec 28, 1:09 pm, I am Tosk wrote:
In article a8e218c8-4ede-497f-937c-a4e158ccb983
@e27g2000yqd.googlegroups.com, says...

On Dec 27, 11:52 am, I am Tosk
wrote:
In article ,
says...

On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 10:48:18 -0500, wrote:

On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 06:49:48 -0500, Harry
wrote:

Jon Stewart pointed out that these climate savers managed to lease
every limo in western europe, some couriered in from as far away as
Germany so nobody had to share a ride.

Well, you can't have people who are interested in saving the planet have to
ride two to a limo or two to a jet, now can you. It's just not done.

I wonder how many heating oil tanks could have been filled for what was
spent on that extravaganza.

BTW, what's a caviar wedge? I understand they ate a lot of caviar. That
would have bought a lot of turkeys at the shelters.

I bet they had expensive cognac and real Cuban cigars, too.

Nothing too good for our tax dollars.

Steve

Does anyone recall "stevie" objecting when bush was spending like a
drunken sailor, and cutting taxes for the wealthy at the same time?

Hypocrisy, thy real name is republican/conservative. Nothing is piled
higher than republican/conservative b.s.

I was complaining about the Bush/Clinton/Bush war long before it
became Obama's war. Is that the spending you are talking about?

Just because it was bad then doesn't mean it's bad now. Obama is doing
it now, therefore it's a good thing. He's just emulating a bad
precedent, but since it *is* a precedent, it's a good thing to
emulate.

I think this is the correct loogic.

"Loogic", I like it...- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Try this. Ask the liar where I EVER said such. I know he won't
apologize for his out and out lie, Harry doesn't either.

Yeah, but Loogic works, it's a new word. It is when someone uses the
idea of proving a negative as proof soemthing exists in the first place.
It's like asking "did you beat your wife last night", or asking Harry
about his Lobsta' boat as a method of debate...- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Show me ONE PLACE where I've asked someone to prove a negative. If you
are talking about when Bill stated that something was NOT the cause of
global warming and I asked him to prove that, that's not a negative.
Bill stated that as FACT. And John DID lie about me.

So show me the quoted lie. Otherwise STFU.
--

John H

Here you go, are you going to apologize now? I'm guessing not, Harry
on the unhinged left side doesn't either. Notice, "according to
Loogy"? Where did I state that?

"Hey, they set a precedent. There's good ones and bad ones. According
to Loogy, they should all be emulated just 'cause they're precedents."

I said this:

"Just because it was bad then doesn't mean it's bad now. Obama is
doing it now, therefore it's a good thing. He's just emulating a bad
precedent, but since it *is* a precedent, it's a good thing to
emulate."

Your name isn't mentioned. You're making up ****, just like Harry.
--

John H

"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the
gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery."

Churchill- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I'm done. You are a lying sack of ****. I don't like liars. You were
talking about ME, and everyone here knows that. Have a nice life,
lying asshole.

I'm a lying asshole because I didn't say what you said I said? Where's
the quote, Loogy? It doesn't exist because I didn't say it.

If, in your mind, your inability to back up your statement makes me a
lying asshole, so be it. Now there's two big name-callers here - Harry
and Loogy.
--
John H

All decisions, even those of liberals, are the result of binary thinking.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

One more time, just to show everyone how ****ing dishonest you are,
you forgot this ending to the above blather:
I think this is the correct loogic

Now who in hell is that referring to? I'm sure, just like Harry you'll
figure out another lie to cover your previous lie, ad nausem, like a
cat trying to cover **** on concrete.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I think I am the one who coined "loogic", or at least made it main
stream. It is by defintion an ability to use tangent thinking to bring
a debate to an absured level of confusion... Either way, I am just
pullin' your chain;p)

bs. That one was mine, but you did say you liked it.

I just thought it was appropriate and showed that a significant level
of thought had gone in to the 'precedent' theories espoused by 'you
know who'.
--
John H

All decisions, even those of liberals, are the result of binary thinking.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

John, another lie? You're going off the deep end. Where did I
"espouse" anything? You are getting so that you lie more than Harry!

Loogy, go read your posts. Let us know how many times you've used the
word 'precedent' when 'Bama's behavior has been questioned.

Until then, you're acting like ...
--
John H

"The problem with Socialism is that you eventually run out of other people s money." --Margaret Thatcher- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Twice. Once to make a damned good point, and another to show that you
are an unhinged liar.

Bull****.
--
John H

"The problem with Socialism is that you eventually run out of other people s money."
--Margaret Thatcher- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Prove me wrong, liar.

Prove you've not said it at least twenty-seven times. Otherwise you
must be a liar.

That's called 'loogic'.
--
John H

"The problem with Socialism is that you eventually run out of other people s money."
*--Margaret Thatcher- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

My you ARE stupid.......show me where I EVER asked someone to prove a
negative.....go ahead, asshole.

Is this conversation still going on?? snerk it's funny...