Not very good are you.
Thanks for revealing yourself as a f*****tic creep. Now that you have r****m, I suggest you move on to your religious bigotry. Maybe after that we can do some of your misogyny, and, for a finale, anti-Semitism.
missinglink wrote:
I said rarely not never asshole. That alone is a giant red f**g. You have no Idea of
what you are reading. To busy making everything up to fit your mush brained narrative .
So now your a stolen I D expert ass well !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
F'n loser TROLL.
. WRONG. I am able to think rationally. I know that's very far afield for you. Pointing out a vanishing small error in syntax is an infallibly accurate indicator of a desperately barren argument.
I'll go tell your mom to offer cash instead of sex. How many guys want sex with a sixty pound crack addict? Especially one hideously deformed.
theotts wrote:
You screwed up. You said there're never any concrete facts in my posts, proving exhaustively that you're sub-literate.
As to any point not on the top of your head, bzzzt, failure. An SSN won't get you ID
to v**e. A stolen identity is, at best, a hit & miss affair, as you need a body that fits the ID. Sending Juan Valdez in with Alice B Toklas' ID has, shall we say, a low probability of success. If it were done on any large scale Toklas II would have encountered someone who knows Toklas I long ago, putting a sizable hole in the whole project.
I suspect you're just, only just, bright enough to see how wildly improbable it is that what you suggest could succeed undetected for very long.
There's an old joke among journalists; One retired editor tells another he had a terrible career, working for the Post and the Times. The other says it sounds very successful to him. The first says 'not really, it was the New York Post and the Washington Times.' The WT is owned by 'the reverend' Sun Yun Moon. Had you ever been in an airport, you'd know who the Moonies were. Suffice to say they were only slightly preferable to pestilence and famine. An article appears only in the WT for a reason. They are the only ones dishonest enough, or credulous enough, to publish it.
Apart from "thinking" your ideas had some traction, how stupid are you? On a scale from one to ten, with ten being Bushlike, I'd say about
12.
Squeeze a dead mole over your head.
You screwed up. You said there're never any concr... (
show quote)
Incidently, your mother is trying again to have you k**led.
missinglink wrote:
I have been reading your opinions for some days now.
Massive amounts of conspirator's ! Really ?
How does stolen SSI numbers and f**e I.D. strike ya big brain ?
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/aug/30/irs-doesnt-tell-1-million-taxpayers-that-illegal-i/
This is just one avenue of many and this is just a small sampling s**t for brains.
DUMBASS propaganda spewing tweezle dick progressive elitist wanna-be maggot attack troll.
You rarely point to concrete facts in your pathetic rants . Just other ranters .
Typical . Propaganda 101 starter course bulls**t.
Lets see
Did I forget anything .
Oh yeah. Stay in your blue zone safe place moron.
I have been reading your opinions for some days no... (
show quote)
You screwed up. You said there're never any concrete facts in my posts, proving exhaustively that you're sub-literate.
As to any point not on the top of your head, bzzzt, failure. An SSN won't get you ID
to v**e. A stolen identity is, at best, a hit & miss affair, as you need a body that fits the ID. Sending Juan Valdez in with Alice B Toklas' ID has, shall we say, a low probability of success. If it were done on any large scale Toklas II would have encountered someone who knows Toklas I long ago, putting a sizable hole in the whole project.
I suspect you're just, only just, bright enough to see how wildly improbable it is that what you suggest could succeed undetected for very long.
There's an old joke among journalists; One retired editor tells another he had a terrible career, working for the Post and the Times. The other says it sounds very successful to him. The first says 'not really, it was the New York Post and the Washington Times.' The WT is owned by 'the reverend' Sun Yun Moon. Had you ever been in an airport, you'd know who the Moonies were. Suffice to say they were only slightly preferable to pestilence and famine. An article appears only in the WT for a reason. They are the only ones dishonest enough, or credulous enough, to publish it.
Apart from "thinking" your ideas had some traction, how stupid are you? On a scale from one to ten, with ten being Bushlike, I'd say about
12.
Squeeze a dead mole over your head.
Lindajoy.
Here's the flaw in your jeremiad; you completely misunderstood my op. Spookily, I predicted exactly that at the beginning of my post.
My post was about media bias, not ad-buying. Apparently mommy read it too fast.
grandmold wrote:
Perhaps they are afraid that the investigation will show one format of fraud didn't happen at the expense of exposing some other issue that may have amounted in their minds to the same thing? ie: all the district gerrymandering that locked so many out of having a voice at all levels of government? Or, all the different types of v***r r**********n requirements that claim to prevent v***r f***d never shown to exist, that themselves impede and prevent v***r r**********n? If these issues aren't part of any investigation that takes place, is the investigation meaningful and worth the taxpayer's money it will cost?
Perhaps they are afraid that the investigation wil... (
show quote)
I find it incredible that the v***r f***d excuse still works for essentially r*****g e******ns. Now this outrage against sense and liberty. Remember, the first time the Orange Menace brought this up, he said Clinton brought in 3 million Mexicans ad hoc! In the state in which I live, massive v***r f***d would require the active complicity of hundreds of conspirators. That wouldn't even work as a premise in one of those dreadful, moronic Bruce Willis mellers.
"Nobody ever lost money underestimating the intelligence of the American public"
H L Mencken
Smokie wrote:
There is NO QUESTION that we need v**er ID.
The sooner the better!
We have it, and the frauds are still claiming fraud. There is nary a scintilla of evidence that fraud is occurring in larger numbers than 6 or 7 per million v**es. The two that were uncovered in my state were both Republicans. Screeching like a Harpie will not alter reality; ALL of the claims of v***r f***d are a cover for repressing the v**e.
lindajoy wrote:
Amen AO....Trump is canning the other Lobbyist on the hill, and he's going to do the same with media... His gag order to all Federal divisions is a start..
They will really be left making up news by the time he finishes.. That or they will start doing as asked, just fair reporting...
Shows the low level scum we have spewing their lies and I'm not about to support any of them...
Media outlets are coming up to the 2wst Century and leaving these l*****t owned garbage reporters by the way side!!
Revolunized by their own doing... I love it!!
Amen AO....Trump is canning the other Lobbyist on ... (
show quote)
You are clearly intellectually and emotionally incapable of understanding how anything works, but I'll give you the dope. All but a tiny minority of the media are for profit businesses. Their profits come primarily from advertising revenue. Most of the businesses that advertise are Republicans. Advertisers have, for a very long time, stopped buying ads if the paper became "too liberal." Similarly with media owners, such as Time Warner. They own CNN, and they are known to have contributed heavily to Republican campaign coffers. The owners control their vompany
Obama, by nearly double, as demonstrated by photo and by numbers of rides on t***sit. Before you say it, you should be aware that the photo Trump has is dated January 21st, 2017, the Saturday on which the women's march was held.
son of witless wrote:
I wonder if any liberal can measure the benefits that Obama delivered as far as saving the ice caps? We can measure the cost of his stupidity in lost jobs and lost economic growth. As far as I can tell the liberals are still saying the North Pole is melting. They still say the polar bears are starving. How many cubic feet of sea ice did Obama save? How many cuddly polar bears did he save?
What lost jobs are those, boy? Unemployment is currently lower than at any time during the Bush Administration. The Dow is at 20,000. So, that falacious argument has become the big lie.
As to g****l w*****g, it is advancing. Miami is losing ocean-front. No-one said it would be underwater at any particular time. No-one said polar bears are starving. They're drowning because there is more open water than they can navigate. Each of the last four years have successively been the warmest on record. The distribution of flora and fauna is shifting markedly. And the people with actual science degrees agree.
Oh... and your president is unhinged, a fully fledged narcissist and a feckless i***t. Apparently, you like him because he's sympatico. Sad.
America Only wrote:
If fits you like a glove, moron. Wear it.
Do the Voices bother you more and more? Are they telling you your cat is a crazed religious fanatic, determined to k**l, k**l, k**l?
Don't worry. Trump knows exactly how that feels. Maybe he'll help.
teabag09 wrote:
To theotts, What in the heck are you talking about? I was responding to a t***sparency question. What omnibus bill? Last I checked the Dems. were in power for that and they HAD the majority, thank GOD, no longer. If I'm wrong, bad on me.
For one thing, I'm not a Republiot, I'm a CONSERVATIVE! I'm not partial to Rebubs. nor Dems. I think they are all out for themselves and not the people or country. I don't know where you stand for the health of our country as I haven't heard that much from you. What I have heard says we are on difference sides and that makes no difference to me. We can still converse and try to be civil. At times because we can without consequence we can be uncivil. Til then, have a great night. Mike
To theotts, What in the heck are you talking about... (
show quote)
I quoted a post by teabag in my reply, and he is not civil. In fact, he doesn't know what the word means. There is no reticence in the statement about the ACA, because very few legislators are familiar with the bills they v**e on. Budget bills are always omnibus bills, as the budget can't be meaningfully discussed in its component parts. Teabag got within a country mile of a point though. The USA PATRIOT act was incomprehensible, because ALL of it exists in reference to other cumbersome statutes, and is so densely cross referenced as to daunt a Jesuit.
America Only wrote:
Light years are a measurement of time and distance dumb nutz....that's three strikes...you're OUT!
One light year is a measure of time, you say? Or six and eighteen nineteenths light years. The time is stated, as, were you semi-literate, you can see. Years are units of time, as arbitrary as any other unit of measurement, such as one sidereal week. Since that scale is arbitrary, it can be applied in only the circumstances of its provenance. A year on Mars is not the same as a year on Saturn, Venus, Pluto, Mercury or earth. Therefor, that is not what is to measure. Its a local unit of measure. A light year is the DISTANCE light travels in one year, roughly six trillion miles. The speed of light is the "c" in E=mc2.
I'll bet your teachers threw a party when they got rid of you.
If you still "think" you're correct, ask a physicist. Don't bother me with your vapid maundering. You do believe in Physics, don't you, even though 99.9% of them affirm the science in g****l w*****g?
teabag09 wrote:
"We must pass the bill to know what is in it"! If that's not secretive what the heck is??? Not one Republican v**ed for it because NO ONE HAD TIME TO READ IT. Just go away. Mike
What bill? The only bill that fits is the ACA. It isn't as long as the most recent budget omnibus bill, even without all the adventitious amendments advanced by righties to confuse and obfuscate. They v**ed on that, didn't they?
Note the collective pronoun "we." How do you conclude that we doesn't include the speaker?
Is it the same hoodoo as ignoring the first half of the Second Article of the Constitution and calling it original intent?
I'm not going anywhere until you admit to being a willfully ignorant, fully programmed Republibot.