Nov 22, 2010 || World News

Monday, November 22, 2010

It's Not Too Late To Get Your Inflatable Turkey

Order Online 24 Hours a Day OR Call 1-800-901-1163
Since 2001, Prankplace.com has offered 1000's of the funniest Gag Gifts and
Products, Funny T-Shirts and Practical Jokes, In-Stock with Same Day Shipping.
prankplace.com 1212 W Fourth Plain Blvd, Vancouver, WA 98660

Click here to view this email as a web page.
Copyright © 2010 prankplace.com All rights reserved.

Email Marketing by

Manage your subscription

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: {Tea Party Patriots} Obama Using Executive Orders To Implement Radical Agenda

TSA stands for Taxpaying Serf Attitude Adjustment. Though that phrase is mine and I have been saying the purpose is to instill a culture of regimentation, since the screening, among other things, does not either image or probe internal body cavities where explosives could be hidden, and is hence either incompetent, or just for show, or to regiment us. Evidence of the latter is that the screening did not begin last year after the Underwear Bomber. It started, as Rush points out today, this year after the Tea Party electoral revolt.

On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 1:23 PM, Brian

From: Dick Morris Reports <subscribers@dickmorris.com>
Subject: Obama Using Executive Orders To Implement Radical Agenda

OBAMA USING EXECUTIVE ORDERS TO IMPLEMENT RADICAL AGENDA

By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN

Published on DickMorris.com on November 22, 2010

Printer-Friendly Version

Does President Obama plan to move to the center in response to his overwhelming rejection at the polls on November 2nd? No way! Instead, he is moving to implement, through executive action, two of the most controversial items in his 2010 agenda -- a carbon tax and pollution permit system and a ban on the use of secret ballots in union elections. Through executive action by the Environmental Protection Administration (EPA) and the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), the Obama Administration is planning to effectuate both policies without asking Congress.

Never mind that he couldn't persuade even a top heavy Democratic Congress to pass either program. Or that public opinion polls show massive rejection of both measures. Or that each is a sure job killer by itself -- and together, they are even worse. This arrogant, ideologically-driven radical is determined to have his way and the public be damned!

The EPA is currently soliciting public comments for its plan to use the Clean Air Act of 1970 to regulate carbon dioxide emissions. The Clean Air Act, as the name indicates, is designed to fight against pollution -- unhealthy chemicals that are belched into the air by smokestacks. It was passed to fight sulfur dioxide, particulates, nitrous oxides and other chemicals that cause human diseases. To use it to fight carbon dioxide -- which we all breathe without ill effects -- because of concerns about global warming -- is a perversion of the law.

Worse, because the Clean Air Act is designed to protect public health by measuring aggregate pollution in each geographic area, it limits economic development in communities where the pollution levels exceed prescribed standards. But carbon dioxide doesn't poison anyone. It makes no sense to ban factory expansion in areas where the nature of the industries is that there will be high carbon dioxide levels (like oil area of Texas and Louisiana). But that's what the EPA plans to do, virtually making economic growth illegal in large parts of the United States.

Meanwhile, Craig Becker, the former chief counsel of the SEIU (Service Employees International Union) -- now the head of the NLRB -- has secured a 3-2 majority party line majority to repeal the Dana decision which mandates secret ballots in unionization elections. The NLRB will rule that if a majority of workers check off that they want a union on cards then the union will automatically be approved without a secret ballot vote of the entire workforce. Currently, if a majority of the workers sign the cards, a secret ballot vote is then triggered. Frequently, the union loses these elections, proving that the card check off is subject to coercion and bullying. The Democratic majority in the Senate wouldn't approve the card check change so the NLRB is planning to accomplish the same objective administratively, trapping workers into unionization they would reject if afforded the opportunity to vote by secret ballot.

Both the pollution permit/carbon tax and the forced unionization proposals will be job killers. The U.S. has maintained its 25% share of global manufacturing by replacing workers with energy driven machines. In the past ten years, the number of manufacturing employees has declined by 33% but our production has risen by 50%. But automation takes energy -- lots of it -- by taxing energy, we are eliminating the strategy that has preserved our jobs. And massive unionization of the private sector will also drive out our jobs. Since 1990, unionized manufacturing jobs have declined by 75%. But non-union manufacturing jobs have actually risen over the same period by 15%.

After he lost Congress in 1992, Bill Clinton, too, resorted to executive orders to maintain his momentum as president. With Congress unwilling to pass anything he proposed, the president canvassed the Administration for ideas that could be implemented by executive orders. A very productive period followed during which tobacco regulation, higher educational standards, affirmative action reform, and other key measures were implemented without asking Congress' permission. But Clinton's executive orders were on subjects on which Congress had not voted. They did not contradict the express will of the body. Obama is using the strategy to act in direct defiance of Congressional action. He is passing ideas Congress refused to pass, even when he had huge majorities.

Obama will live to regret these moves. Republicans in the House will defund these actions and insert legislative language making it a crime to spend appropriated funds to implement them. By this strategy, all of the controversial Obama legislation will be at issue during the budget fight -- taxes, Obamacare, cap and trade, and card check. The more these issues are inserted into the budget fight, the greater the chances of Republican victory.

So President Obama has not learned the lessons of 2010 and likely never will.

Sarah Palin's New Book Makes Waves, Get Free Offer

Doctor Shows How to Accurately Test Your Thyroid at Home

Economists Predict Financial Meltdown Directly Ahead

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

GO TO DICKMORRIS.COM! TO READ ALL OF DICK'S COLUMNS!

PLEASE FORWARD THIS EMAIL TO FRIENDS & FAMILY AND INVITE THEM TO RECEIVE OUR FREE COLUMNS BY SUBSCRIBING HERE. THANKS!

THANK YOU!

***COPYRIGHT EILEEN MCGANN AND DICK MORRIS 2010. REPRINTS WITH PERMISSION ONLY***

You are currently subscribed to dickmorris-reports as: brianprince100@yahoo.com
Add subscribers@dickmorris.com to your email address book to ensure delivery.
Forward to a Friend | Manage Subscription | Subscribe | Unsubscribe

__._,_.___

Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post | Start a New Topic
Messages in this topic (1)

Recent Activity:

New Members 1

New Links 5

Visit Your Group

MARKETPLACE

Find useful articles and helpful tips on living with Fibromyalgia. Visit the Fibromyalgia Zone today!

Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now.

Hobbies & Activities Zone: Find others who share your passions! Explore new interests.

Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use

.

__,_._,___

--
This group is created for discussing national issues to stop the current administration from transforming this country into something not intended by the founders. Any discussions that are not relevant to that topic will be deleted.

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Tea Party Patriots" group.
To post to this group, send email to tea-party-patriots@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
tea-party-patriots+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/tea-party-patriots?hl=en?hl=en

For more information on Tea Party Patriots, please visit http://www.teapartypatriots.org.

Re: Nominal9 Censorship Hall of Shame

Nominal,

I'm tired of this.

Although I am not in favor of closing this thread, or any thread; like Mark, I don't see the point here, and I support him in his decision.

With regard to Perp, she is a big girl, (And I don't mean in the literal sense); and can handle herself. I only point out that once again, you have misjudged her, and are once again way off base.

We are not censoring anyone, we just don't allow for the kind of behavior that Merc brings to this forum, and as she is known to do and does in each and every forum that she has made her presence known.

We have but one rule here, "Govern yourself with dignity, and be respectful of each and every member".

http://groups.google.com/group/politicalforum/web/political-forum-decorum

Merc is in violation of that rule, period.

Further, according to our guidelines:

"When Discussing Pornography: and asked to describe what constitutes "pornography", Justice Potter Stewart replied, "I Know It When I See It". The same guideline applies here in Political Forum; your moderators "know it' when a message, thread or specific converstation is improper or is getting out of hand. Unlike algebra, calculus, accounting, or any other science, moderation on a board like Political Forum sometimes requires making subjective calls. Your Moderators are without a doubt, the most kindly, astute, brilliant, good looking people that you have ever met, and they will always attempt to be fair! Nevertheless, any content or media posted by members of Political Forum which is deemed inappropriate, unbefitting, vexatious, harrassing, incendiary or in any way discordant or unsuitable to the Group is subject to removal, without notice. Any member of Political Forum who is deemed to be unbefitting to the Group Political Forum, is subject to removal from the Group, without notice."

http://groups.google.com/group/politicalforum/web/political-forum-decorum

=====

So Nominal, there you have it. If I choose to remove a moderated individual's posts, because I feel that it is incendiary, harassing and just flat out unbecoming, especially to any other member, believe me, "I/We" have done so, and "I/We" will continue to do so. There is such a thing as good manners and good taste, and Merc lacks those qualities.

I'm done with this.

KeithInTampa

Re: Nominal9 Censorship Hall of Shame

could care less, I have no right to tell you what to do, just what
you
CAN'T do here. And that is a very short list with maligning (of ANY
nature)
kids topping the list followed by overt threats against anyone. Merc
did
BOTH. / Mark

I still say that you are being "egged on" and railroaded in your
opinions by others who are not necessarily "honest brokers", Mark. I
have done enough to at least raise the possibility that you acted
perhaps rashly and in error... I hope you take the cue....
nominal9

On Nov 21, 3:07 pm, Mark <markmka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> ""I believe Merc explained that she mistook Cold Water to be another
> poster (using a fictitious screen name) with whm Merc has a history on
> the topic of Children and abusive names being applied to some of
> them....""
>
> And that is my or Cold Waters problem because ....??
>
> Merc particularly takes umbrage at people who use the term
> "retard" to refer to some children....
>
> Some kids... doing away with Political Correctness and all the shit it
> entails... are Retarded Mentally (as are some adults). Is this not true ??
>
> .The "folks" on that other (ABC) Political
> Forum Board apparently gave Merc quite an abusive and tough time with
> the "retard" bit... ( I wasn't there but so I've heard). Personally, I
> don't get that insulted about the term "retard" if it is used in a
> non- abusive manner and I would not condone censoring it in any case,
> even if it were....
>
> I am not responsible for what happens on other boards. I am not "censoring"
> Merc. I am simply not allowing her to verbally abuse children on THIS forum.
>
> But, I think that Merc made a genuine mistake in "wrongly identifying
> Cold Water" she acknowledged it and made her apology, on board.... as
> a practical matter, I say that, at this point you do not have a leg to
> stand on and that you are apparently maliciously banning Merc egged on
> by those same actual (ABC Political Scrotum Boards) child abusers who
> are the actual culprits....
>
> I do not read any non-Google forums.. The people on those other boards did
> not come on this Forum and Malign or threaten kids. The posts I pulled and
> the reason Merc was banned came after her "apology" and after an off-board
> warning was sent.
>
> Anyway, that is the situation....That " is what it is".... you don't
> seem able either to recognize it or to amend your own error....
>
> I made no "ERROR"... Kids are off-limits, Merc was informed of this and
> continued with a threat against another members child... There is NO EXCUSE
> for her behavior unless she would like to claim "Diminished Capacity". If
> she did that then any promise she may make to clean up her act in this
> regard would be tainted at best.
>
> and
> Nominal9's Censorship Hall of Shame is looming nearer by the
> moment.....
>
> I could care less, I have no right to tell you what to do, just what you
> CAN'T do here. And that is a very short list with maligning (of ANY nature)
> kids topping the list followed by overt threats against anyone. Merc did
> BOTH.
>
>
>
> On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 1:37 PM, nominal9 <nomin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > I believe Merc explained that she mistook Cold Water to be another
> > poster (using a fictitious screen name) with whm Merc has a history on
> > the topic of Children and abusive names being applied to some of
> > them.... Merc particularly takes umbrage at people who use the term
> > "retard" to refer to some children.....I am telling you this as a
> > point of information....The "folks" on that other (ABC) Political
> > Forum Board apparently gave Merc quite an abusive and tough time with
> > the "retard" bit... ( I wasn't there but so I've heard). Personally, I
> > don't get that insulted about the term "retard" if it is used in a
> > non- abusive manner and I would not condone censoring it in any case,
> > even if it were....
> > But, I think that Merc made a genuine mistake in "wrongly identifying
> > Cold Water" she acknowledged it and made her apology, on board.... as
> > a practical matter, I say that, at this point you do not have a leg to
> > stand on and that you are apparently maliciously banning Merc egged on
> > by those same actual (ABC Political Scrotum Boards) child abusers who
> > are the actual culprits....
> > Anyway, that is the situation....That " is what it is".... you don't
> > seem able either to recognize it or to amend your own error.... and
> > Nominal9's Censorship Hall of Shame is looming nearer by the
> > moment.....
>
> > On Nov 21, 2:18 pm, Mark <markmka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Nominal9,
>
> > > The only person to bring Mercs kid into the conversation was Merc, the
> > only
> > > person to levy a threat against another persons child was Merc, the only
> > > person to victimize Merc was Merc herself.
>
> > > This is a political forum.... just what do you think her kids "condition"
> > > has to do with politics unless she had been using her experiences to talk
> > > about or relate personally under the health care laws which she did not
> > do.
>
> > > She was using that child as a crutch to garner some level of sympathy...
> > > (between shit and syphilis in dictionary).
>
> > > Again, I do not care who did it !!!!!! No one is "special". To bring any
> > > child into this forum in any negative light is ABSOLUTELY NOT GOING TO
> > > HAPPEN.
>
> > > On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 12:41 PM, nominal9 <nomin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > Mark M. Kahle H. , you evaded the point... you are further victimizing
> > > > Merc, a person who has been subjected to the conduct that you yourself
> > > > seem to condemn....
> > > > "Kids, mentioned in a negative manner or any misguided wish that
> > > > someones
> > > > elses kid were also ill is wrong."
> > > > Answer the direct question and please don't double-talk....Stop
> > > > grandstanding, or behaving like a sententious, dictatorial NAZI ...
> > > > The Hell Pits of Nominal9's Censorship Hall of Shame are looming
> > > > near....
> > > > Nominal9
>
> > > > PS... Listen to Ewe who goes BAAAAHHHH... and you are more than Half-
> > > > Way there.... you too, can join the likes of the Cecotrophic Rabbit,
> > > > the Pusillanimous Pellet... or Cosmo Cornuto Magcrest, and their
> > > > Board... Euwe-topia... since renamed... Cornuto-pia.
>
> > > > Hypocrites.... one and all....
>
> > > > On Nov 19, 12:40 pm, Mark <markmka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > We have decided and it is rather simple:
>
> > > > > Kids, mentioned in a negative manner or any misguided wish that
> > someones
> > > > > elses kid were also ill is wrong.
>
> > > > > KIDS ARE OFF LIMITS, NO SECOND CHANCES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> > > > > Nominal9 if you can't live with that, I am sorry.
>
> > > > > On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 11:22 AM, nominal9 <nomin...@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > > > > I was discomforted when Merc brought her child into a string. To
> > > > > > bring
> > > > > > in a child is distasteful at best. She then went on to wish the
> > same
> > > > > > upon another posters child and in rather raunchy terms.... This I
> > > > > > will
> > > > > > not abide from anyone about any child. The words she used about
> > > > > > children (regardless of whose) is (thank God) a felony in my
> > country.
> > > > > > To have allowed them to post would have made me complicit.
>
> > > > > > One last Time............ KIDS ARE OFF LIMITS IN THIS FORUM.
>
> > > > > > There are NO second chances. /Annointed One
>
> > > > > > I've only known Merc on the boards for about one year....
> > > > > > Point is, her child is the one who is (however it is prioperly
> > > > > > put).... disabled... not anyone else's child. I truly believe that
> > > > > > Merc has and conntinues to lash out at others (incluing their
> > > > > > children) because those others have lashed out at her own child (of
> > > > > > course, Merc sometimes gets confused in her emotional outbursts and
> > > > > > happens to target innocent bystanders, but she "usually" corrects
> > > > > > herself when she is made aware of the error) .... Merc is the
> > victim,
> > > > > > and anyone seeking to make her the "perpetrator" is just very
> > ignorant
> > > > > > or is trying to pull some sort of "reverse-discrimination"
> > > > > > scam....You. Annointed One speak of yourself as being a liberal-
> > > > > > progressive sort of person and here you champiion the interestes of
> > > > > > "children'... If that is true, I definitely think that you missed
> > the
> > > > > > boat in using that "angle" to censure Merc....As I understand it,
> > Merc
> > > > > > is also trained to somne extent in medicine, I believe that she is
> > a
> > > > > > registered nurse of some kind... So, in terms of medical knowledge
> > or
> > > > > > even psychological stability.... I think she has a leg up on most
> > > > > > others here abouts....
> > > > > > There's reality and then there's what "posters" spew out to make
> > > > > > points in arguments [on [political bioards and such.].. Merc is
> > living
> > > > > > a reality, when it comes to at least this one issue.....Cheap shots
> > > > > > just do not carry the same eight... or they shouldn't... among
> > "half-
> > > > > > way serious folks" who try to deal in mutually respectful
> > > > > > relationships.... of course... if people just want to sling the
> > crap
> > > > > > around... tha'ts alright, too, as long as it's understood for the
> > crap
> > > > > > that it is and given it's due "weight".....The crap that has been
> > > > > > slung against Merc... IMO.... is not worth censorship or
> > > > > > "banning".....
> > > > > > Let me know awhat "y'all" decide....
>
> > > > > > On Nov 18, 9:21 pm, THE ANNOINTED ONE <markmka...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > > > > Nominal9,
>
> > > > > > > I was discomforted when Merc brought her child into a string. To
> > > > bring
> > > > > > > in a child is distasteful at best. She then went on to wish the
> > same
> > > > > > > upon another posters child and in rather raunchy terms.... This I
> > > > will
> > > > > > > not abide from anyone about any child. The words she used about
> > > > > > > children (regardless of whose) is (thank God) a felony in my
> > country.
> > > > > > > To have allowed them to post would have made me complicit.
>
> > > > > > > One last Time............ KIDS ARE OFF LIMITS IN THIS FORUM.
>
> > > > > > > There are NO second chances.
>
> > > > > > > On Nov 18, 4:26 pm, nominal9 <nomin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > Annointed One, Keith from Tampa...
> > > > > > > > Mark M. Kahle H.
> > > > > > > > Kindly reconsider.... I don't like censors.... lowest of the
> > low,
> > > > in
> > > > > > > > my book.... usually the jaclass stupidest of the jackass
> > stupid,
> > > > as
> > > > > > > > well..... have to be, to think censorship is any sort of
> > > > answer....
> > > > > > > > Always room in the Hell
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Nominal9 Censorship Hall of Shame

Nominal,

You don't have a clue as to what you are talking about.

I saw the posts that Merc submitted here recently, which were never
posted
to the board. Thankfully, Mark didn't post them, (as I was working
and
wasn't managing the board on the day in question) The comments that
you are
referencing toward Cold Water were mild, as to what didn't get
posted. / Keith from Tampa

Now... you see, Keith.... that's "one" of the major problems with
"censorship"... you are asking
"ME"... to take the word of and the opinion or judgment of Mark
(nothing personal, or anyone else) in forming not unly an opinion as
to Merc but also in condioning a "punishment" administered against her
(in "free" Courts, they have the "practice" of requiring "evidence"
questioning it with "opposing experts" and allowing for the "cross-
examination of evidence and witnesses) .... Frankly, I like to know
all the "facts" in any situation and make up my own mind... be it in
"politics" or in other important (or unimportant ) aspects of life and
living.....
nominal9

On Nov 21, 2:44 pm, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Nominal,
>
> You don't have a clue as to what you are talking about.
>
> I saw the posts that Merc submitted here recently, which were never posted
> to the board. Thankfully, Mark didn't post them, (as I was working and
> wasn't managing the board on the day in question) The comments that you are
> referencing toward Cold Water were mild, as to what didn't get posted.
>
> I too was an active participant of Euwetopia back in the day, (and I am
> still a member over there, I just don't get over there as often anymore).
> What you are referencing is only a small fraction of what took place over
> there. I am not defending all of the Euwetopians, they are like a wolf
> pack when taunted, and they were unmerciful toward Merc, (as well as others
> that cross them)
>
> Merc was far from innocent, and the "retard" comment, frankly, I don't even
> remember that. If that took place, it was only a small fraction of what
> Merc dished out to not only the Euwetopians, but to anyone and everyone.
>
> Again, you just don't know. Merc has you snowed.
>
> Keith
>
>
>
> On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 2:37 PM, nominal9 <nomin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > I believe Merc explained that she mistook Cold Water to be another
> > poster (using a fictitious screen name) with whm Merc has a history on
> > the topic of Children and abusive names being applied to some of
> > them.... Merc particularly takes umbrage at people who use the term
> > "retard" to refer to some children.....I am telling you this as a
> > point of information....The "folks" on that other (ABC) Political
> > Forum Board apparently gave Merc quite an abusive and tough time with
> > the "retard" bit... ( I wasn't there but so I've heard). Personally, I
> > don't get that insulted about the term "retard" if it is used in a
> > non- abusive manner and I would not condone censoring it in any case,
> > even if it were....
> > But, I think that Merc made a genuine mistake in "wrongly identifying
> > Cold Water" she acknowledged it and made her apology, on board.... as
> > a practical matter, I say that, at this point you do not have a leg to
> > stand on and that you are apparently maliciously banning Merc egged on
> > by those same actual (ABC Political Scrotum Boards) child abusers who
> > are the actual culprits....
> > Anyway, that is the situation....That " is what it is".... you don't
> > seem able either to recognize it or to amend your own error.... and
> > Nominal9's Censorship Hall of Shame is looming nearer by the
> > moment.....
>
> > On Nov 21, 2:18 pm, Mark <markmka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Nominal9,
>
> > > The only person to bring Mercs kid into the conversation was Merc, the
> > only
> > > person to levy a threat against another persons child was Merc, the only
> > > person to victimize Merc was Merc herself.
>
> > > This is a political forum.... just what do you think her kids "condition"
> > > has to do with politics unless she had been using her experiences to talk
> > > about or relate personally under the health care laws which she did not
> > do.
>
> > > She was using that child as a crutch to garner some level of sympathy...
> > > (between shit and syphilis in dictionary).
>
> > > Again, I do not care who did it !!!!!! No one is "special". To bring any
> > > child into this forum in any negative light is ABSOLUTELY NOT GOING TO
> > > HAPPEN.
>
> > > On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 12:41 PM, nominal9 <nomin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > Mark M. Kahle H. , you evaded the point... you are further victimizing
> > > > Merc, a person who has been subjected to the conduct that you yourself
> > > > seem to condemn....
> > > > "Kids, mentioned in a negative manner or any misguided wish that
> > > > someones
> > > > elses kid were also ill is wrong."
> > > > Answer the direct question and please don't double-talk....Stop
> > > > grandstanding, or behaving like a sententious, dictatorial NAZI ...
> > > > The Hell Pits of Nominal9's Censorship Hall of Shame are looming
> > > > near....
> > > > Nominal9
>
> > > > PS... Listen to Ewe who goes BAAAAHHHH... and you are more than Half-
> > > > Way there.... you too, can join the likes of the Cecotrophic Rabbit,
> > > > the Pusillanimous Pellet... or Cosmo Cornuto Magcrest, and their
> > > > Board... Euwe-topia... since renamed... Cornuto-pia.
>
> > > > Hypocrites.... one and all....
>
> > > > On Nov 19, 12:40 pm, Mark <markmka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > We have decided and it is rather simple:
>
> > > > > Kids, mentioned in a negative manner or any misguided wish that
> > someones
> > > > > elses kid were also ill is wrong.
>
> > > > > KIDS ARE OFF LIMITS, NO SECOND CHANCES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> > > > > Nominal9 if you can't live with that, I am sorry.
>
> > > > > On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 11:22 AM, nominal9 <nomin...@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > > > > I was discomforted when Merc brought her child into a string. To
> > > > > > bring
> > > > > > in a child is distasteful at best. She then went on to wish the
> > same
> > > > > > upon another posters child and in rather raunchy terms.... This I
> > > > > > will
> > > > > > not abide from anyone about any child. The words she used about
> > > > > > children (regardless of whose) is (thank God) a felony in my
> > country.
> > > > > > To have allowed them to post would have made me complicit.
>
> > > > > > One last Time............ KIDS ARE OFF LIMITS IN THIS FORUM.
>
> > > > > > There are NO second chances. /Annointed One
>
> > > > > > I've only known Merc on the boards for about one year....
> > > > > > Point is, her child is the one who is (however it is prioperly
> > > > > > put).... disabled... not anyone else's child. I truly believe that
> > > > > > Merc has and conntinues to lash out at others (incluing their
> > > > > > children) because those others have lashed out at her own child (of
> > > > > > course, Merc sometimes gets confused in her emotional outbursts and
> > > > > > happens to target innocent bystanders, but she "usually" corrects
> > > > > > herself when she is made aware of the error) .... Merc is the
> > victim,
> > > > > > and anyone seeking to make her the "perpetrator" is just very
> > ignorant
> > > > > > or is trying to pull some sort of "reverse-discrimination"
> > > > > > scam....You. Annointed One speak of yourself as being a liberal-
> > > > > > progressive sort of person and here you champiion the interestes of
> > > > > > "children'... If that is true, I definitely think that you missed
> > the
> > > > > > boat in using that "angle" to censure Merc....As I understand it,
> > Merc
> > > > > > is also trained to somne extent in medicine, I believe that she is
> > a
> > > > > > registered nurse of some kind... So, in terms of medical knowledge
> > or
> > > > > > even psychological stability.... I think she has a leg up on most
> > > > > > others here abouts....
> > > > > > There's reality and then there's what "posters" spew out to make
> > > > > > points in arguments [on [political bioards and such.].. Merc is
> > living
> > > > > > a reality, when it comes to at least this one issue.....Cheap shots
> > > > > > just do not carry the same eight... or they shouldn't... among
> > "half-
> > > > > > way serious folks" who try to deal in mutually respectful
> > > > > > relationships.... of course... if people just want to sling the
> > crap
> > > > > > around... tha'ts alright, too, as long as it's understood for the
> > crap
> > > > > > that it is and given it's due "weight".....The crap that has been
> > > > > > slung against Merc... IMO.... is not worth censorship or
> > > > > > "banning".....
> > > > > > Let me know awhat "y'all" decide....
>
> > > > > > On Nov 18, 9:21 pm, THE ANNOINTED ONE <markmka...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > > > > Nominal9,
>
> > > > > > > I was discomforted when Merc brought her child into a string. To
> > > > bring
> > > > > > > in a child is distasteful at best. She then went on to wish the
> > same
> > > > > > > upon another posters child and in rather raunchy terms.... This I
> > > > will
> > > > > > > not abide from anyone about any child. The words she used about
> > > > > > > children (regardless of whose) is (thank God) a felony in my
> > country.
> > > > > > > To have allowed them to post would have made me complicit.
>
> > > > > > > One last Time............ KIDS ARE OFF LIMITS IN THIS FORUM.
>
> > > > > > > There are NO second chances.
>
> > > > > > > On Nov 18, 4:26 pm, nominal9 <nomin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > Annointed One, Keith from Tampa...
> > > > > > > > Mark M. Kahle H.
> > > > > > > > Kindly reconsider.... I don't like censors.... lowest of the
> > low,
> > > > in
> > > > > > > > my book.... usually the jaclass stupidest of the jackass
> > stupid,
> > > > as
> > > > > > > > well..... have to be, to think censorship is any sort of
> > > > answer....
> > > > > > > > Always room in the Hell Pits.... head up the ass with shit for
> > > > > > > > brains... for eternity....
> > > > > > > > nominal9
>
> > > >http://groups.google.com/group/number-71/browse_thread/thread/493434e.
> > > > > > ..
>
> > > >http://groups.google.com/group/number-71/browse_thread/thread/f0e0237.
> > > > > > ..
> > > > > > > > Sadly, I must enter the Owner "sysop" Rabbit... the
> > Pusillanimous
> > > > > > > > Pellet..... into my Nominal9 Censorship Hall of Shame, along
> > with
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > Message Board.... 72....
>
> > > > > > > > The Pusillanimous Pellet censored and apparently "banned" at
> > least
> > > > > > > > two
> > > > > > > > posters from 72....les and merc.
> > > > > > > > Granted that les and merc can be irritating, still
> > .....whatever
> > > > > > > > offense they may have ostensibly given amounts to naught in
> > > > > > > > comparison
> > > > > > > > to the general level of offense prevalent on the 72 board and
> > of
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > offense that they, themselves, received.Rather, it seems that
> > les
> > > > and
> > > > > > > > merc were subject to the usual "cabal" of social castigation
> > > > > > > > irrespective of politics, ideology or affiliation that seems to
> > run
> > > > > > > > rampant among censors and sysops..... which is to say...
> > censorship
> > > > > > > > for the sake of dominance, sadism and control....
>
> > > > > > > > I have given Rabbit, the Pusillanimous
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Nominal9 Censorship Hall of Shame

Nominal9

All of this is nonsense !!! People are judged or not judged for what they do ON THIS BOARD.

Just why should anyone take it "easier" on any one else ??

It is NOT censorship to deny Merc the right to continue to threaten the children of others (or to use hers as an excuse or as a crutch)

This string will be closed at 12:30 GMT - 6.

On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 11:21 AM, nominal9 <nominal9@yahoo.com> wrote:

Hello Perp....
THIRD ERSON ADDRESS:For those who may not Know... Perp(lexed) is the
"nemesis" that Merc is so upset with....
For my own sake.... I think Perp(lexed) will also agree that I have
never asked for Perplexed to be censored, banned or even silenced in
any other group or forum... I think I may have asked Perplexed to try
to take it a bit easier on Merc... but that whole attempt was sort of
futile.
DIRECT ADDRESS: Anyway, Perplexed, as to what you have uncovered as to
Merc being (or not) a "registered nurse"....I can't say, myself,
because I do not have the actual facts, either way.... but Merc does
seem to be knowledgeable in the medical area, above the usual level of
a layman, and she has been represented to be a "working" nurse by her
friend, les.... so, maybe your research was not definitive....As to
the assertion you made:"And NOBODY has ever attacked her kid.
EVER."..... I don't think that is totally true, I would have to try
to go back through old posts on other boards regarding people I may
not even know to prove my doubts.... which is something that I don't
like to do to anyone.....and will not do now.... but I think you are
wrong about that, even when it regards you, yourself, Preplexed.
"You're no better than she is if you continue posting this crap."....
as to this orther statement... this whole... "better" issue as a
general "theme" always bothers me.... "better" implies some sort of
superior vs. inferior relation... Generally, I never claim to be
"better" than any others, especially in a social, economic, racial/
ethnic , class standing or even intelligence sense. Frankly, from
other posts of yours that I have seen, Perplexed, you seem to think of
yourself as "better" in all of those "social" senses... But I'll give
you the benefit of semantics and assume that you are accusing me of
being "worse" in an ethical sense by spreading falsehoods regarding
the situation between you and Merc.....Like I said... I tend to
believe that Merc is basically telling the truth, as to herself and
especially as to her child......
But, here's my question to you.... Perplexed... are you here at this
time in support or in opposition to the Censorship of Merc or of her
Banning?.....Because.... that is my issue.... Censorship, Freedom of
Speech.... etc....

nominal9
On Nov 21, 3:43 pm, Perplexed <openlyincogn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> As I understand it, Merc
> is also trained to somne extent in medicine, I believe that she is a
> registered nurse of some kind... So, in terms of medical knowledge or
> even psychological stability.... I think she has a leg up on most
> others here abouts....
> ---------------
>
> You are a fool to believe anything that loonbat types. She claimed
> she was a nurse, so I looked her up in her state's database and posted
> the link to that database showing that she is not only NOT a
> registered nurse, she's not even a registered nurses' aide hired to
> change bedpans.
>
> She's a deranged lunatic who has wished gang rape, death, and
> mutilation on other people's children numerous times (including
> mine). She's come on this very forum and attacked me and my kids more
> than once. And NOBODY has ever attacked her kid. EVER. Stop
> supporting her brand of deranged hate and blaming others for what merc
> does. You're no better than she is if you continue posting this crap.
>
> On Nov 19, 12:22 pm, nominal9 <nomin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > I was discomforted when Merc brought her child into a string. To
> > bring
> > in a child is distasteful at best. She then went on to wish the same
> > upon another posters child and in rather raunchy terms.... This I
> > will
> > not abide from anyone about any child. The words she used about
> > children (regardless of whose) is (thank God) a felony in my country.
> > To have allowed them to post would have made me complicit.
>
> > One last Time............ KIDS ARE OFF LIMITS IN THIS FORUM.
>
> > There are NO second chances. /Annointed One
>
> > I've only known Merc on the boards for about one year....
> > Point is, her child is the one who is (however it is prioperly
> > put).... disabled... not anyone else's child. I truly believe that
> > Merc has and conntinues to lash out at others (incluing their
> > children) because those others have lashed out at her own child (of
> > course, Merc sometimes gets confused in her emotional outbursts and
> > happens to target innocent bystanders, but she "usually" corrects
> > herself when she is made aware of the error) .... Merc is the victim,
> > and anyone seeking to make her the "perpetrator" is just very ignorant
> > or is trying to pull some sort of "reverse-discrimination"
> > scam....You. Annointed One speak of yourself as being a liberal-
> > progressive sort of person and here you champiion the interestes of
> > "children'... If that is true, I definitely think that you missed the
> > boat in using that "angle" to censure Merc....As I understand it, Merc
> > is also trained to somne extent in medicine, I believe that she is a
> > registered nurse of some kind... So, in terms of medical knowledge or
> > even psychological stability.... I think she has a leg up on most
> > others here abouts....
> > There's reality and then there's what "posters" spew out to make
> > points in arguments [on [political bioards and such.].. Merc is living
> > a reality, when it comes to at least this one issue.....Cheap shots
> > just do not carry the same eight... or they shouldn't... among "half-
> > way serious folks" who try to deal in mutually respectful
> > relationships.... of course... if people just want to sling the crap
> > around... tha'ts alright, too, as long as it's understood for the crap
> > that it is and given it's due "weight".....The crap that has been
> > slung against Merc... IMO.... is not worth censorship or
> > "banning".....
> > Let me know awhat "y'all" decide....
>
> > On Nov 18, 9:21 pm, THE ANNOINTED ONE <markmka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Nominal9,
>
> > > I was discomforted when Merc brought her child into a string. To bring
> > > in a child is distasteful at best. She then went on to wish the same
> > > upon another posters child and in rather raunchy terms.... This I will
> > > not abide from anyone about any child. The words she used about
> > > children (regardless of whose) is (thank God) a felony in my country.
> > > To have allowed them to post would have made me complicit.
>
> > > One last Time............ KIDS ARE OFF LIMITS IN THIS FORUM.
>
> > > There are NO second chances.
>
> > > On Nov 18, 4:26 pm, nominal9 <nomin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Annointed One, Keith from Tampa...
> > > > Mark M. Kahle H.
> > > > Kindly reconsider.... I don't like censors.... lowest of the low, in
> > > > my book.... usually the jaclass stupidest of the jackass stupid, as
> > > > well..... have to be, to think censorship is any sort of answer....
> > > > Always room in the Hell Pits.... head up the ass with shit for
> > > > brains... for eternity....
> > > > nominal9
>
> > > >http://groups.google.com/group/number-71/browse_thread/thread/493434e...
>
> > > >http://groups.google.com/group/number-71/browse_thread/thread/f0e0237...
> > > > Sadly, I must enter the Owner "sysop" Rabbit... the Pusillanimous
> > > > Pellet..... into my Nominal9 Censorship Hall of Shame, along with the
> > > > Message Board.... 72....
>
> > > > The Pusillanimous Pellet censored and apparently "banned" at least
> > > > two
> > > > posters from 72....les and merc.
> > > > Granted that les and merc can be irritating, still .....whatever
> > > > offense they may have ostensibly given amounts to naught in
> > > > comparison
> > > > to the general level of offense prevalent on the 72 board and of the
> > > > offense that they, themselves, received.Rather, it seems that les and
> > > > merc were subject to the usual "cabal" of social castigation
> > > > irrespective of politics, ideology or affiliation that seems to run
> > > > rampant among censors and sysops..... which is to say... censorship
> > > > for the sake of dominance, sadism and control....
>
> > > > I have given Rabbit, the Pusillanimous Pellet, more than ample
> > > > warning of his impending dishonor , shame and eternal damnation of
> > > > being relegated to my Nominal9 Censorship Hall of Shame....Consigned
> > > > to an eternity of literal punishment to correspond to the
> > > > metaphorical condition in which he lives his life as the censor and
> > > > sysop of 72... which is to say, Damnerd to an Eternity in Hell with
> > > > his Head Stuck Up His Ass and with Shit for Brains. But Rabbit, the
> > > > Pusilllanomous Pellet, seems to scoff at this most foul and dire
> > > > opprobrium... seemingly glad to join the ranks of his fellow Head Up
> > > > The Ass and Shit For Brains sysops and Censors in their eternal
> > > > misery...
>
> > > > So be it....Abandon All Hope...forever...
>
> > > > nominal9
>
> > > > Rogue View profile
> > > > More options Aug 27, 12:46 pm
>
> > > > From: Rogue <rogueplan...@gmail.com>
> > > > Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2010 12:46:29 -0400
> > > > Local: Fri, Aug 27 2010 12:46 pm
> > > > Subject: Re: Nominal9 Censorship Hall Of Shame.... enter... Rabbit...
> > > > the "Pusillanimous Pellet"
> > > > Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this
> > > > message | Find messages by this author
> > > > Rabbit? Ban posters?
>
> > > > Say it ain't so! / rogue
>
> > > > - Hide quoted text -
> > > > -Reporting spam
> > > > Message reported
> > > > Rate this post:
>
> > > > nominal9 View profile
> > > > More options Aug 30, 2:33 pm
>
> > > > From: nominal9 <nomin...@yahoo.com>
> > > > Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2010 11:33:51 -0700 (PDT)
> > > > Local: Mon, Aug 30 2010 2:33 pm
> > > > Subject: Re: Nominal9 Censorship Hall Of Shame.... enter... Rabbit...
> > > > the "Pusillanimous Pellet"
> > > > Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Remove |
> > > > Report
> > > > this message | Find messages by this author
>
> > > >http://www.bio.miami.edu/hare/poop.html
>
> > > > Rabbit, the pusillanimous pellet... with the shit-eating grin..... /
> > > > n9
>
> > > > Then I tried to add another post in reply to a snide aside by Rabbit
> > > > under his pseudonym...RighteousObserver...
> > > > here's Rabbit's "concealed" whiny-ass post
>
> > > > From: RighteousObserver <tinywhiterab...@gmail.com>
> > > > Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2010 04:24:29 -0700 (PDT)
> > > > Local: Tues, Aug 31 2010 7:24 am
> > > > Subject: I Sucked The Fun Out Of 71 And Now I'm Here For You On 72!
> > > > Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this
> > > > message | Find messages by this author
> > > > I *am* RighteousOberserver.
>
> > > > Sworn Defender of Board Justice and um..er..other stoopid shit like
> > > > that.
>
> > > > <doin' the crab>grrrrr</doin' the crab><doin' the crab>grrrrr</doin'
> > > > the crab> / rabbit
>
> > > > To which I replied with my own counter that flashed on the board for
> > > > a
> > > > minute or so... before rabbit proceeded to remove it from 72...
> > > > as I recall it....
>
> > > > "The cecotrophic Rabbit, the pusillanimous pellet with the shit-
> > > > eating grin... turns two big floppy deaf ears...."
>
> > > > That was it.... looks like I'm "Banned" from 72... too.....another
> > > > badge of honor.....
> > > > Always good to be Banned by the Damned ... see?... Rabbit does
> > > > deserve
> > > > to be in Nominal9's Censorship Hall of Shame...
>
> > > > n9- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Mark M. Kahle H.

Re: Nominal9 Censorship Hall of Shame

Hello Perp....
THIRD ERSON ADDRESS:For those who may not Know... Perp(lexed) is the
"nemesis" that Merc is so upset with....
For my own sake.... I think Perp(lexed) will also agree that I have
never asked for Perplexed to be censored, banned or even silenced in
any other group or forum... I think I may have asked Perplexed to try
to take it a bit easier on Merc... but that whole attempt was sort of
futile.
DIRECT ADDRESS: Anyway, Perplexed, as to what you have uncovered as to
Merc being (or not) a "registered nurse"....I can't say, myself,
because I do not have the actual facts, either way.... but Merc does
seem to be knowledgeable in the medical area, above the usual level of
a layman, and she has been represented to be a "working" nurse by her
friend, les.... so, maybe your research was not definitive....As to
the assertion you made:"And NOBODY has ever attacked her kid.
EVER."..... I don't think that is totally true, I would have to try
to go back through old posts on other boards regarding people I may
not even know to prove my doubts.... which is something that I don't
like to do to anyone.....and will not do now.... but I think you are
wrong about that, even when it regards you, yourself, Preplexed.
"You're no better than she is if you continue posting this crap."....
as to this orther statement... this whole... "better" issue as a
general "theme" always bothers me.... "better" implies some sort of
superior vs. inferior relation... Generally, I never claim to be
"better" than any others, especially in a social, economic, racial/
ethnic , class standing or even intelligence sense. Frankly, from
other posts of yours that I have seen, Perplexed, you seem to think of
yourself as "better" in all of those "social" senses... But I'll give
you the benefit of semantics and assume that you are accusing me of
being "worse" in an ethical sense by spreading falsehoods regarding
the situation between you and Merc.....Like I said... I tend to
believe that Merc is basically telling the truth, as to herself and
especially as to her child......
But, here's my question to you.... Perplexed... are you here at this
time in support or in opposition to the Censorship of Merc or of her
Banning?.....Because.... that is my issue.... Censorship, Freedom of
Speech.... etc....

nominal9
On Nov 21, 3:43 pm, Perplexed <openlyincogn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> As I understand it, Merc
> is also trained to somne extent in medicine, I believe that she is a
> registered nurse of some kind... So, in terms of medical knowledge or
> even psychological stability.... I think she has a leg up on most
> others here abouts....
> ---------------
>
> You are a fool to believe anything that loonbat types. She claimed
> she was a nurse, so I looked her up in her state's database and posted
> the link to that database showing that she is not only NOT a
> registered nurse, she's not even a registered nurses' aide hired to
> change bedpans.
>
> She's a deranged lunatic who has wished gang rape, death, and
> mutilation on other people's children numerous times (including
> mine). She's come on this very forum and attacked me and my kids more
> than once. And NOBODY has ever attacked her kid. EVER. Stop
> supporting her brand of deranged hate and blaming others for what merc
> does. You're no better than she is if you continue posting this crap.
>
> On Nov 19, 12:22 pm, nominal9 <nomin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > I was discomforted when Merc brought her child into a string. To
> > bring
> > in a child is distasteful at best. She then went on to wish the same
> > upon another posters child and in rather raunchy terms.... This I
> > will
> > not abide from anyone about any child. The words she used about
> > children (regardless of whose) is (thank God) a felony in my country.
> > To have allowed them to post would have made me complicit.
>
> > One last Time............ KIDS ARE OFF LIMITS IN THIS FORUM.
>
> > There are NO second chances. /Annointed One
>
> > I've only known Merc on the boards for about one year....
> > Point is, her child is the one who is (however it is prioperly
> > put).... disabled... not anyone else's child. I truly believe that
> > Merc has and conntinues to lash out at others (incluing their
> > children) because those others have lashed out at her own child (of
> > course, Merc sometimes gets confused in her emotional outbursts and
> > happens to target innocent bystanders, but she "usually" corrects
> > herself when she is made aware of the error) .... Merc is the victim,
> > and anyone seeking to make her the "perpetrator" is just very ignorant
> > or is trying to pull some sort of "reverse-discrimination"
> > scam....You. Annointed One speak of yourself as being a liberal-
> > progressive sort of person and here you champiion the interestes of
> > "children'... If that is true, I definitely think that you missed the
> > boat in using that "angle" to censure Merc....As I understand it, Merc
> > is also trained to somne extent in medicine, I believe that she is a
> > registered nurse of some kind... So, in terms of medical knowledge or
> > even psychological stability.... I think she has a leg up on most
> > others here abouts....
> > There's reality and then there's what "posters" spew out to make
> > points in arguments [on [political bioards and such.].. Merc is living
> > a reality, when it comes to at least this one issue.....Cheap shots
> > just do not carry the same eight... or they shouldn't... among "half-
> > way serious folks" who try to deal in mutually respectful
> > relationships.... of course... if people just want to sling the crap
> > around... tha'ts alright, too, as long as it's understood for the crap
> > that it is and given it's due "weight".....The crap that has been
> > slung against Merc... IMO.... is not worth censorship or
> > "banning".....
> > Let me know awhat "y'all" decide....
>
> > On Nov 18, 9:21 pm, THE ANNOINTED ONE <markmka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Nominal9,
>
> > > I was discomforted when Merc brought her child into a string. To bring
> > > in a child is distasteful at best. She then went on to wish the same
> > > upon another posters child and in rather raunchy terms.... This I will
> > > not abide from anyone about any child. The words she used about
> > > children (regardless of whose) is (thank God) a felony in my country.
> > > To have allowed them to post would have made me complicit.
>
> > > One last Time............ KIDS ARE OFF LIMITS IN THIS FORUM.
>
> > > There are NO second chances.
>
> > > On Nov 18, 4:26 pm, nominal9 <nomin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Annointed One, Keith from Tampa...
> > > > Mark M. Kahle H.
> > > > Kindly reconsider.... I don't like censors.... lowest of the low, in
> > > > my book.... usually the jaclass stupidest of the jackass stupid, as
> > > > well..... have to be, to think censorship is any sort of answer....
> > > > Always room in the Hell Pits.... head up the ass with shit for
> > > > brains... for eternity....
> > > > nominal9
>
> > > >http://groups.google.com/group/number-71/browse_thread/thread/493434e...
>
> > > >http://groups.google.com/group/number-71/browse_thread/thread/f0e0237...
> > > > Sadly, I must enter the Owner "sysop" Rabbit... the Pusillanimous
> > > > Pellet..... into my Nominal9 Censorship Hall of Shame, along with the
> > > > Message Board.... 72....
>
> > > > The Pusillanimous Pellet censored and apparently "banned" at least
> > > > two
> > > > posters from 72....les and merc.
> > > > Granted that les and merc can be irritating, still .....whatever
> > > > offense they may have ostensibly given amounts to naught in
> > > > comparison
> > > > to the general level of offense prevalent on the 72 board and of the
> > > > offense that they, themselves, received.Rather, it seems that les and
> > > > merc were subject to the usual "cabal" of social castigation
> > > > irrespective of politics, ideology or affiliation that seems to run
> > > > rampant among censors and sysops..... which is to say... censorship
> > > > for the sake of dominance, sadism and control....
>
> > > > I have given Rabbit, the Pusillanimous Pellet, more than ample
> > > > warning of his impending dishonor , shame and eternal damnation of
> > > > being relegated to my Nominal9 Censorship Hall of Shame....Consigned
> > > > to an eternity of literal punishment to correspond to the
> > > > metaphorical condition in which he lives his life as the censor and
> > > > sysop of 72... which is to say, Damnerd to an Eternity in Hell with
> > > > his Head Stuck Up His Ass and with Shit for Brains. But Rabbit, the
> > > > Pusilllanomous Pellet, seems to scoff at this most foul and dire
> > > > opprobrium... seemingly glad to join the ranks of his fellow Head Up
> > > > The Ass and Shit For Brains sysops and Censors in their eternal
> > > > misery...
>
> > > > So be it....Abandon All Hope...forever...
>
> > > > nominal9
>
> > > > Rogue View profile
> > > > More options Aug 27, 12:46 pm
>
> > > > From: Rogue <rogueplan...@gmail.com>
> > > > Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2010 12:46:29 -0400
> > > > Local: Fri, Aug 27 2010 12:46 pm
> > > > Subject: Re: Nominal9 Censorship Hall Of Shame.... enter... Rabbit...
> > > > the "Pusillanimous Pellet"
> > > > Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this
> > > > message | Find messages by this author
> > > > Rabbit? Ban posters?
>
> > > > Say it ain't so! / rogue
>
> > > > - Hide quoted text -
> > > > -Reporting spam
> > > > Message reported
> > > > Rate this post:
>
> > > > nominal9 View profile
> > > > More options Aug 30, 2:33 pm
>
> > > > From: nominal9 <nomin...@yahoo.com>
> > > > Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2010 11:33:51 -0700 (PDT)
> > > > Local: Mon, Aug 30 2010 2:33 pm
> > > > Subject: Re: Nominal9 Censorship Hall Of Shame.... enter... Rabbit...
> > > > the "Pusillanimous Pellet"
> > > > Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Remove |
> > > > Report
> > > > this message | Find messages by this author
>
> > > >http://www.bio.miami.edu/hare/poop.html
>
> > > > Rabbit, the pusillanimous pellet... with the shit-eating grin..... /
> > > > n9
>
> > > > Then I tried to add another post in reply to a snide aside by Rabbit
> > > > under his pseudonym...RighteousObserver...
> > > > here's Rabbit's "concealed" whiny-ass post
>
> > > > From: RighteousObserver <tinywhiterab...@gmail.com>
> > > > Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2010 04:24:29 -0700 (PDT)
> > > > Local: Tues, Aug 31 2010 7:24 am
> > > > Subject: I Sucked The Fun Out Of 71 And Now I'm Here For You On 72!
> > > > Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this
> > > > message | Find messages by this author
> > > > I *am* RighteousOberserver.
>
> > > > Sworn Defender of Board Justice and um..er..other stoopid shit like
> > > > that.
>
> > > > <doin' the crab>grrrrr</doin' the crab><doin' the crab>grrrrr</doin'
> > > > the crab> / rabbit
>
> > > > To which I replied with my own counter that flashed on the board for
> > > > a
> > > > minute or so... before rabbit proceeded to remove it from 72...
> > > > as I recall it....
>
> > > > "The cecotrophic Rabbit, the pusillanimous pellet with the shit-
> > > > eating grin... turns two big floppy deaf ears...."
>
> > > > That was it.... looks like I'm "Banned" from 72... too.....another
> > > > badge of honor.....
> > > > Always good to be Banned by the Damned ... see?... Rabbit does
> > > > deserve
> > > > to be in Nominal9's Censorship Hall of Shame...
>
> > > > n9- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Higher Taxes Won't Reduce the Deficit

Of course. Reagan's cuts doubled tax revenues. Give people more of
THEIR money, and they spend it. Its easy man.

On Nov 22, 11:19 am, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
> NOVEMBER 21, 2010Higher Taxes Won't Reduce the DeficitHistory shows that when Congress gets more revenue, the pols spend it.By STEPHEN MOORE And RICHARD VEDDER
> The draft recommendations of the president's commission on deficit reduction call for closing popular tax deductions, higher gas taxes and other revenue raisers to drive tax collections up to 21% of GDP from the historical norm of about 18.5%. Another plan, proposed last week by commission member and former Congressional Budget Office director Alice Rivlin, would impose a 6.5% national sales tax on consumers.
> The claim here, echoed by endless purveyors of conventional wisdom in Washington, is that these added revenuespotentially a half-trillion dollars a yearwill be used to reduce the $8 trillion to $10 trillion deficits in the coming decade. If history is any guide, however, that won't happen. Instead, Congress will simply spend the money.
> In the late 1980s, one of us, Richard Vedder, and Lowell Gallaway of Ohio University co-authored a often-cited research paper for the congressional Joint Economic Committee (known as the $1.58 study) that found that every new dollar of new taxes led to more than one dollar of new spending by Congress. Subsequent revisions of the study over the next decade found similar results.
> We've updated the research. Using standard statistical analyses that introduce variables to control for business-cycle fluctuations, wars and inflation, we found that over the entire post World War II era through 2009 each dollar of new tax revenue was associated with $1.17 of new spending. Politicians spend the money as fast as it comes inand a little bit more.
> We also looked at different time periods (e.g., 1947-2009 vs. 1959-2009), different financial data (fiscal year federal budget data, as well as calendar year National Income and Product Account data from the Bureau of Economic Analysis), different lag structures (e.g., relating taxes one year to spending change the following year to allow for the time it takes bureaucracies to spend money), different control variables, etc. The alternative models produce different estimates of the tax-spend relationshipbetween $1.05 and $1.81. But no matter how we configured the data and no matter what variables we examined, higher tax collections never resulted in less spending.
> This is exactly the opposite of what the tax-increase lobby in Washington is preaching today. For example, Erskine Bowles, co-chairman of the president's deficit reduction commission, suggested at a briefing several months ago that there will be $3 of spending cuts for every $1 of tax increases. Sound familiar? Reagan used to complain that he waited his entire presidency for the $3 of spending cuts that Congress promised for every dollar of new taxes he agreed to in 1982. The cuts never came.
> We're constantly told by politicos that tax increases must be put "on the table" to get congressional Democratswho've already approved close to $1 trillion of new spending in violation of their own budget rules over the last two yearsto agree to make cuts in the unsustainable entitlement programs like Medicare and Social Security.
> Our research indicates this is a sucker play. After the 1990 and 1993 tax increases, federal spending continued to rise. The 1990 tax increase deal was enacted specifically to avoid automatic spending sequestrations that would have been required under the then-prevailing Gramm-Rudman budget rules.
> The only era in modern times that the budget has been in balance was in the late 1990s, when Republicans were in control of Congress. Taxes were not raised, and the capital gains tax rate was cut in 1997. The growth rate of federal spending was dramatically reduced from 1995-99, and the economy roared.
> We suspect that voters intuitively understand this tax and spend connection, which is why there is such hostility to broad-based tax increases. "Polls consistently find that a majority of Americans believe any new taxes will be spent by the politicians," pollster Scott Rasmussen told us recently in an interview.
> The grand bargain so many in Washington yearn fortax increases coupled with spending cutsis a fool's errand. Our research confirms what the late economist Milton Friedman said of Congress many years ago: "Politicians will always spend every penny of tax raised and whatever else they can get away with."Mr. Moore is senior economics writer for The Wall Street Journal editorial page. Mr. Vedder is a professor of economics at Ohio University and an adjunct scholar at the American Enterprise Institute.http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704648604575620502560925156.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_sections_opinion

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.