Industry news
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Curly Surmudgeon
Guest
|
 Posted: Sun Jun 03, 2007 10:35 am Post subject: Re: Most popular Republican presidential candidate? Ron Paul |
 |
|
On Sat, 02 Jun 2007 18:18:18 -0700, *Anarcissie* wrote:
| Quote: |
On Jun 2, 3:24 pm, Dan Clore <c...@columbia-center.org> wrote:
*Anarcissie* wrote:
http://bostonnow.com/community/blogs/blackbart213/2007/06/02/most-pop...
Ron Paul. Who is this man? Actually, he is the leader of the polls in
the Republican Party by a clear majority. That is, if you watch the
debates and voted who was the winner.
That is, in unscientific polls, where a few energetic supporters can
stuff the ballot and skew results. The fact that these supporters
actually exist is encouraging, but one shouldn't take these poll results
at face value.
The boss media are going to quite a bit of effort to eliminate heretics
from the village square, as usual, but this year they may fail due to the
Internet, and that could have interesting results.
|
Ross Perot scared the demopublicans so badly they've been on the lookout
since 1996 and declare premptive war against any rational candidate. The
"2-party" system will never allow a candidate who doesn't grovel before
the hidden party rulers the opportunity to be considered in a fair light.
As much as I wish otherwise Ron Paul doesn't stand a chance in hell of
participating in a truly free election.
Get out while you can.
-- Regards, Curly
------------------------------------------------------------------------
https://thegreen.stanleylieber.com/
------------------------------------------------------------------------ |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Day Brown
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 03, 2007 10:35 am Post subject: Re: Straight Talk: Paul Has a Point |
|
|
On Jun 2, 12:05 pm, JG <n...@spam.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
The wonder is that the Serbs, Somalis, or some other people that the
U.S. government attacked haven't retaliated also.
BTW, Rudy Giuliani is not only either a liar or incredibly dense, but
one of the most overrated politicians. He takes credit for the drop in
crime in New York during his administration without noting that the
crime rate declined throughout the country during that period--and even
in Canada--largely for demographic reasons. And the decline in New York
began before he took office.
Agreed. Also agreed that Ron Paul has a point. but so what? The |
electorate is too irrational to realize what is in their own self
interest. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
C Wilder
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 03, 2007 10:35 am Post subject: Re: Hey Vandar, animal, BDK, JohnP, and other douchebags...W |
|
|
BDK wrote:
| Quote: |
In article <zMidnYHtMvefXfzbnZ2dnUVZ_qCmnZ2d@comcast.com>,
CWilder@nospam.not says...
BDK wrote:
In article <IYKdnVzRe48StvzbnZ2dnUVZ_rSjnZ2d@adelphia.com>,
user200128- US@startfirst.net says...
Why don't you tell us what caused the building to fall shitstain.
You're obviously a qualified person who spends all of his
non-research time trolling the conspiracy groups on usenet. So go
ahead and wipe the shit off your fingers and type up a good report
on why the towers came down. Try to leave the words "kook" out of
just 1 post this year asswipe.
"John P." <JohnP_Da_Evil_Joo@WhyAreMoronsAttractedToMe.com> wrote
in message news:8Iydne0chaiTkfzbnZ2dnUVZ_vumnZ2d@comcast.com...
That you think steel melted and caused the collapses shows you've
done zero research - typical of the few remaining deranged lunatic
kooks who are still delusional and willfully ignorant enough to
parrot old kook theories in public.
It's too hard to leave the "k--k" out of a reply to one of you
folks.
We've been telling you why the towers came down for a long time.
Putting it simple, so even you might get it, if you let go of your
religion:
WTC1: Plane fly into building real fast, go BOOM. Later, fire and
booboo from plane make building fall down, go BOOOOOOOOOOOOM!
WTC2: Plane fly into building real fast, go BOOM. Later, fire and
booboo from plane make building fall down, go BOOOOOOOOOOOOM!
WTC7: Hunks of WTC1 crash into building, make fire and big booboo on
it, later, it fall down go BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!
Got it now?
See, I was nice and didn't use the K word..
BWHAHAHA!
BDK=Big Donut King must be one of those smoke eaters that dreams of
heroism while washing the chief's car every other day. Don't choke
on the cruller big boy.
Whatever little fantasy gets you through the day, "Wilder". Make up
whatever scenario you want and masturbate away.
BDK
|
Wahahahaha. BDK defaults to vulgar mode. You clueless moron has nothing
left but desperation. You are such a pathetic troll aren't you? You are the
only one that is making up shit to fit in your sand box. No go play with
your simple minded buddies and swallow some more of those donuts you brought
with you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
C Wilder
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 03, 2007 10:35 am Post subject: Re: Hey Vandar, animal, BDK, JohnP, and other douchebags...W |
|
|
John P. wrote:
| Quote: |
"Ratchet Up One more" <user200128-US@startfirst.net> wrote in a
message
Why don't you tell us what caused the building to fall shitstain.
You're obviously a qualified person who spends all of his
non-research time trolling the conspiracy groups on usenet. So go
ahead and wipe the shit off your fingers and type up a good report
on why the towers came down. Try to leave the words "kook" out of
just 1 post this year asswipe.
You seemed to have somehow missed that there was a detailed
investigation on this very matter. It was conducted by the NIST, as
well as a large number of participants from outside the NIST. They
released a 10,000+ page report on the collapse of the towers. They
answer your question in far more detail than you probably desire.
Here's the JP summary version
A plane hit each building.
The buildings were severely damaged, but they survived being hit by a
plane (as they were designed to do). Some of the structure was
destroyed.
The load normally supported by the structure, was now being carried
by the remaining structural components (some of these were damaged)
The plane crashes caused fires in the buildings.
Fires produce heat.
Heat causes steel to change - even if it doesn't melt.
Knowing that heat and fire can be a problem for steel framed
structures (as evidence by the number of such structures which have
collapsed due to fires before and since 9/11), NYC had a fire code in
place requiring fireproofing on steel structures.
Some of this fireproofing was knocked off in the plane crash, leaving
unprotected areas of steel.
The changes cause by the heat from the fires caused additional
structural components to fail.
As each component failed, the support for the building was
transferred to the remaining structure.
At some point, the remaining structure could no longer support the
load placed upon it.
The failure of the structure in the collapse area initiated the
collapse of the building.
If you have any questions, simply read through all 10,000+ pages of
the NIST report. You should find the answers you are looking for. If
not, feel free to ask and I'll try to point you to a reference which
will provide your answer.
|
Except for the building that was not hit by a plane. Rosie already bitch
slapped you. Even she can take on a troll like you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
C Wilder
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 03, 2007 10:35 am Post subject: Re: Why does the RNC appeal to stupid people? |
|
|
Rich Travsky wrote:
| Quote: |
Vitor wrote:
Lamont Cranston wrote:
"Harry Dope" <TheWarIsLost@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:466033c1$0$9945$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
Anyone know why the democratic party appeals to the most ignorant
people in USA society?
It doesn't. I have two facts that prove it.
1 - You are not a Democrat
2 - Albert Einstein was a Democrat
rotfl
I am not a Democrat and I don't look at the world as Democrats do.
They have some hate for Republicans that goes back to Grant. I
don't see the
Say what???? Since Grant? LOL
Democrats as a party of eternal Evil. Even today there are some
Democrats I would find tolerable. It is a big picture difference.
The Democrats have push more and more costly government programs.
They
Conveniently overlooking the current administration and Bonzo and
Poppy's. All three have exploded the deficit.
always win. Government never gets smaller or a program ended or a
federal employee get downsized.
Gee, what's happened while republicons controlled the WH and
Congress????
I also don't buy the anti-war groupthink. I know too many people who
have fought and I value what they say over some reporter that only
presents the facts that support their side. From what I know about
terrorists and the hate they have had for us for generations, I am
for an active plan to defeat them not try to make them stop hating
us.
What does invading Iraq have to do with that?
|
They hate us because we are free and for that very and only reason they
have decided they must kill themselves rather than allow the US to continue
to be a democracy. The US has never even uttered a bad word against anyone.
Those terrorists are just so evil and hate filled they see no reason to go
on living. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
707 Attacks blocked
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
