In article <1190118334.782915.195790@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>,
osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
On Sep 17, 10:42 pm, "David W. Barnes" <davbar...@gmail.com> wrote:
In article <1190006236.038186.187...@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com>,
osprey <noneedtok...@mail.com> wrote:
On Sep 16, 10:12 pm, "David W. Barnes" <davbar...@gmail.com> wrote:
In article <k7KdnV9AhILfRnDbnZ2dnUVZ_jmdn...@comcast.com>, Osprey
<NoNeedtok...@mail.com> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <davbar...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:160920071800012271%davbarnes@gmail.com...
In article <46adnV2edcZGXXDbnZ2dnUVZ_qCgn...@comcast.com>, Osprey
<NoNeedtok...@mail.com> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <davbar...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:160920071635548664%davbarnes@gmail.com...
In article <NYOdndA_cqDbOnDbnZ2dnUVZ_rOpn...@comcast.com>, Osprey
<NoNeedtok...@mail.com> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <davbar...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:160920071437430739%davbarnes@gmail.com...
In article <KbidnYy1oPJQB3DbnZ2dnUVZ_h-vn...@comcast.com>,
Osprey
<NoNeedtok...@mail.com> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <davbar...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:160920071403288538%davbarnes@gmail.com...
In article <8c2dnckC55ZZC3DbnZ2dnUVZ_vqpn...@comcast.com>,
Osprey
<NoNeedtok...@mail.com> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <davbar...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:160920071255194219%davbarnes@gmail.com...
In article
<4cydnUXtqKk963DbnZ2dnUVZ_tCrn...@comcast.com>,
Osprey
<NoNeedtok...@mail.com> wrote:
"David W. Barnes" <davbar...@gmail.com> wrote in
message
news:160920071122205927%davbarnes@gmail.com...
In article
<0dqqe35imuoivf8gi695qgdj8817fac...@4ax.com>,
Free
Lunch
<lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 10:23:46 -0700, in alt.atheism
"David W. Barnes" <davbar...@gmail.com> wrote in
<160920071023467815%davbar...@gmail.com>:
In article
<4moqe3deee889gu801l4m4gdp94slcq...@4ax.com>,
Free
Lunch
<lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 10:01:48 -0700, in
alt.atheism
"David W. Barnes" <davbar...@gmail.com> wrote in
<160920071001482467%davbar...@gmail.com>:
After years of trying to make people understand
that
Bush
was
screwing
up this country while Clinton, one of the
"smartest
presidents"Alan
Greenspan worked with, was a top notch
president,
Greenspan
now
says
as
much in his new book. It always satisfies me
when
those
in
the
know
confirm what the common person suspects - here,
that
the
economic
growth under Clinton was the responsibility of
the
Democrats,
and
the
economic blunders were that of the Republicans.
Responsible,
intelligent people out here might want to
remember
that
in
Novemeber
of
'08.
<http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/09/16/greenspan.book/index.html>
"The [Republicans] deserved the stomping it
took in
November's
congressional elections -- a ballot that saw
both
houses
of
Congress
wrested from Republican control -- because the
party
"swapped
principle
for power."
"Greenspan praised former President Clinton and
his
attitude
toward
economic policies, saying, "either Clinton
shared
many
of
my
views
on
the way the economic system was evolving and on
what
should
be
done,
or
he was the cleverest chameleon I'd ever
encountered."
"Clinton was often criticized for inconsistency
and
for a
tendency
to
take all sides in a debate, but that was never
true
about
his
economic
policy," he wrote. "A consistent, disciplined
focus
on
long-term
economic growth became a hallmark of his
presidency."
Bush and the Republicans are unprincipled. Too
bad
it
took
so
long
for
America to realize it.
Greenspan's memory isn't the same as many others
about
what
he
did
or
said, particularly in the early '00s.
Greenspan, due to his position in the government,
had
to
be
careful
what he said in the past. He was a very
responsible
and
principled
person. Once people leave office, the truth comes
out.
While there may be competition, his most
unprincipled
and
irresponsible
statement is likely to be his recommendation that
people
borrow
using
ARMs when fixed rate mortgages were near historic
lows.
By
getting
people to borrow at teaser ARMs rather than fair,
low
fixed
rates,
he
encouraged the real estate bubble that is now being
undone.
While
it
is
possible that we cannot always stop people from
their
irrational
exuberance, Greenspan was a major cause of this one.
I doubt the average home buyer looked to Greenspan
before
determining
which loan to use.
It's really odd how you suddenly want to kiss up to
Greenspan.
I do recall a conversation some years ago, when
Greenspan
also
gave
credit
to some of Reagan's economic policies for a good
economy in
the
90's...and
also how Greenspan stated the economy rolls like a
rollercoaster.
You were bashing Greenspan.
Not at all. Maybe you should show us where that was. I
have
always
viewed Greenspan as a responsible and well qualified
American,
albeit a
Republican.
Suddenly, Greenspan says Clinton was very smart and I
am
not
denying
that..he is very smart (he just made some poor choices
at
times
which
we
all
do), and suddenly Greenspan is like a God in your eyes.
We don't disagree about Clinton making a poor choice.
However,
what
annoys me about you and so many other conservatives is
your
selection
of what is important.
Clinton got a ***** from a woman, not his wife, in
the
White
House.
Yes, we know that and we know you have stated you
supported
his
actions
including his lying about it.
No - what we know is you are a lying piece of *****.
No - You have told many lies in the course of 24 hours.
It's true, you supported his actions and you supported his
lying
about
it.
You also supported his drug use, and you even claimed it was
legal
for
him
to smoke marijuana..and I have YET to find a period in the
last
50
years
where it was ever legal to smoke marijuana in this country.
He smoked in England, you moron. I take it that being stupid
is a
GOOD
thing for guards.
That's not what you had said.
So, once again you are wrong.
You sure are jealous of correctional officers.
Is that another example of that keen intellect or yours.?
Hell, you haven't even a clue
as to where I work, what I do, or how much I earn..:o)
Hell, you are wrong!
Here is your opportunity.
Where do I work, that being, where is my assignment?
What do I do?
How much do I earn?
Proof will be expected.
First explain how we will know if I am correct.
You can contact DOC admin, get the informatio, and I shall record the
event.
That information is not available.
Then you can apologize for your ignorance.
I will provide you the name of the person whom you need to contact, we
shall
be waiting for your call.
OK - give it to us, bluffer.
Major McGuigan
No number. Give us a number, bluffer.
You claimed to have the knowledge to use resources...use them. I gave
you the person who you need to contact.
If you're scared..just say you're scared.
ROFLMAO! I knew you were bluffing. That is all you ever do!
You will be wrong, because you haven't a clue...:o)
"You will be wrong." Typical Osprey. Damn the possibility he might
know! Insist everyone is wrong!
And you would ***** yourself knowing how far up I have gone in just
the
past
two years..:o)
You work for the government - incompetents are promoted all the
time.
Awww, you're jealous..:o)
Yeah - I wish I could make on tenth of what I make now.
You have no clue, but that doesn't stop you from being an idiot and
guessing.
I know you are a guard.
No, you're dead wrong too.
Sure.
What are you suggesting, a bachelors degree in
government makes you rich?
You haven't even a clue as to what my income is.
I know you work for the government, and that means you make very
little. YOU probably believe it is a lot, however.
You tried this before, and you failed miserably when asked to show
proof.
Meaning you denied it.
Meaning, as you do most often, you failed.
Meaning you denied it.
Look at FEMA Director Mike Brown. He was the Commissioner for the
International Arabian Horse Association and, like you, disciplined
before getting the promotion. The idea that some guard in Delaware
could eke out a degree from some crappy little local college and
get a
promotion at a prison would not surprise me at all.
Yep, you're jealous..:o)
I love it.
You failed in the private sector and are proud you took a government
job?
Failed where?
"in the private sector " Are you really that stupid?
Where?
Explain and show proof.
You already admitted you had an Internet site that failed. Keep up.
Basically you are saying that anyone who works in Government has
failed in the private sector.
Reading comprehension must not be needed as a guard.
That means you admitted you failed, since you claimed to have worked
for Government.
What an idiot.
It's your theory, don't cry now.
It isn't a theory and your reading comprehension leaves much to be
desired.
Well, with your proven history of hatred towards Correctional
Officers...what happened to you? Did you get busted and have a
bad
experience?
I don't hate guards, Spud.
It's been proven you hate correctional officers.
LOL! Yeah - "proven" because you say so.
Proven because you have said you hate correctional officers.
Not at all, but even if I had that would not prove what you claim.
It's been proven, you have said it.
Sure.
Good, you finally agree.
I'm sure that with that keen guard standard of yours you believe that.
But as a former police officer
You were never a police officer
Because you say so.
It's WAY too obvious
To the psychotic
You are psychotic
lol! That's it?
I find it
contemptible that guard try to pass themselves off as law
enforcement.
I don't care what you find contemptible, fact is, corrections is a
part
of
law enforcement.
Keep telling yourself that.
I don't have to tell myself that, it's fact.
What other hallucinations do you experience?
You can't dispute the facts, period.
Nope. Give us some facts.
http://delcode.delaware.gov/title11/c002/index.shtml#P187_18174
Like the K-Mart Guard.
You don't even understand the very basics of law enforcement, what law
enforcement is about.
I teach it (occasionally), Spud.
No, you don't.
Yes, I do, *****. What a world you live in - deny whatever is
inconvenient.
I asked you once the three components of the Criminal
Justice system and you couldn't answer.
WOULDN'T Answer, moron.
Hell, go towww.state.de.us/correct
...Department of Correction--the largest law enforcement agency in the
First State.
Well I guess if a web site says it, it must be true.
http://delcode.delaware.gov/title11/c002/index.shtml#P187_18174
Del Code Title 11 Chapter 2 Subsection 222
I love bursting your bubble and exposing your ignorance.
Look, *****, the State calling you law enforcement in an effort to
appease you means nothing. Explain how a guard enforces the law.
It's just another example of why it's totally unbelievable you
were a
police
officer.
Because I am "in the know."
Police officers know this.
LOL!!!! We used to laugh at you guys!
Says the one who claimed he didn't hate correctional officers.
We laughed at you, we didn't hate you. You are even dumber than I
thought.
I work closely with police officers, state, county, and town.
Sure. And when you leave, they laugh at you.
This is why I, and many others never believed you were a police
officer.
No - only you. And I suspect even you know better.
Go ahead, prove you were ever a police officer.
Why? Because you say so? Better you continue to act a fool.
Your name
State you were working in as a police officer
Time period
Division or Department
I will verify it.
Stop trying to figure out who I am. Think of me as your worst
nightmare.
We all have a close working relationship, we all respect what we do.
Until you leave.
Which is why no one believes you were ever in law enforcement.
Keep telling yourself that.
A real police officer respects us, and knows what we do...and the same
in return is given to them.
Until you leave.
A real police officer knows that our jobs are VERY similiar in almost
every way.
LOL!!! Yeah - being a babysitter is so similar to police work.
You haven't even a clue as to how corrections works, the departments,
the purpose and functions.
Oh, but I do.
I have tested you and you have failed.
Hallucinating again?
You were never a police officer, you will never understand.
I was and I do.
Nope and no you don't.
Denials from Osprey again. Proof positive of what he says. (In his
mind.)
Delaware State Code states it as well as all other state codes.
No it doesn't.
Yes, it does..you have been shown this.
No I haven't.
Yes, you have..many times.
Sure.
http://delcode.delaware.gov/title11/c002/index.shtml#P187_18174
There, you have been shown..once again.
Again, *****, the State calling you law enforcement in an effort to
appease you means nothing. Explain how a guard enforces the law.
You're just an uneducated idiot.
My education far surpasses yours, Spud.
Not hardly.
And you know this how?
Well for one your ignorance is too obvious.
I kick your ***** on a regular basis.
You are eating crow
Sure.
You lie, just like you will lie about your education.
Sure.
You didn't even graduate H.S.
Then you know my name. What is it?
The standard for guards is much lower than police officers.
You haven't a clue, at all.
Oh, but I do.
Well, you got your opportunity to show it, and you failed.
Because you say so.
Only because it's a fact
Sure.
Entry level..does not require much. Neither does the entry level
for
many
police departments.
Untrue. Guards generally require a HS diploma. Police officers
require college.
Nope, that's not true. Some state police organizations require a min.
of a
two year degree, most police organizations do NOT require college
education;
however..and the same goes in my career, in order to advance to higher
positions, a college degree is required.
Delaware State Police
Entry with 2 year degree, can not promote past Sgt, unless you have a
4
year
degree.
Town and County police, do NOT require college education.
I have proved this in the past but only once. Here is the second time:
"Correctional Officer":
"Most institutions require correctional officers to be at least 18 to
21 years of age and a U.S. citizen; have a high school education or its
equivalent; demonstrate job stability, usually by accumulating 2 years
of work experience; and have no felony convictions."
That is correct, and do you know why?
Because the job, on entree level...doesn't require or need anything
above that level; however, in order to promote and move up into areas
like investigations and supervision...a degree is required and needed.
<http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos156.htm>
Police Officer"
Eligibility for appointment usually depends on performance in
competitive written examinations and previous education and experience.
In larger departments, where the majority of law enforcement jobs are
found, applicants usually must have at least a high school education,
and some departments require a year or two of college coursework.
Federal and State agencies typically require a college degree.
<http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos160.htm>
And there you go...EXACTLY what I had already said.
Read it again, Spud. Police = college, Guards = HS.
"some departments require a year or two of college coursework."
How does that crow taste?
Where does it say "some prisons require college?" LOL!
Hell, according to your fellow guards you ran a failed Internet
business before becoming a guard.
Except for a few problems here.
You have never spoken with anyone I work with
and
I had a side internet business, that did not fail...it was not a primary
source for a business.
It did fine.
So you became a guard.
I became a correctional officer.
Same thing.
Not even close, then again..we can't expect you to actually know what
you're talking about.
You are a guard.
You don't know the difference, nor can you understand.
Next stop, "sanitation engineer."
Another reason why no one believes you were ever in law enforcement.
You mean you are in denial.
Nor do you know my reasons for going in that direction.
Failed Internet business.
Wrong again
*****.
I guess it is easier working for the
government, eh?
That is typical of many government
workers. When you can't make it in the private sector, go to the
public sector.
When are you going to come off of unemployment???
LOL! What an idiot.
You can't answer the question, I guess that means you have chosen to
remain on unemployment. Doesn't it run out though?
Osprey's critical thinking.
And you're done...toasted as well.
Keep telling yourself that, loser.
.
