| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"liberal democrats" |
| Date: |
15 Oct 2006 09:47:21 PM |
| Object: |
Question: why are the liberal Democrats |
so bloody good at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This message was posted via one or more anonymous remailing services.
The original sender is unknown. Any address shown in the From header
is unverified.
.
|
|
| User: "Geoff" |
|
| Title: Re: Question: why are the liberal Democrats |
15 Oct 2006 10:19:30 PM |
|
|
"liberal democrats" <liberal.democrats@lose.elections> wrote in message
news:XQJQDSOX39006.1995486111@anonymous.poster...
so bloody good at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory?
We're the Cubs of politics.
And we don't sacrifice our young for political gain.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Do Not Mind Me" |
|
| Title: TROLL ALERT JEFF SPELLED RONG |
15 Oct 2006 10:45:03 PM |
|
|
Geoff wrote:
"liberal democrats" <liberal.democrats@lose.elections> wrote in message
news:XQJQDSOX39006.1995486111@anonymous.poster...
so bloody good at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory?
We're the Cubs of politics.
And we don't sacrifice our young for political gain.
This guy "Jeff" who spells his name wrong is nothing but a usenet
troll. He has gone out of his way to troll me in the past. I'm here
to advice people he is a troll. I think I'm going to try to reply to
every single post he makes and inform people he is a troll until he
tells me he will leave me the ***** alone and not reply to me for the
sole purpose of being a fucking *****.
Please just say you're sorry and that you'll leave me alone, I really
don't want to have to follow you around usenet and let everyone know
about you being a lame troll, I just want your lame troll ***** to stay
away from me?
So you gonna say you're sorry or what?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Geoff" |
|
| Title: Re: TROLL ALERT JEFF SPELLED RONG |
16 Oct 2006 09:31:13 AM |
|
|
"Do Not Mind Me" <domindme@mindless.com> wrote in message
news:1160970303.264180.177050@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
This guy "Jeff" who spells his name wrong is nothing but a usenet
troll. He has gone out of his way to troll me in the past. I'm here
to advice people he is a troll. I think I'm going to try to reply to
every single post he makes and inform people he is a troll until he
tells me he will leave me the ***** alone and not reply to me for the
sole purpose of being a fucking *****.
Please just say you're sorry and that you'll leave me alone, I really
don't want to have to follow you around usenet and let everyone know
about you being a lame troll, I just want your lame troll ***** to stay
away from me?
So you gonna say you're sorry or what?
Who the ***** are you? I've never heard of you before. Can you give me one
instance where I replied to even one of your posts?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Asshole Lee Perkoff" |
|
| Title: Re: TROLL ALERT JEFF SPELLED RONG |
16 Oct 2006 03:27:55 PM |
|
|
Geoff wrote:
"Do Not Mind Me" <domindme@mindless.com> wrote in message
news:1160970303.264180.177050@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
This guy "Jeff" who spells his name wrong is nothing but a usenet
troll. He has gone out of his way to troll me in the past. I'm here
to advice people he is a troll. I think I'm going to try to reply to
every single post he makes and inform people he is a troll until he
tells me he will leave me the ***** alone and not reply to me for the
sole purpose of being a fucking *****.
Please just say you're sorry and that you'll leave me alone, I really
don't want to have to follow you around usenet and let everyone know
about you being a lame troll, I just want your lame troll ***** to stay
away from me?
So you gonna say you're sorry or what?
Who the ***** are you? I've never heard of you before. Can you give me one
instance where I replied to even one of your posts?
Say you're sorry.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Geoff" |
|
| Title: Re: TROLL ALERT JEFF SPELLED RONG |
16 Oct 2006 05:34:04 PM |
|
|
"***** Lee Perkoff" <donotmindme@mindless.com> wrote in message
news:1161030475.620028.69260@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Geoff wrote:
"Do Not Mind Me" <domindme@mindless.com> wrote in message
news:1160970303.264180.177050@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
This guy "Jeff" who spells his name wrong is nothing but a usenet
troll. He has gone out of his way to troll me in the past. I'm here
to advice people he is a troll. I think I'm going to try to reply to
every single post he makes and inform people he is a troll until he
tells me he will leave me the ***** alone and not reply to me for the
sole purpose of being a fucking *****.
Please just say you're sorry and that you'll leave me alone, I really
don't want to have to follow you around usenet and let everyone know
about you being a lame troll, I just want your lame troll ***** to stay
away from me?
So you gonna say you're sorry or what?
Who the ***** are you? I've never heard of you before. Can you give me one
instance where I replied to even one of your posts?
Say you're sorry.
I have NO idea what you're talking about. Get a life.
Howzabout I say this...*plonk*
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: TROLL ALERT JEFF SPELLED RONG |
16 Oct 2006 10:01:01 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 10:31:13 -0400, "Geoff" <geoff@nospam.com> wrote:
"Do Not Mind Me" <domindme@mindless.com> wrote in message
news:1160970303.264180.177050@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
This guy "Jeff" who spells his name wrong is nothing but a usenet
troll. He has gone out of his way to troll me in the past. I'm here
to advice people he is a troll. I think I'm going to try to reply to
every single post he makes and inform people he is a troll until he
tells me he will leave me the ***** alone and not reply to me for the
sole purpose of being a fucking *****.
Please just say you're sorry and that you'll leave me alone, I really
don't want to have to follow you around usenet and let everyone know
about you being a lame troll, I just want your lame troll ***** to stay
away from me?
So you gonna say you're sorry or what?
Who the ***** are you? I've never heard of you before. Can you give me one
instance where I replied to even one of your posts?
Now he'll cite this one and claim it proves his accusations.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Geoff" |
|
| Title: Re: TROLL ALERT JEFF SPELLED RONG |
16 Oct 2006 10:26:34 AM |
|
|
"John Baker" <nunya@bizniz.net> wrote in message
news:ak77j2pi2fq0plngpq0ukpfl03l6na7jcf@4ax.com...
So you gonna say you're sorry or what?
Who the ***** are you? I've never heard of you before. Can you give me one
instance where I replied to even one of your posts?
Now he'll cite this one and claim it proves his accusations.
See the thread: "(Original Video) Me Dressed As Pee Wee Herman"
(chronologically just after this one).
His display name changed from Perkoff Kruger to Peewee Perkoff...obviously
the same loser. Watch the video in that thread to see the juvenile mind in
action.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Asshole Lee Perkoff" |
|
| Title: Re: TROLL ALERT JEFF SPELLED RONG |
16 Oct 2006 03:28:56 PM |
|
|
Geoff wrote:
"John Baker" <nunya@bizniz.net> wrote in message
news:ak77j2pi2fq0plngpq0ukpfl03l6na7jcf@4ax.com...
So you gonna say you're sorry or what?
Who the ***** are you? I've never heard of you before. Can you give me one
instance where I replied to even one of your posts?
Now he'll cite this one and claim it proves his accusations.
See the thread: "(Original Video) Me Dressed As Pee Wee Herman"
(chronologically just after this one).
His display name changed from Perkoff Kruger to Peewee Perkoff...obviously
the same loser. Watch the video in that thread to see the juvenile mind in
action.
Say you're sorry for your previous ***** post and this ***** post.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Geoff" |
|
| Title: Re: TROLL ALERT JEFF SPELLED RONG |
16 Oct 2006 05:33:15 PM |
|
|
"***** Lee Perkoff" <donotmindme@mindless.com> wrote in message
news:1161030536.063974.287340@f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Geoff wrote:
"John Baker" <nunya@bizniz.net> wrote in message
news:ak77j2pi2fq0plngpq0ukpfl03l6na7jcf@4ax.com...
So you gonna say you're sorry or what?
Who the ***** are you? I've never heard of you before. Can you give me
one
instance where I replied to even one of your posts?
Now he'll cite this one and claim it proves his accusations.
See the thread: "(Original Video) Me Dressed As Pee Wee Herman"
(chronologically just after this one).
His display name changed from Perkoff Kruger to Peewee
Perkoff...obviously
the same loser. Watch the video in that thread to see the juvenile mind
in
action.
Say you're sorry for your previous ***** post and this ***** post.
lol...if you're going to troll you can't be so sensitive...didn't you get
the FAQ?
*plonk*
.
|
|
|
| User: "Asshole Lee Perkoff" |
|
| Title: (alt.humor) Read My Part Of This Post, It's Pretty Funny |
16 Oct 2006 05:42:11 PM |
|
|
Geoff wrote:
"***** Lee Perkoff" <donotmindme@mindless.com> wrote in message
news:1161030536.063974.287340@f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Geoff wrote:
"John Baker" <nunya@bizniz.net> wrote in message
news:ak77j2pi2fq0plngpq0ukpfl03l6na7jcf@4ax.com...
So you gonna say you're sorry or what?
Who the ***** are you? I've never heard of you before. Can you give me
one
instance where I replied to even one of your posts?
Now he'll cite this one and claim it proves his accusations.
See the thread: "(Original Video) Me Dressed As Pee Wee Herman"
(chronologically just after this one).
His display name changed from Perkoff Kruger to Peewee
Perkoff...obviously
the same loser. Watch the video in that thread to see the juvenile mind
in
action.
Say you're sorry for your previous ***** post and this ***** post.
lol...if you're going to troll you can't be so sensitive...didn't you get
the FAQ?
*plonk*
If plonking me means you're going to stop trolling me, ouch, why'd you
do that? That hurts so bad.
Looks like Perkoff had a goal, and he did what he had to do to meet
that goal, I don't know how to spell acomplishment, unless that is how
you spell it, that's why I said meet instead of acomplishment.
http://perkoff.com
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: TROLL ALERT JEFF SPELLED RONG |
16 Oct 2006 11:07:03 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 11:26:34 -0400, "Geoff" <geoff@nospam.com> wrote:
"John Baker" <nunya@bizniz.net> wrote in message
news:ak77j2pi2fq0plngpq0ukpfl03l6na7jcf@4ax.com...
So you gonna say you're sorry or what?
Who the ***** are you? I've never heard of you before. Can you give me one
instance where I replied to even one of your posts?
Now he'll cite this one and claim it proves his accusations.
See the thread: "(Original Video) Me Dressed As Pee Wee Herman"
(chronologically just after this one).
His display name changed from Perkoff Kruger to Peewee Perkoff...obviously
the same loser. Watch the video in that thread to see the juvenile mind in
action.
I plonked any and all variations on 'Perkoff' months ago. <G>
.
|
|
|
| User: "Asshole Lee Perkoff" |
|
| Title: Re: TROLL ALERT JEFF SPELLED RONG |
16 Oct 2006 03:30:58 PM |
|
|
John Baker wrote:
On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 11:26:34 -0400, "Geoff" <geoff@nospam.com> wrote:
"John Baker" <nunya@bizniz.net> wrote in message
news:ak77j2pi2fq0plngpq0ukpfl03l6na7jcf@4ax.com...
So you gonna say you're sorry or what?
Who the ***** are you? I've never heard of you before. Can you give me one
instance where I replied to even one of your posts?
Now he'll cite this one and claim it proves his accusations.
See the thread: "(Original Video) Me Dressed As Pee Wee Herman"
(chronologically just after this one).
His display name changed from Perkoff Kruger to Peewee Perkoff...obviously
the same loser. Watch the video in that thread to see the juvenile mind in
action.
I plonked any and all variations on 'Perkoff' months ago. <G>
Are you one of those guys who makes "plonk" announcements when you
plonk someone? Oh yeah, you just made one on me, so are you lying
about plonking me months ago? If so why did you just directly reply to
me to say "Plonk" besides being a lame lying loser, got any reasons?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: TROLL ALERT JEFF SPELLED RONG |
16 Oct 2006 07:33:44 AM |
|
|
On 15 Oct 2006 20:45:03 -0700, "Do Not Mind Me"
<domindme@mindless.com> wrote:
Geoff wrote:
"liberal democrats" <liberal.democrats@lose.elections> wrote in message
news:XQJQDSOX39006.1995486111@anonymous.poster...
so bloody good at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory?
We're the Cubs of politics.
And we don't sacrifice our young for political gain.
This guy "Jeff" who spells his name wrong is nothing but a usenet
troll. He has gone out of his way to troll me in the past. I'm here
to advice people he is a troll. I think I'm going to try to reply to
every single post he makes and inform people he is a troll until he
tells me he will leave me the ***** alone and not reply to me for the
sole purpose of being a fucking *****.
Please just say you're sorry and that you'll leave me alone, I really
don't want to have to follow you around usenet and let everyone know
about you being a lame troll, I just want your lame troll ***** to stay
away from me?
So you gonna say you're sorry or what?
<PLONK!>
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Free Lunch" |
|
| Title: Re: Question: why are the liberal Democrats |
15 Oct 2006 10:50:06 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 23:19:30 -0400, in alt.atheism
"Geoff" <geoff@nospam.com> wrote in
<m_qdnaD0aOHfZ6_YnZ2dnUVZ_sSdnZ2d@comcast.com>:
"liberal democrats" <liberal.democrats@lose.elections> wrote in message
news:XQJQDSOX39006.1995486111@anonymous.poster...
so bloody good at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory?
We're the Cubs of politics.
And we don't sacrifice our young for political gain.
And let the Republicans tell lies without instantly calling them on it
-- loudly and continually.
.
|
|
|
| User: "liberal democrats" |
|
| Title: Re: Question: why are the liberal Democrats |
15 Oct 2006 11:46:45 PM |
|
|
In article <ga06j2dlet941p4h781bl1ifcmoqu1mj1b@4ax.com>,
Free Lunch <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 23:19:30 -0400, in alt.atheism
"Geoff" <geoff@nospam.com> wrote in
<m_qdnaD0aOHfZ6_YnZ2dnUVZ_sSdnZ2d@comcast.com>:
"liberal democrats" <liberal.democrats@lose.elections> wrote in message
news:XQJQDSOX39006.1995486111@anonymous.poster...
so bloody good at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory?
We're the Cubs of politics.
And we don't sacrifice our young for political gain.
And let the Republicans tell lies without instantly calling them on it
-- loudly and continually.
So you're saying that that explains why the liberal Democrats keep
losing elections.
Figured as much.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This message was posted via one or more anonymous remailing services.
The original sender is unknown. Any address shown in the From header
is unverified.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Free Lunch" |
|
| Title: Re: Question: why are the liberal Democrats |
15 Oct 2006 11:53:18 PM |
|
|
On 16 Oct 2006 04:46:45 -0000, in alt.atheism
liberal democrats <liberal.democrats@lose.elections> wrote in
<MO8HG3AA39006.2824652778@anonymous.poster>:
In article <ga06j2dlet941p4h781bl1ifcmoqu1mj1b@4ax.com>,
Free Lunch <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 23:19:30 -0400, in alt.atheism
"Geoff" <geoff@nospam.com> wrote in
<m_qdnaD0aOHfZ6_YnZ2dnUVZ_sSdnZ2d@comcast.com>:
"liberal democrats" <liberal.democrats@lose.elections> wrote in message
news:XQJQDSOX39006.1995486111@anonymous.poster...
so bloody good at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory?
We're the Cubs of politics.
And we don't sacrifice our young for political gain.
And let the Republicans tell lies without instantly calling them on it
-- loudly and continually.
So you're saying that that explains why the liberal Democrats keep
losing elections.
Figured as much.
Yes, Republican lies are a major reason that Democrats lose. Not so much
the lies, but the unwillingness to fight back immediately when the
Republicans lie.
Why do people take the Republicans seriously when they claim to be
fiscally responsible. They aren't. Their spending is out of control, but
they put it on credit instead of paying for it. That merely makes them
even more irresponsible.
.
|
|
|
| User: "liberal democrats" |
|
| Title: Re: Question: why are the liberal Democrats |
16 Oct 2006 01:50:31 AM |
|
|
In article <us36j292c3jmqq8u1hno98epcr4de1id4b@4ax.com>,
Free Lunch <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
On 16 Oct 2006 04:46:45 -0000, in alt.atheism
liberal democrats <liberal.democrats@lose.elections> wrote in
<MO8HG3AA39006.2824652778@anonymous.poster>:
In article <ga06j2dlet941p4h781bl1ifcmoqu1mj1b@4ax.com>,
Free Lunch <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 23:19:30 -0400, in alt.atheism
"Geoff" <geoff@nospam.com> wrote in
<m_qdnaD0aOHfZ6_YnZ2dnUVZ_sSdnZ2d@comcast.com>:
"liberal democrats" <liberal.democrats@lose.elections> wrote in message
news:XQJQDSOX39006.1995486111@anonymous.poster...
so bloody good at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory?
We're the Cubs of politics.
And we don't sacrifice our young for political gain.
And let the Republicans tell lies without instantly calling them on it
-- loudly and continually.
So you're saying that that explains why the liberal Democrats keep
losing elections.
Figured as much.
Yes, Republican lies are a major reason that Democrats lose. Not so much
the lies, but the unwillingness to fight back immediately when the
Republicans lie.
Oh, sorry. I misunderstood. I thought that the liberal Democrats
relied on worn-out bogus excuses like "republican lies" to justify
their inability to win elections. Thanks for setting me straight.
Why do people take the Republicans seriously when they claim to be
fiscally responsible. They aren't. Their spending is out of control, but
they put it on credit instead of paying for it. That merely makes them
even more irresponsible.
Which is why the liberal Democrats keep losing the elections.
Liberals are all useless rhetoric and no actual substance.
No wonder they lose. America is better for it.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This message was posted via one or more anonymous remailing services.
The original sender is unknown. Any address shown in the From header
is unverified.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Free Lunch" |
|
| Title: Re: Question: why are the liberal Democrats |
16 Oct 2006 06:49:27 AM |
|
|
On 16 Oct 2006 06:50:31 -0000, in alt.atheism
liberal democrats <liberal.democrats@lose.elections> wrote in
<PE1MPIMB39006.3684143519@anonymous.poster>:
In article <us36j292c3jmqq8u1hno98epcr4de1id4b@4ax.com>,
Free Lunch <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
On 16 Oct 2006 04:46:45 -0000, in alt.atheism
liberal democrats <liberal.democrats@lose.elections> wrote in
<MO8HG3AA39006.2824652778@anonymous.poster>:
In article <ga06j2dlet941p4h781bl1ifcmoqu1mj1b@4ax.com>,
Free Lunch <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 23:19:30 -0400, in alt.atheism
"Geoff" <geoff@nospam.com> wrote in
<m_qdnaD0aOHfZ6_YnZ2dnUVZ_sSdnZ2d@comcast.com>:
"liberal democrats" <liberal.democrats@lose.elections> wrote in message
news:XQJQDSOX39006.1995486111@anonymous.poster...
so bloody good at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory?
We're the Cubs of politics.
And we don't sacrifice our young for political gain.
And let the Republicans tell lies without instantly calling them on it
-- loudly and continually.
So you're saying that that explains why the liberal Democrats keep
losing elections.
Figured as much.
Yes, Republican lies are a major reason that Democrats lose. Not so much
the lies, but the unwillingness to fight back immediately when the
Republicans lie.
Oh, sorry. I misunderstood. I thought that the liberal Democrats
relied on worn-out bogus excuses like "republican lies" to justify
their inability to win elections. Thanks for setting me straight.
Republicans do lie. The question is why don't the Democracts act against
those lies more quickly.
Why do people take the Republicans seriously when they claim to be
fiscally responsible. They aren't. Their spending is out of control, but
they put it on credit instead of paying for it. That merely makes them
even more irresponsible.
Which is why the liberal Democrats keep losing the elections.
Liberals are all useless rhetoric and no actual substance.
No wonder they lose. America is better for it.
Why do you think that America is better off under Bush's totally
incompetent governance?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Question: why are the liberal Democrats |
16 Oct 2006 11:50:33 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 06:49:27 -0500, Free Lunch <lunch@nofreelunch.us>
wrote:
Why do you think that America is better off under Bush's totally
incompetent governance?
He got that from a soldier who died unnecessarily in Putsch's phony
war.
--
rukbat at optonline dot net
"To assume the existence of an unperceivable being ... does not facilitate understanding
the orderliness we find in the perceivable world."
- Letter to an Iowa student who asked, What is God? July, 1953; Einstein Archive 59-085
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
This signature was made by SigChanger.
You can find SigChanger at: http://www.phranc.nl/
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Starlord" |
|
| Title: Re: Question: why are the liberal Democrats |
16 Oct 2006 05:26:25 AM |
|
|
POINK
--
The Lone Sidewalk Astronomer of Rosamond
Telescope Buyers FAQ
http://home.inreach.com/starlord
Sidewalk Astronomy
www.sidewalkastronomy.info
The Church of Eternity
http://home.inreach.com/starlord/church/Eternity.html
"liberal democrats" <liberal.democrats@lose.elections> wrote in message
news:MO8HG3AA39006.2824652778@anonymous.poster...
In article <ga06j2dlet941p4h781bl1ifcmoqu1mj1b@4ax.com>,
Free Lunch <lunch@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 23:19:30 -0400, in alt.atheism
"Geoff" <geoff@nospam.com> wrote in
<m_qdnaD0aOHfZ6_YnZ2dnUVZ_sSdnZ2d@comcast.com>:
"liberal democrats" <liberal.democrats@lose.elections> wrote in message
news:XQJQDSOX39006.1995486111@anonymous.poster...
so bloody good at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory?
We're the Cubs of politics.
And we don't sacrifice our young for political gain.
And let the Republicans tell lies without instantly calling them on it
-- loudly and continually.
So you're saying that that explains why the liberal Democrats keep
losing elections.
Figured as much.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This message was posted via one or more anonymous remailing services.
The original sender is unknown. Any address shown in the From header
is unverified.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mij Adyaw" |
|
| Title: Re: Question: why are the liberal Democrats |
16 Oct 2006 01:14:28 PM |
|
|
Starlord Dude,
I think that the correct word is "PLONK". Now repeat after me... PLONK. :-)
"Starlord" <starlord@sidewalkastronomy.info> wrote in message
news:X62dne8S48aowq7YnZ2dnUVZ_umdnZ2d@inreach.com...
POINK
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: Question: why are the liberal Democrats |
16 Oct 2006 07:35:26 AM |
|
|
On 16 Oct 2006 02:47:21 -0000, liberal democrats
<liberal.democrats@lose.elections> wrote:
so bloody good at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory?
Why are you so incompetent at trolling?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "William Styron" |
|
| Title: Re: Question: why are the liberal Democrats |
15 Oct 2006 10:01:49 PM |
|
|
The more astute among you may notice that the original poster, a pig
troll, posted his inflammatory message to alt.religion.christian,
sci.astro.amateur, and alt.atheism. Clearly an attempt to incite lots of
impassioned replies from those not on to his game.
Sort of like posting "Mohamed was a fag" to alt.religion.muslim and
alt.religion.christian. You get the drift.
Just don't buy into his game. It only encourages him/her/it/
On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 02:47:21 +0000, liberal democrats wrote:
so bloody good at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This message was posted via one or more anonymous remailing services.
The original sender is unknown. Any address shown in the From header
is unverified.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "David Goldberg" |
|
| Title: Re: Question: why are the liberal Democrats |
15 Oct 2006 10:07:27 PM |
|
|
liberal democrats wrote:
so bloody good at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory?
Because they have no original ideas.
Except for hatred of Republicans, they have nothing to offer America.
--
Be thankful we're not getting all the government we're paying for.
.
|
|
|
| User: "liberal democrats" |
|
| Title: Re: Question: why are the liberal Democrats |
15 Oct 2006 10:55:39 PM |
|
|
In article <4532F76F.10017DCE@yahoo.com>,
David Goldberg <david_asbnll@yahoo.com> wrote:
liberal democrats wrote:
so bloody good at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory?
Because they have no original ideas.
Except for hatred of Republicans, they have nothing to offer America.
And they hate God. And they seem to hate winning elections, because
they keep losing the elections at the last minute.
I wonder what their clownish excuses will be this November eighth?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This message was posted via one or more anonymous remailing services.
The original sender is unknown. Any address shown in the From header
is unverified.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Kate" |
|
| Title: Re: Question: why are the liberal Democrats |
16 Oct 2006 03:59:30 PM |
|
|
liberal democrats wrote:
In article <4532F76F.10017DCE@yahoo.com>,
David Goldberg <david_asbnll@yahoo.com> wrote:
liberal democrats wrote:
so bloody good at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory?
Because they have no original ideas.
Except for hatred of Republicans, they have nothing to offer America.
And they hate God. And they seem to hate winning elections, because
they keep losing the elections at the last minute.
I wonder what their clownish excuses will be this November eighth?
Probably the same as before. When the corrupt party has control of the
vote counts, it's not unusual for the other party to amazingly lose by
a small amount even though the polls said they were in a strong lead.
That you weren't amazed before speaks volumes for your lack of
integrity.
.
|
|
|
| User: "liberal democrats" |
|
| Title: Re: Question: why are the liberal Democrats |
16 Oct 2006 07:15:40 PM |
|
|
In article <1161032370.842763.85880@f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
"Kate" <Kate@twoangryliberals.com> wrote:
liberal democrats wrote:
In article <4532F76F.10017DCE@yahoo.com>,
David Goldberg <david_asbnll@yahoo.com> wrote:
liberal democrats wrote:
so bloody good at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory?
Because they have no original ideas.
Except for hatred of Republicans, they have nothing to offer America.
And they hate God. And they seem to hate winning elections, because
they keep losing the elections at the last minute.
I wonder what their clownish excuses will be this November eighth?
Probably the same as before. When the corrupt party has control of the
vote counts, it's not unusual for the other party to amazingly lose by
a small amount even though the polls said they were in a strong lead.
That you weren't amazed before speaks volumes for your lack of
integrity.
So you're saying that the liberal Democrats should have won the
elections according to media poll numbers, instead of by votes?
There are no excuses for failure. Liberal Democrats must want to
lose. There is no other explanation. Otherwise, why do liberal
Democrats keep saying and doing such stupid things, like with
their tabloid "green alien space baby" conspiracy theories?
There are actually liberal Democrats who believe that hurricane
Katrina and the flooding of New Orleans was caused by the Bush
administration. Many of them also believe that 9/11 was caused
by the Bush administration. The liberal Democrats lose the
elections and blame in on "stolen votes." Do they even realize
how completely insane that sounds to the average American voters?
The liberal Democrats say, vote for us, because we are completely
off our rockers. If it looks like a duck, and it walks like a
duck, odds are pretty good it's a duck.
We can always tell who the liberal Democrats are around here.
They get really upset when others talk about why the liberals
keep losing the elections. Not by rising and falling "poll
numbers," which don't count for beans, but by votes.
That was my original question, why are the liberal Democrats so
darned good at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, by
throwing away their opportunities to win elections at the drop
of a hat? They must unconsciously want to lose.
I am talking about votes. Liberal Democrats can only talk about
poll numbers and desperate conspiracy theories. No wonder they
keep losing elections. Because deep down inside, they want to
lose.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This message was posted via one or more anonymous remailing services.
The original sender is unknown. Any address shown in the From header
is unverified.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Kate " |
|
| Title: Re: Question: why are the liberal Democrats |
16 Oct 2006 08:26:03 PM |
|
|
On 17 Oct 2006 00:15:40 -0000, liberal democrats
<liberal.democrats@lose.elections> wrote:
In article <1161032370.842763.85880@f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
"Kate" <Kate@twoangryliberals.com> wrote:
liberal democrats wrote:
In article <4532F76F.10017DCE@yahoo.com>,
David Goldberg <david_asbnll@yahoo.com> wrote:
liberal democrats wrote:
so bloody good at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory?
Because they have no original ideas.
Except for hatred of Republicans, they have nothing to offer America.
And they hate God. And they seem to hate winning elections, because
they keep losing the elections at the last minute.
I wonder what their clownish excuses will be this November eighth?
Probably the same as before. When the corrupt party has control of the
vote counts, it's not unusual for the other party to amazingly lose by
a small amount even though the polls said they were in a strong lead.
That you weren't amazed before speaks volumes for your lack of
integrity.
So you're saying that the liberal Democrats should have won the
elections according to media poll numbers, instead of by votes?
There are no excuses for failure. Liberal Democrats must want to
lose. There is no other explanation. Otherwise, why do liberal
Democrats keep saying and doing such stupid things, like with
their tabloid "green alien space baby" conspiracy theories?
There are actually liberal Democrats who believe that hurricane
Katrina and the flooding of New Orleans was caused by the Bush
administration. Many of them also believe that 9/11 was caused
by the Bush administration. The liberal Democrats lose the
elections and blame in on "stolen votes." Do they even realize
how completely insane that sounds to the average American voters?
The liberal Democrats say, vote for us, because we are completely
off our rockers. If it looks like a duck, and it walks like a
duck, odds are pretty good it's a duck.
We can always tell who the liberal Democrats are around here.
They get really upset when others talk about why the liberals
keep losing the elections. Not by rising and falling "poll
numbers," which don't count for beans, but by votes.
That was my original question, why are the liberal Democrats so
darned good at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, by
throwing away their opportunities to win elections at the drop
of a hat? They must unconsciously want to lose.
I am talking about votes. Liberal Democrats can only talk about
poll numbers and desperate conspiracy theories. No wonder they
keep losing elections. Because deep down inside, they want to
lose.
Honey, I'm a programmer. The electronic voting processes set up by
the republicans are completely wide open to fraud. I know the vendor
who set many of them up - they are well known slime balls. They were
kicked out of California for trying to change programming and let back
in by the new republican sec of state completely against the rules and
with no explanation.
That you are an idiot who doesn't want to face the fact that most of
the current crop of republicans are corrupt and are going to jail one
by one, is really your problem.
Now run along little neo con. You are wasting our time. You don't
want to face the truth.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Yang, AthD h.c, Kicking AWOLs Cocaine Snorting Ass" |
|
| Title: Re: Question: why are the liberal Democrats |
15 Oct 2006 10:30:57 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 20:07:27 -0700, David Goldberg
<david_asbnll@yahoo.com> wrote:
liberal democrats wrote:
so bloody good at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory?
Because they have no original ideas.
Because Liberal don't molest little kids like the Republicans do.
Except for hatred of Republicans, they have nothing to offer America.
Except for lust for little kids, Republicans have nothing to offer
America.
-----
Yang
a.a. #28
AthD (h.c.) conferred by the regents of the LCL
a.a. pastor #-273.15, the most frigid church of Celcius nee Kelvin
EAC Econometric Forecast and Sorcery Division
The Bush 'balanced' budget: -2 trillion and worsening
The Bush 'economic' policy: 12.5 million FEWER jobs than Clinton and counting
The Bush Iraq lie: -2759 GIs, one friend's co-worker's son and mounting
Having Bush ***** up my country: Worthless
newsgroups Yang promises not to revenge post
in response to Sound-of-Trumpet's *****:
rec.art.scifi.written
sci.archaeology
soc.history.what-if
.
|
|
|
|
|

|
Related Articles |
|
|