Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: T Wake on 24 Nov 2006 11:32 <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote in message news:g_E9h.9703$yE6.3595(a)newssvr14.news.prodigy.com... > > "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote in message > news:bfSdnU2N77r5ZfjYRVnytQ(a)pipex.net... >> >> <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote in message >> news:CXb9h.24806$yl4.9568(a)newssvr12.news.prodigy.com... >>> >>> "unsettled" <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote in message >>> news:3fcbb$45647f3d$4fe77c5$17560(a)DIALUPUSA.NET... >>> >>>> AT&T's former monopoly was licensed and regulated. They >>>> eventally voluntarily gave it up in order to be permitted >>>> to invest their profits in something unrelated to >>>> their primary business. >>>> >>>> And just in case you haven't been paying attention, the >>>> phoenix is arising out of its ashes. >>> >>> Yes, and the American consumer and worker had better hope that this is >>> one pendulum that starts to swing back the other way, and FAST. Jobs >>> are being lost and prices are rising, all because of the lack of >>> effective competition in several sectors of the American economy. The >>> SEC and FTC have been asleep at the wheel for the past 20 years, and the >>> American middle class is the one paying the price. >> >> Based on unsettled and /BAH's previous posts, they are not overly >> concerned what happens to the middle class as "Middle class" assumptions >> and lifestyles appear to be "wrong" from their class war POV. > > The one thing you have to keep in mind is that they both claim to be > retired (I have no reason to doubt either.) I've seen this behavior > often. While they were working, they supported administrations that built > up enormous deficits because it meant not paying as much in taxes as they > should have to support the services that they got from the government. > Now that the economy is slowing down in response to such irresponsible > governance, and health care is becoming too expensive for all but the > richest, those who got their slice of the pie during that time refuse to > allow the government to institute the social programs that were > necessitated by their generation's irresponsibility and greed. In other > words, now that BAH and Unsettled have gotten their little slice of the > pie, everyone else can eat cake. Apres eux, la deluge! Vive la revolucion :-)
From: unsettled on 24 Nov 2006 11:33 T Wake wrote: > <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote in message > news:QNE9h.9698$yE6.6604(a)newssvr14.news.prodigy.com... > >>"unsettled" <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote in message >>news:e9d6$4565ee94$4fe72a4$25703(a)DIALUPUSA.NET... >> >>>JoeBloe wrote: >>> >>>> Being a Usenet PlonkTARD is likely worse. Announcing your filter >>>>file edits plants you squarely at the bottom of the barrel. >>> >>>Having read his bile which he tries to foist off as discussion >>>for a bit, it is obvious that he only engages those who are easy >>>victims. Relf and TJ spring to mind. He thinks it is a face >>>saving form or retreat on his part to plonk posters like me, >>>never realizing just how transparent his agenda is. >> >>Is that why you put me in your killfile? > > > And assuming the unsettled thing is still talking about PTP here, it was > stated that PTP still responds to Relf / Frazir because at least they are > amusing. Mental illness is amusing to you? Of course it is, how silly of me. > Unsettled was just a jingoistic retard with nothing of value to > provide to _any_ debate. My in depth posts in this thread demonstrate that your comment is just another in the series of lies you've posted. > If unsettled wants to check, he can take part in some of the other threads > and see what he can provide in the way of real physics. I looked at a number of your posts and found absolutely nothing relating to physics in your comments. In fact there's very little real physics beig discussed in the newsgroup. How's your sidekick Hammond these days?
From: lucasea on 24 Nov 2006 11:43 "JoeBloe" <joebloe(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message news:p57cm2hcg9fq0nq13693m3usqd6noe7rkc(a)4ax.com... > On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 20:12:01 -0000, "T Wake" > <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> Gave us: > >> >>"JoeBloe" <joebloe(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message >>news:cgd4m2pnb2md9d2nue5p1v59o2lnqvdmqj(a)4ax.com... >>> On Sat, 18 Nov 2006 17:42:05 -0000, "T Wake" >>> <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> Gave us: >>> >>>> >>>>"JoeBloe" <joebloe(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message >>>>news:o80tl2d7bpo9919u2296bvnom2h3mqgrq1(a)4ax.com... >>>>> On Fri, 17 Nov 2006 22:15:05 -0000, "T Wake" >>>>> <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> Gave us: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>><jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message >>>>>>news:ejk9op$8qk_001(a)s922.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... >>>>>>> In article <1163689355.822964.185390(a)k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, >>>>>>> |||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>So who are you then? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> My moniker is in some listings. JMF's is in all the listings. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>Stop alluding then. Tell us. Listings of what? This is USENET, as it >>>>>>stands, >>>>>>based on your recent posts you are currently as believable as tj >>>>>>Frazir. >>>>>> >>>>> As if a twit like you, resting only one notch above TJ Frazir, could >>>>> judge anyone else. >>>> >>>>At least I, unlike you, am that one notch above Frazir. Even he laughs >>>>at >>>>your posts. >>>> >>> >>> >>> You're an idiot. >>> >>> He can't even spell the words laugh, your, or post, much less know >>> what they mean. >> >>Yet he still has you beaten hands down. Pretty sad really. I feel sorry >>for >>you. >> > You need to stop looking in a mirror when you are thinking up your > replies. It shows, terribly. You know you're on the right track when all your stalker can find to say in response is "I know you are, but what am I?" Eric Lucas
From: lucasea on 24 Nov 2006 11:45 "Ken Smith" <kensmith(a)green.rahul.net> wrote in message news:ek5873$t07$1(a)blue.rahul.net... > In article <p_b9h.24807$yl4.15267(a)newssvr12.news.prodigy.com>, > <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: >> >>"unsettled" <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote in message >>news:c16c5$456482ae$4fe77c5$17631(a)DIALUPUSA.NET... >>> Lloyd Parker wrote: >>> > [...] >>> You've just gone over the cliff with the other lemmings. >> >>And you think calling people names is a valid substitute for discussing >>facts. Nice way to influence people to your point of view. > > > The sad thing is that this steaming pile of turtle droppings isn't very > good at it. At least you could hope that when he opened his festering gob > something mildly entertaining would come out. Instead that ball of dung > he calls a brain can only manage to spew forth the same boring insults as > before. A fixation on things like lemmings is fairly common in people > suffering from pneumoencephali, so that may explain the things entered > repeatedly on his drool-proof keyboard. Creations formed from reanimated > vomit, such as him, are the festering canker on the leprid face of his > party. Those of us in California, at least, are up wind and need not > suffer the miasma-like vapor that exudes from every malodorous pore of the > pustule he calls his body. Usenet has its share of maggots and vultures > but this one gags them all. > > What do you want to bet that this now starts a subthread about whether > maggots really can gag? Now *that's* funny! Eric Lucas
From: krw on 24 Nov 2006 11:55
In article <eFE9h.9693$yE6.9309(a)newssvr14.news.prodigy.com>, lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net says... > > "T Wake" <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> wrote in message > news:MtSdnXm0y5U4evjYnZ2dnUVZ8tOdnZ2d(a)pipex.net... > > > > <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message > > news:ek47u9$8qk_002(a)s1002.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... > >> In article <456481AB.D9E20023(a)hotmail.com>, > >> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >>> > >>>> lparker(a)emory.edu (Lloyd Parker) wrote: > >>>> > jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >>>> > > >>>> >>>>What percentage do you think the government has to take? > >>>> >>> > >>>> >>>Medicare runs with about a 3% overhead rate. > >>>> >> > >>>> >>I don't believe this. That may be the Federal percentage. The > >>>> >>state percentage also has to be included. > >>>> > > >>>> >There is no state % for Medicare. You're thinking of Medicaid. > >>>> > >>>> No, I'm not. Who sends the money? Not the feds. The feds > >>>> send the money to the state who then disburses it. That is > >>>> two political levels of bureaucracy. > >>> > >>>An 'NHS' doesn't have these problems. > >> > >> Once again, I'll ask you to think about administering your > >> NHS to all of Europe. That is how the US has to work. > >> We essentially 50 countries, each has its own politics, economy > >> and different priority lists. > > > > It is a shame you have such a low opinion of the American people. > > It's also quite a shame that she has such a lack of understanding of the US > Constitution, to think that no national program is possible. There are > plenty of national programs in the US, and they work fine. All (not operated through the states) are unconstitutional, as well. None come close to 17% of the GNP either, though you'd likely be all for nationalizing the oil companies too. -- Keith |