http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living?hl=en
misc.consumers.frugal-living@googlegroups.com
Today's topics:
* I finally get it: If GW is not man-made, then God is punishing us with it -
12 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/a0a0ec86da3faf9a?hl=en
* Pay mortage payment before due date? - 9 messages, 6 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/3228aec93fd86575?hl=en
* NONVIOLENCE: Why Jesus is a fake - 4 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/3449037952f7cd43?hl=en
==============================================================================
TOPIC: I finally get it: If GW is not man-made, then God is punishing us with
it
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/a0a0ec86da3faf9a?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 12 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 8 2010 11:32 am
From: jeff
Edward Dolan wrote:
> "jeff" <jeff_thies@att.net> wrote in message news:4B702D1D.80406@att.net...
>> Edward Dolan wrote:
> [...]
>> But there are none so blind as those
>>> who will not see, i.e., liberals.
>> You have only beliefs, no facts. Just because someone you like says it's
>> so, does not make it so.
>
> I leave it to others with lesser minds than mine to supply facts. I supply
> ideology.
Yes. Which makes you an ideologue. Someone who believes just because
they do.
I hate Leftists because they have been wrong about most everything
> for the past hundred years. Furthermore, it was Leftists that gave us the
> 20th century, the worst century in the history of the West.
An odd turn there. Was it not the right wing that brought us both world
wars?
>
>> I heard a Tea Partier saying they liked Sarah because she think like they
>> do. Exactly.
>
> Keep your eye on Sarah. She has hit a raw nerve in this country. She may or
> may not ever become president, but she is changing how things are discussed.
> She makes the Leftists look like the fools that they are.
She is incompetent. She flaked out on the big Republican fund raiser,
and she hit this one to get the 100K. You did know that, didn't you?
Jeff
>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
>>> aka
>>> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
>
>
>
>
== 2 of 12 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 8 2010 11:38 am
From: "Edward Dolan"
"jeff" <jeff_thies@att.net> wrote in message
news:hkpdi9$r2q$1@news.albasani.net...
> jeff wrote:
>> Edward Dolan wrote:
[...]
>>> Colin Powell in fact is guilty of treason himself. He was never loyal to
>>> Bush. Why did he not resign if he did not agree with Bush on the Iraq
>>> war? He was nothing but an opportunist and owed everything he was to the
>>> Repubs. Fuck that cowardly general - who never met a war that he liked.
>
> I missed this before.
>
> They were all loyal, and they all came to understand the facts were
> being manipulated. It is not just Colin Powell but George Tenet, Paul
> O'Neill, Scott McClellan, Richard Clarke...
Yup, they were all just too dumb to ever see anything until it was too late.
> Powell was a typical army general, not wanting to get out ahead, and
> being faithful. The UN speech is what gave the Iraq war it's rationale. It
> was all misinformation made up by the OVP (Cheney).
Nothing was made up - you confounded dolt. Everyone in the world believed
that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction and that he would use them (as
he had in the past). Apparently, only you ever believed otherwise.
Bill Sornson has posted many times what everyone was saying at the time. But
of course, liberals are never deterred by any facts. All liberals know how
to do is spin, spin, spin and lie, lie, lie! And of course, hindsight is
always 20/20.
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
>>> aka
>>> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
== 3 of 12 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 8 2010 11:55 am
From: "Edward Dolan"
"jeff" <jeff_thies@att.net> wrote in message
news:hkposf$fj1$1@news.albasani.net...
> Edward Dolan wrote:
[...]
>> I leave it to others with lesser minds than mine to supply facts. I
>> supply ideology.
>
> Yes. Which makes you an ideologue. Someone who believes just because they
> do.
I am a conservative ideologue based on my reading of history and my views on
human nature. What do you base your beliefs on?
> I hate Leftists because they have been wrong about most everything
>> for the past hundred years. Furthermore, it was Leftists that gave us the
>> 20th century, the worst century in the history of the West.
>
> An odd turn there. Was it not the right wing that brought us both world
> wars?
WWI was brought on by a general lust for war by all the great powers. It
marked the end of three empires. WWII was brought on by Leftists like
Hitler, Mussolini and Stalin; Korea and Vietnam, again by Leftists. Or do
you think republican democracies start wars?
>>> I heard a Tea Partier saying they liked Sarah because she think like
>>> they do. Exactly.
>>
>> Keep your eye on Sarah. She has hit a raw nerve in this country. She may
>> or may not ever become president, but she is changing how things are
>> discussed. She makes the Leftists look like the fools that they are.
>
> She is incompetent. She flaked out on the big Republican fund raiser,
> and she hit this one to get the 100K. You did know that, didn't you?
Let's talk about Edwards, a real scum bucket if ever there was one. Kerry
was a scum bucket too.
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
>>>> aka
>>>> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
== 4 of 12 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 8 2010 12:21 pm
From: jeff
Edward Dolan wrote:
> "jeff" <jeff_thies@att.net> wrote in message
> news:hkpa5q$lcu$1@news.albasani.net...
>> Edward Dolan wrote:
>>> "jeff" <jeff_thies@att.net> wrote in message
>>> news:hkmimr$p4o$1@news.albasani.net...
>>>> Edward Dolan wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>>> What would the Middle East have cost us if we hadn't invaded Iraq?
>>>> In a lot better shape. Iran wouldn't be the huge problem it is in now,
>>>> because Iraq would have kept it in check. And we would have finished
>>>> Afghanistan.
>>> Bush will go down in history as the president who took on the Islamic
>>> terrorists while the rest of the world stood by and did nothing.
>> Er, did he have a choice? He will go down as the president on whose watch
>> 9/11 happened and who let binLaden get away while he strated a war that
>> had nothing to do with alQaeda in Iraq. You do realize that the drones
>> that were tracking binLaden were pilled out of Afghanistan to track Iraq
>> instead?
>
> Compared to Clinton, Bush did indeed do a lot. We shall have to effect
> regime change in Iran too sooner or later.
Bzzt.
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB147/index.htm
W sat on his ass.
>
>> To his
>>> credit, Obama seems to be doing the right thing in Afghanistan.
>>> [...]
>> After languishing for years, because the eye was on Iraq.
>>
>> Note that 2009 was a record year for killing alQaeda and Taliban. 2010 is
>> well on the way to eclipsing that. The leader of Pak Taliban is dead. But
>> in additional much progress has been made in cutting off their finances.
>> The difference between a working government and one trying to limp to the
>> finish line. Attention is finally being paid to Yemen. You did know that
>> Bush had a bit of a tiff and halted efforts there?
>
> Iraq was the central battleground as long we we there. Even the Islamic
> extremists agreed with that.
Hows that? There was no alQaeda in any part of Iraq that Saddam
controlled. There was only after we invaded. Get the difference?
What difference does it make whether we kill
> them in Iraq or Afghanistan or Pakistan or anywhere else. The important
> thing is to kill them wherever they are.
The crew in Iraq didn't exist before. Iraq turned into a huge
recruiting boost for alQaeda. One of the reasons, now that we are on the
way out, that their influence has fallen.
>
>>>> It [the debt] is unsustainable and
>>>>> highly dangerous. The only way out will be hyperinflation, the gravest
>>>>> sort of tax on the middle class and the working poor.
>>>> No sign of hyperinflation. Plenty of signs of fear and rabid behaviour
>>>> on the right. The debt will have to be handled, but the right has no
>>>> plans other than tax cuts and more spending off books. But first the
>>>> economy. You always spend your way out of a recession, that is if you
>>>> want to get out. Historically money is put back during good times. W
>>>> drained the pot.
>>> This business of spending your way out of a recession may be seriously
>>> flawed. However, time will tell and any chickens out there will soon come
>>> home to roost. The debt is very worrisome.
>> Yes. Reagan was wrong in that deficits don't matter. So was Bush 2.
>> Remember he was given near surpluses.
>
> Their means of fighting a recession was to lower taxes, especially on the
> rich. It seemed to have worked rather well.
The recession, largely caused by after effects of Vietnam and oil
shocks, was on the way out long before any of those tax breaks took effect.
But those tax breaks are miniscule compared to what W did. Look up
the marginal tax rates if you don't believe me.
So far, Obama is making a mess
> of everything.
Except the economy is on the mend. GDP is up, unemployment heading
down. Much success in killing alQaeda. Millions of people retained their
unemployment benefits.
>> But the recession comes first. Note that the value of the dollar which
>> had fallen so much under W is up under Obama. That borrowing rates are
>> historically low and that the % debt to GDP was higher post war.
>>
>> You can not lower taxes and fix the debt. It has always been the opposite.
>> Even Reagan and George Bush 1 had to raise taxes after a while. Trickle
>> Down does not work.
>
> Trickle down works in the short term, but not in the long term. We all
> believe in the progressive income tax, don't we?
All that money that W gave to the rich didn't help the economy. It
wasn't invested in productive work. A lot of it went into those exotic
financial instruments that wrecked the economy.
The economy did very well under Clinton with a top marginal Tax Rate
of 39.6%. Not that anyone pays that after tax breaks. What's wrong with
going back to that?
>
>> There is little discretionary spending that can be cut, and the right
>> refuses to consider tackling mandatory. The only plan they had was to
>> privatize SS, the safety net. How many people would be destitute now if
>> that had been in place?
>
> Agree with you on the above.
I'm glad we agree on something!
>
>>> Bush was a big spender and he never vetoed anything. He was not a true
>>> conservative by any means.
>> He was the darling of the conservative set, how can you deny that? You
>> still defend and admire him.
>
> I admire Bush for taking on the Islamic extremists, something Clinton never
> did. The invasion of Iraq was a stroke of genius. Bravo Bush!
Nope. Clinton had a comprehensive plan, one that was handed off to W who
did nothing. Read Richard Clarke, George Tenet, Paul O'Neill, any of
those who worked in the W Whitehouse (all Republicans) and they will
tell you that W was obsessed with Saddam and cared not a whit about
alQaeda, until... and then the first reaction was to go after Iraq.
Mind you that the designers of the first WTC attack were all arrested
and successfully prosecuted.
While all that was happening the right repeatedly said that Clinton
was too obsessed with alQaeda. The focus shifted when W took office.
And, you do realize there was no alQaeda in any part of Iraq that
Saddam controlled. After the invasion, those were alQaeda converts, that
didn't exist before. All for the loss of thousands of American
Military personnel and many many innocent civilians (The average
civilian death toll was on the order of a hundred a day for years) and a
trillion dollars or so.
What has happened is you have been swept up in the strong talk and
breast beating. Results are what matters.
Jeff
>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
>>>>> aka
>>>>> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
>
>
== 5 of 12 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 8 2010 12:45 pm
From: jeff
Edward Dolan wrote:
> "jeff" <jeff_thies@att.net> wrote in message
> news:hkposf$fj1$1@news.albasani.net...
>> Edward Dolan wrote:
> [...]
>>> I leave it to others with lesser minds than mine to supply facts. I
>>> supply ideology.
>> Yes. Which makes you an ideologue. Someone who believes just because they
>> do.
>
> I am a conservative ideologue based on my reading of history and my views on
> human nature. What do you base your beliefs on?
I'm a pragmatist and know a good bit about history and warfare.
>
>> I hate Leftists because they have been wrong about most everything
>>> for the past hundred years. Furthermore, it was Leftists that gave us the
>>> 20th century, the worst century in the history of the West.
>> An odd turn there. Was it not the right wing that brought us both world
>> wars?
>
> WWI was brought on by a general lust for war by all the great powers. It
> marked the end of three empires.
And you think Kaiser Wilhelm, Hötzendorf and Berchtold were leftists?
WWII was brought on by Leftists like
> Hitler,
Bzzt. Leftist? Get real, he was a right wing fascist.
Fascism, pronounced /ˈfæʃɪzÉ™m/, is a political ideology that seeks to
combine radical and authoritarian nationalism[1][2][3][4] with a
corporatist economic system.[5] Scholars generally consider it to be on
the far right of the traditional left-right political spectrum.
Mussolini
Bzzt. fascist.
and Stalin; Korea and Vietnam, again by Leftists. Or do
> you think republican democracies start wars?
You don't have clue about the difference between being a Socialist, a
Communist and a Democrat. Have you ever talked to people that lived
under communism? I know quite a number that escaped from the iron
curtain. There is no comparison between Obama and Communism in their minds.
>
>>>> I heard a Tea Partier saying they liked Sarah because she think like
>>>> they do. Exactly.
>>> Keep your eye on Sarah. She has hit a raw nerve in this country. She may
>>> or may not ever become president, but she is changing how things are
>>> discussed. She makes the Leftists look like the fools that they are.
>> She is incompetent. She flaked out on the big Republican fund raiser,
>> and she hit this one to get the 100K. You did know that, didn't you?
>
> Let's talk about Edwards, a real scum bucket if ever there was one.
Why. Is he running? Was he president? I never liked him. Did I ever say
I did?
Is he worse than Mark Sanford? Or any of the numerous closeted gay
republicans that have taken a wide stance?
Kerry
> was a scum bucket too.
Same as above.
Jeff
>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
>>>>> aka
>>>>> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
>
>
== 6 of 12 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 8 2010 12:55 pm
From: jeff
Edward Dolan wrote:
> "jeff" <jeff_thies@att.net> wrote in message
> news:hkpbno$nuq$1@news.albasani.net...
>> Edward Dolan wrote:
> [...]
>>> The Repubs do blather on about taxes way too much I must admit. But we
>>> have got to get some control over spending. That is the problem, not
>>> taxes.
>>> [...]
>> Exactly what spending? I've posted the links to the 2010 budget, did you
>> look? What would you cut in the discretionary that would make a
>> difference?
>
> ALL spending - you dolt!
So, no roads, no government services of any kind.
Doesn't matter what is in your sausage, your water or your air.
No police, CIA, FBI or Fire Department.
That is just stupid.
>
>> Would you take the wars off budget again so the numbers look better?
>
> There is one main reason why we have a federal government, to protect the
> people. Why do the Dems always want to cut defense spending?
>
>>>> As someone put it, The Tea Party is like a dog chasing a car. If they
>>>> ever caught it they wouldn't know what to do with it.
>>> The Tea Party movement is a sign of hope. They want smaller government
>>> and less spending. If you are on the frugal living group, you should be
>>> for it.
>> Sarah is a woman with much ambition, but little ability. She has little
>> clue of what is going on. She has narrow dogmatic beliefs. It is not just
>> liberals that believe that.
>
> Just keep believing that and you will soon get the surprise of your life.
> McCain was dead until he got hold of Sarah.
Then he was really dead.
>
>> Sarah ran a state where the average citizen received far more from the
>> government dole than the lower 48. Indeed while she was mayor of Wasilla
>> she lobbied heavily and got government dollars. And she quit the
>> Governership in shambles, she treated the office like it was for family
>> and personal benefit. What a messy family life she leads.
>
> Who cares about any of the above. Alaska has always been fucked up. So what
> else is new?
>
> Sarah at least is not a murderer like liberals are (abortion).
Why is it that right wingers care more about a 1 minute old embryo
than a 1 minute old baby. Seems wrong to me. I do not support abortion
willy nilly either.
>
>> But she think like you, which is to say, not deeply.
>
> We deep thinkers are alike in that we hate liberals. But Mass. gives us
> hope. Imagine people so stupid as to keep voting for Kennedy even though he
> was a murderer (Chappaquiddick) and a craven coward. But that is a liberal
> for you!
I've mostly just seen seething blind hatred. Surely no reflection on
past failures or what the policies will actually do. There are no
numbers, no facts, just a divine belief that you are right. That is just
pure crazy.
Jeff
>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
>>>>> aka
>>>>> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
>
>
== 7 of 12 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 8 2010 1:16 pm
From: jeff
Edward Dolan wrote:
> "jeff" <jeff_thies@att.net> wrote in message
> news:hkpdi9$r2q$1@news.albasani.net...
>> jeff wrote:
>>> Edward Dolan wrote:
> [...]
>>>> Colin Powell in fact is guilty of treason himself. He was never loyal to
>>>> Bush. Why did he not resign if he did not agree with Bush on the Iraq
>>>> war? He was nothing but an opportunist and owed everything he was to the
>>>> Repubs. Fuck that cowardly general - who never met a war that he liked.
>> I missed this before.
>>
>> They were all loyal, and they all came to understand the facts were
>> being manipulated. It is not just Colin Powell but George Tenet, Paul
>> O'Neill, Scott McClellan, Richard Clarke...
>
> Yup, they were all just too dumb to ever see anything until it was too late.
You haven't read a word of what any of them have said, have you? You
just believe, because you believe. Any evidence that might oppose what
you believe must be blocked.
Such blind faith. Pride comes before the fall.
>
>> Powell was a typical army general, not wanting to get out ahead, and
>> being faithful. The UN speech is what gave the Iraq war it's rationale. It
>> was all misinformation made up by the OVP (Cheney).
>
> Nothing was made up - you confounded dolt.
All of it was made up by wishful interpretation of raw intelligence.
They used to call it "feith based", because Doug Feith made it all up.
He would put in anything that strengthened the case for war, no matter
how unlikely or discredited it was. All of it came out of the OVP which
ran it's own (faulty) intel analysis. Absolutely all of it has been
discredited. Even W, Cheney and Rumsfeld now say there were no weapons
of mass destruction.
Colin Powell had one week to write that UN speech. The OVP kept
putting stuff that had to be thrown out. What remained in there the OVP
vouched that is was true.
Everyone in the world believed
> that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction and that he would use them (as
> he had in the past). Apparently, only you ever believed otherwise.
Nope. The Germans warned repeatedly that Curveball (that's the basis
of the bio terror) was not to be relied on. In fact they never even
talked to him to check (US) as he was in Germany. All that came out of
some screwball report.
There was plenty of evidence that the aluminum tubes were completely
unsuited for centrifuges, and for multiple reasons. And there was plenty
of evidence for what they were really used for.
>
> Bill Sornson has posted many times what everyone was saying at the time. But
> of course, liberals are never deterred by any facts.
I haven't seen a fact yet from you. I like facts. Show me one.
All liberals know how
> to do is spin, spin, spin and lie, lie, lie! And of course, hindsight is
> always 20/20.
No spin, just the truth. I've posted references to what Clinton did,
what is in the budget, what W didn't do. And you have, nothing... but
your blind convictions.
Jeff
>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
>>>> aka
>>>> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
>
>
== 8 of 12 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 8 2010 5:12 pm
From: "Edward Dolan"
"jeff" <jeff_thies@att.net> wrote in message
news:hkprom$krc$1@news.albasani.net...
> Edward Dolan wrote:
[...]
>> Iraq was the central battleground as long we we there. Even the Islamic
>> extremists agreed with that.
>
> Hows that? There was no alQaeda in any part of Iraq that Saddam
> controlled. There was only after we invaded. Get the difference?
There were other good and sufficient reasons for taking out Iraq. Once we
invaded we got two for the price of one. Get the difference?
> What difference does it make whether we kill
>> them in Iraq or Afghanistan or Pakistan or anywhere else. The important
>> thing is to kill them wherever they are.
>
> The crew in Iraq didn't exist before. Iraq turned into a huge recruiting
> boost for alQaeda. One of the reasons, now that we are on the way out,
> that their influence has fallen.
That is because we defeated them in Iraq, something that would never have
happened if liberal Dems had been in charge.
[...]
> So far, Obama is making a mess
>> of everything.
>
> Except the economy is on the mend. GDP is up, unemployment heading down.
> Much success in killing alQaeda. Millions of people retained their
> unemployment benefits.
Nothing much is happening yet if you ask me.
>>> But the recession comes first. Note that the value of the dollar which
>>> had fallen so much under W is up under Obama. That borrowing rates are
>>> historically low and that the % debt to GDP was higher post war.
>>>
>>> You can not lower taxes and fix the debt. It has always been the
>>> opposite. Even Reagan and George Bush 1 had to raise taxes after a
>>> while. Trickle Down does not work.
>>
>> Trickle down works in the short term, but not in the long term. We all
>> believe in the progressive income tax, don't we?
>
> All that money that W gave to the rich didn't help the economy. It
> wasn't invested in productive work. A lot of it went into those exotic
> financial instruments that wrecked the economy.
Nope, we had a good economy under Bush until the bubble burst.
> The economy did very well under Clinton with a top marginal Tax Rate of
> 39.6%. Not that anyone pays that after tax breaks. What's wrong with going
> back to that?
Yes, I am in favor of that too.
>>> There is little discretionary spending that can be cut, and the right
>>> refuses to consider tackling mandatory. The only plan they had was to
>>> privatize SS, the safety net. How many people would be destitute now if
>>> that had been in place?
>>
>> Agree with you on the above.
>
> I'm glad we agree on something!
>>
>>>> Bush was a big spender and he never vetoed anything. He was not a true
>>>> conservative by any means.
>>> He was the darling of the conservative set, how can you deny that? You
>>> still defend and admire him.
>>
>> I admire Bush for taking on the Islamic extremists, something Clinton
>> never did. The invasion of Iraq was a stroke of genius. Bravo Bush!
>
> Nope. Clinton had a comprehensive plan, one that was handed off to W who
> did nothing. Read Richard Clarke, George Tenet, Paul O'Neill, any of those
> who worked in the W Whitehouse (all Republicans) and they will tell you
> that W was obsessed with Saddam and cared not a whit about alQaeda,
> until... and then the first reaction was to go after Iraq.
It was time to accomplish several things at the time. Only Bush had the guts
to do it.
> Mind you that the designers of the first WTC attack were all arrested
> and successfully prosecuted.
Clinton never woke up from his slumbers. He treated them as criminals, not
Islamic terrorists that were at war with us.
> While all that was happening the right repeatedly said that Clinton was
> too obsessed with alQaeda. The focus shifted when W took office.
>
> And, you do realize there was no alQaeda in any part of Iraq that Saddam
> controlled. After the invasion, those were alQaeda converts, that didn't
> exist before. All for the loss of thousands of American Military personnel
> and many many innocent civilians (The average civilian death toll was on
> the order of a hundred a day for years) and a trillion dollars or so.
Who cares how many Iraqis die for whatever reason. Did you care about the
Iraqis that were being murdered under Saddam? Did you care about the Kurds
that were being gassed to death by Saddam?
American losses have also been minimal. You like statistics so much, why not
compare our military losses with losses from road accidents on our highways.
Or is a soldier more valuable than a civilian?
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
>>>>>> aka
>>>>>> Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
== 9 of 12 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 8 2010 5:28 pm
From: "Edward Dolan"
"jeff" <jeff_thies@att.net> wrote in message
news:hkpt5k$n64$1@news.albasani.net...
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>> "jeff" <jeff_thies@att.net> wrote in message
>> news:hkposf$fj1$1@news.albasani.net...
>>> Edward Dolan wrote:
>> [...]
>>>> I leave it to others with lesser minds than mine to supply facts. I
>>>> supply ideology.
>>> Yes. Which makes you an ideologue. Someone who believes just because
>>> they do.
>>
>> I am a conservative ideologue based on my reading of history and my views
>> on human nature. What do you base your beliefs on?
>
> I'm a pragmatist and know a good bit about history and warfare.
You are libearl idealogeu I cna't underatdn what yo ar edoign on frugal
lviing. Yo are abig spender jstu liek all liberasl are. Waht is frugal about
that?
>>
>>> I hate Leftists because they have been wrong about most everything
>>>> for the past hundred years. Furthermore, it was Leftists that gave us
>>>> the 20th century, the worst century in the history of the West.
>>> An odd turn there. Was it not the right wing that brought us both world
>>> wars?
>>
>> WWI was brought on by a general lust for war by all the great powers. It
>> marked the end of three empires.
>
> And you think Kaiser Wilhelm, Hötzendorf and Berchtold were leftists?
I clearly stated taht WWI was exceptional.
>
>
> WWII was brought on by Leftists like
>> Hitler,
>
>
> Bzzt. Leftist? Get real, he was a right wing fascist.
>
> Fascism, pronounced /'fæ??z?m/, is a political ideology that seeks to
> combine radical and authoritarian nationalism[1][2][3][4] with a
> corporatist economic system.[5] Scholars generally consider it to be on
> the far right of the traditional left-right political spectrum.
Jeez, I wonder where they ever got the term NAZI? Look it up!
> Mussolini
>
> Bzzt. fascist.
>
> and Stalin; Korea and Vietnam, again by Leftists. Or do
>> you think republican democracies start wars?
>
> You don't have clue about the difference between being a Socialist, a
> Communist and a Democrat. Have you ever talked to people that lived under
> communism? I know quite a number that escaped from the iron curtain. There
> is no comparison between Obama and Communism in their minds.
The goal of leftist ideology is complete control of the people. Then they
find out that they can only accomplish that by dictatorship and tyranny.
Why? Because your leftist crap goes against human nature and indeed history
itself.
[...]
>> Let's talk about Edwards, a real scum bucket if ever there was one.
>
> Why. Is he running? Was he president? I never liked him. Did I ever say I
> did?
Is Sarah running for president?
> Is he worse than Mark Sanford? Or any of the numerous closeted gay
> republicans that have taken a wide stance?
Dems do not have enough shame to closet themselves. Barney Frank ran a male
prostitution ring out of his house in Mass.
> Kerry
>> was a scum bucket too.
>
> Same as above.
Sanford never ran for president. Unlike Kerry, I think he always supported
this nation in its wars. Repubs are not treasonous bastards like liberal
Dems.
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
== 10 of 12 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 8 2010 5:37 pm
From: "Edward Dolan"
"jeff" <jeff_thies@att.net> wrote in message
news:hkptob$o5v$1@news.albasani.net...
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>> "jeff" <jeff_thies@att.net> wrote in message
>> news:hkpbno$nuq$1@news.albasani.net...
>>> Edward Dolan wrote:
>> [...]
>>>> The Repubs do blather on about taxes way too much I must admit. But we
>>>> have got to get some control over spending. That is the problem, not
>>>> taxes.
>>>> [...]
>>> Exactly what spending? I've posted the links to the 2010 budget, did
>>> you look? What would you cut in the discretionary that would make a
>>> difference?
>>
>> ALL spending - you dolt!
>
> So, no roads, no government services of any kind.
>
> Doesn't matter what is in your sausage, your water or your air.
>
> No police, CIA, FBI or Fire Department.
>
> That is just stupid.
Just cut spending. You would not know frugal if it jumped up and bit you in
your ass.
[...]
>> We deep thinkers are alike in that we hate liberals. But Mass. gives us
>> hope. Imagine people so stupid as to keep voting for Kennedy even though
>> he was a murderer (Chappaquiddick) and a craven coward. But that is a
>> liberal for you!
>
> I've mostly just seen seething blind hatred. Surely no reflection on
> past failures or what the policies will actually do. There are no numbers,
> no facts, just a divine belief that you are right. That is just pure
> crazy.
You like immoral bastards like Ted Kennedy. I don't. President Kennedy was
also a scofflaw and a terrible president who bungled the Cuban invasion.
Apparently only the Bushs know how to invade and win.
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
== 11 of 12 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 8 2010 5:51 pm
From: "Edward Dolan"
"jeff" <jeff_thies@att.net> wrote in message
news:hkpv05$qd4$1@news.albasani.net...
> Edward Dolan wrote:
[...]
> Everyone in the world believed
>> that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction and that he would use them
>> (as he had in the past). Apparently, only you ever believed otherwise.
> Nope. The Germans warned repeatedly that Curveball (that's the basis of
> the bio terror) was not to be relied on. In fact they never even talked to
> him to check (US) as he was in Germany. All that came out of some
> screwball report.
>
> There was plenty of evidence that the aluminum tubes were completely
> unsuited for centrifuges, and for multiple reasons. And there was plenty
> of evidence for what they were really used for.
Have you ever thought of going to work for an intelligence agency? We badly
need those who are expert in hindsight.
>> Bill Sornson has posted many times what everyone was saying at the time.
>> But of course, liberals are never deterred by any facts.
>
> I haven't seen a fact yet from you. I like facts. Show me one.
Only if you tell me how you are frugal. So far, all you have done is defend
big free spending liberal Dems.
> All liberals know how
>> to do is spin, spin, spin and lie, lie, lie! And of course, hindsight is
>> always 20/20.
>
> No spin, just the truth. I've posted references to what Clinton did,
> what is in the budget, what W didn't do. And you have, nothing... but your
> blind convictions.
Facts are the last refuge of a scoundrel. We can all pick and choose our
facts. Your liberal bias disqualifies you from having any credibility when
it comes to facts. You and Tom Sherman should get together. He only likes
his "liberal" facts too. I will stick with Bill Sornson who at least knows a
fact when he sees one.
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
== 12 of 12 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 8 2010 6:18 pm
From: "Edward Dolan"
"jeff" <jeff_thies@att.net> wrote in message
news:hkptob$o5v$1@news.albasani.net...
> Edward Dolan wrote:
[...]
>> Sarah at least is not a murderer like liberals are (abortion).
>
> Why is it that right wingers care more about a 1 minute old embryo than
> a 1 minute old baby. Seems wrong to me. I do not support abortion willy
> nilly either.
A human life begins at conception. A woman should not fuck if she does not
want a baby. A man similarly should not fuck if he does not want a baby.
What is there about this that you do not understand?
Saint Edward the Great is the last celibate in the known universe. That is
because He never wanted a baby and indeed would not mind if mankind perished
from this earth. Now perhaps you get a glimmer of what is meant by frugal
living!
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Pay mortage payment before due date?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/3228aec93fd86575?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 9 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 8 2010 12:03 pm
From: VFW
In article <hkpghi$a2$1@news.albasani.net>, jeff <jeff_thies@att.net>
wrote:
> Bill wrote:
> > If a mortgage payment is due on the 30th of each month, is there any
> > advantage to paying it on the 1st of each month?
> >
> > (Pay earlier than the due date each month)
>
> That all depends on how your mortgage is written!
>
> Jeff
> >
> >
who would be the best bet to analyze your mortgage with frugality in
mind, An accountant?
--
Hint; Enjoy the moment !
== 2 of 9 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 8 2010 12:38 pm
From: "Rod Speed"
VFW wrote:
> In article <hkpghi$a2$1@news.albasani.net>, jeff <jeff_thies@att.net>
> wrote:
>
>> Bill wrote:
>>> If a mortgage payment is due on the 30th of each month, is there any
>>> advantage to paying it on the 1st of each month?
>>>
>>> (Pay earlier than the due date each month)
>>
>> That all depends on how your mortgage is written!
>>
>> Jeff
>>>
>>>
>
> who would be the best bet to analyze your mortgage with frugality in mind, An accountant?
Pity about the fee he will charge to do that. Much more frugal to ask here instead.
== 3 of 9 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 8 2010 2:41 pm
From: jeff
VFW wrote:
> In article <hkpghi$a2$1@news.albasani.net>, jeff <jeff_thies@att.net>
> wrote:
>
>> Bill wrote:
>>> If a mortgage payment is due on the 30th of each month, is there any
>>> advantage to paying it on the 1st of each month?
>>>
>>> (Pay earlier than the due date each month)
>> That all depends on how your mortgage is written!
>>
>> Jeff
>>>
>
> who would be the best bet to analyze your mortgage with frugality in
> mind, An accountant?
You can try just reading it. What you really want is to make an extra
payment, ie two on the 30th at least once. That extra should come purely
off the principal, early in a loan it is almost all interest, so you are
ahead there. After that, I wouldn't bother. The math to figure out exact
interest depending on actual payment date is messy and I doubt anyone
applies it.
Paying more, so you pay off early can be substantial. Just what you
can do and get credit for should be written in. Google yielded this:
http://www.mortgageqna.com/mortgage-payment/early-pay-off-penalty-for-a-mortgage-loan.html
I'm inclined to think that your real estate agent should have told you
what was allowable. It's been a while since I've had a mortgage, so I
don't know what is standard now. Back then you could pay more and it
would come off your principal. Now, there are gotchas.
I misread this a bit when I first looked at it, so I wanted to clear
up any misunderstanding. I doubt paying on the first, if your loan is
due on the 30th, will be of any benefit.
Jeff
== 4 of 9 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 8 2010 4:08 pm
From: "Malcom \"Mal\" Reynolds"
In article
<7tbb1qF4skU1@mid.individual.net>,
"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com>
wrote:
> VFW wrote:
> > In article <hkpghi$a2$1@news.albasani.net>, jeff <jeff_thies@att.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Bill wrote:
> >>> If a mortgage payment is due on the 30th of each month, is there any
> >>> advantage to paying it on the 1st of each month?
> >>>
> >>> (Pay earlier than the due date each month)
> >>
> >> That all depends on how your mortgage is written!
> >>
> >> Jeff
> >>>
> >>>
> >
> > who would be the best bet to analyze your mortgage with frugality in mind,
> > An accountant?
>
> Pity about the fee he will charge to do that. Much more frugal to ask here
> instead.
yes, because getting free advice from
anonymous posters who are in all
probablity not licensed or even caring
is always the best investment
== 5 of 9 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 8 2010 4:11 pm
From: "Rod Speed"
Malcom "Mal" Reynolds wrote:
> In article
> <7tbb1qF4skU1@mid.individual.net>,
> "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> VFW wrote:
>>> In article <hkpghi$a2$1@news.albasani.net>, jeff
>>> <jeff_thies@att.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Bill wrote:
>>>>> If a mortgage payment is due on the 30th of each month, is there
>>>>> any advantage to paying it on the 1st of each month?
>>>>>
>>>>> (Pay earlier than the due date each month)
>>>>
>>>> That all depends on how your mortgage is written!
>>>>
>>>> Jeff
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>> who would be the best bet to analyze your mortgage with frugality
>>> in mind, An accountant?
>>
>> Pity about the fee he will charge to do that. Much more frugal to
>> ask here instead.
>
> yes, because getting free advice from
> anonymous posters who are in all
> probablity not licensed or even caring
> is always the best investment
Anyone with even half a clue can consider the claims made and check them if they need to be checked, for free.
You cant manage something as simple as that ? Your problem.
== 6 of 9 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 8 2010 6:20 pm
From: Robert Neville
"h" <tmclone@searchmachine.com> wrote:
>Yes, depending on how your loan is set up, you'll be saving some interest
>money by paying early. Very likely that you'll save a whole payment or two
>by the end of the term. Maybe a lot more - depends on how the loan is set
>up.
Not exactly. In the US, most ontime mortgage payments are applied as of the
payment date (usually the first of the month), regardless of when the payment is
actually received. In other words paying two weeks ahead of the due date or two
weeks behind (assuming you are still in the grace period) will have zero effect
on the interest charge.
On most US conforming mortgages, you can make a significant change (reduction)
to the lifetime interest charge on your mortgage by making "extra" principle
payments. Those payments can usually be made as an extra amount on your regular
payment, or as a separate payment. It's important to make sure those payments
are credited as principle reduction payments and not just stuffed in your escrow
account.
However, keep in mind that with extra principle payments, the savings comes at
the end of the mortgage in the form of an earlier payoff date - it will not
reduce the amount of your monthly payment. It will also be reflected in the form
of a smaller mortgage interest deduction each year. This may or may not be a
good thing, depending on whether you are subject to AMT.
Given the historically low mortgage rates these days, paying off your mortgage
early should take back seat to paying off car loans, credit cards and building
up your personal cash cusion.
== 7 of 9 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 8 2010 9:37 pm
From: "Malcom \"Mal\" Reynolds"
In article
<7tbngsF83kU1@mid.individual.net>,
"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com>
wrote:
> >>>> Bill wrote:
> >>>>> If a mortgage payment is due on the 30th of each month, is there
> >>>>> any advantage to paying it on the 1st of each month?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> (Pay earlier than the due date each month)
> >>>>
> >>>> That all depends on how your mortgage is written!
> >>>>
> >>>> Jeff
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>
> >>> who would be the best bet to analyze your mortgage with frugality
> >>> in mind, An accountant?
> >>
> >> Pity about the fee he will charge to do that. Much more frugal to
> >> ask here instead.
> >
> > yes, because getting free advice from
> > anonymous posters who are in all
> > probablity not licensed or even caring
> > is always the best investment
>
> Anyone with even half a clue can consider the claims made and check them if
> they need to be checked, for free.
spoken like the online fool who would
take medical advice from another online
fool
>
> You cant manage something as simple as that ?
Of course I can. I could also google the
original question and probably get
better advice.
> Your problem.
no problems here old fella
== 8 of 9 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 8 2010 10:27 pm
From: Stan Brown
Mon, 8 Feb 2010 09:04:11 -0800 from Bill
<billnomailnospamx@yahoo.com>:
>
> If a mortgage payment is due on the 30th of each month, is there any
> advantage to paying it on the 1st of each month?
>
> (Pay earlier than the due date each month)
It depends on the mortgage. The mortgage on my first house computed
interest based on the actual dates payments were received, so there
was an advantage to paying early. The mortgage on my present house
computes interest on the date the payment is due, regardless of when
it is received,(*) so there is no advantage to paying early.
(*) There's a late fee for paying late, and presumably interest
starts accruing again if the payment is very late, but I don't know
the details.
--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com
Shikata ga nai...
== 9 of 9 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 8 2010 10:28 pm
From: Stan Brown
Mon, 08 Feb 2010 19:20:32 -0700 from Robert Neville
<dont@bother.com>:
[mostly good advice]
But the word is principal, not principle!
--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com
Shikata ga nai...
==============================================================================
TOPIC: NONVIOLENCE: Why Jesus is a fake
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/3449037952f7cd43?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 8 2010 3:33 pm
From: TheTibetanMonkey showing-the-path-of-enlightenment-in-the-jungle
On Feb 8, 1:14 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
> TheTibetanMonkey showing-the-path-of-enlightenment-in-the-jungle wrote
>
>
>
>
>
> > Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote
> >> TheTibetanMonkey showing-the-path-of-enlightenment-in-the-jungle wrote
> >>> Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote
> >>>> TheTibetanMonkey showing-the-path-of-enlightenment-in-the-jungle
> >>>> wrote
> >>>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote
> >>>>>> TheTibetanMonkey wrote
> >>>>>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote
> >>>>>>>> TheTibetanMonkey
> >>>>>>>> showing-the-path-of-enlightenment-in-the-jungle
> >>>>>>>> wrote
> >>>>>>>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote
> >>>>>>>>>> TheTibetanMonkey showing-the-path-of-enlightenment-in-the-jungle wrote
> >>>>>>>>>>> e_space <espace1...@gmail.com> wrote
> >>>>>>>>>>>> taken for granted by who? you call pacifists weak do you? i
> >>>>>>>>>>>> dont want to beat the crap out of you, therefore i am weak?
> >>>>>>>>>>>> lol ... i can see why you consider yourself to be in a
> >>>>>>>>>>>> jungle. i presume your knuckles have evolved enough not to
> >>>>>>>>>>>> hurt too much from dragging them along concrete rather than
> >>>>>>>>>>>> the jungle floor? ;^-]
> >>>>>>>>>>> I'm sure that all the Christians that supported the war
> >>>>>>>>>>> agree with me: IN THE JUNGLE YOU MUST STRIKE FIRST.
> >>>>>>>>>> There is no jungle in Iraq, stupid.
> >>>>>>>>> Still ruled by the Law of the Jungle, isn't it not?
> >>>>>>>> Nope, ruled by the law of some rather swathy goat fucker/child molester, actually.
> >>>>>>>>> The little lion is being changed for the big ones.
> >>>>>>>> There are no lions in Iraq, stupid.
> >>>>>>>> And lions dont live in jungles either, stupid.
> >>>>>>>>>>> Where we disagree is that they are happy with the jungle,
> >>>>>>>>>>> and I'm not. But of course, I'm the Wise Tibetan Monkey.
> >>>>>>>>>> Only in your pathetic little drug crazed fantasyland.
> >>>>>>>>> See, you are obsessed with drugs...
> >>>>>>>> Nope, you drug crazed loons stand out like dogs balls, child.
> >>>>>>>>> yet another stupid war.
> >>>>>>>> Indeed.
> >>>>>>> Well, at least you don't support another stupid war.
> >>>>>> Yeah, Afghanistan is never gunna fly.
> >>>>>>> But if you can't even understand of the value of a basic metaphor, how can
> >>>>>>> you even get the point that war --all wars-- feed some hungry predators?
> >>>>>> Not all wars do, WW2 didnt.
> >>>>> OK, I agree with that. Self defense.
>
> And that is what Afghanistan was initially too.
>
>
>
>
>
> >>>>>>> You wouldn't believe that fairy tale of Adam and Eve being tempted by a serpent.
> >>>>>> Or that the goat fucker/child molester had some angel whisper in his ear either.
> >>>>>>> Yes, the West believes that an evil snake doomed mankind
> >>>>>>> to suffering and indifference --perhaps even martyrdom.
> >>>>>>> We are so different from the Muslim world!?
> >>>>>> Yeah, no 90 virgins for us, ours fuck around much too much for that.
> >>>>> I see there's no saints among us. Maybe not even the Pope.
> >>>> Certainly not even the pope. The current one used to run the
> >>>> Inquisition and it will be fascinating to see how many were
> >>>> child molesters, just like so many other roman catholic priests.
> >>> Laws that keep sexual predators away from the general
> >>> population doesn't seem effective for Catholic priests.
> >> Yeah, presumably because most cops are roman catholics.
> >>> It would be a good question whether they would be willing to give up
> >>> their manhood upon vow of priesthood. It should be a simple operation. ;)
> >> Makes a lot more sense to let them marry.
>
> They have enough problems with recruiting enough new ones without your 'solution'
>
> > Oh sure. At least they wouldn't have to live in the lie.
>
> Yeah, likely more of them fuck adult women than kids, tho there
> is some evidence that the current rules do attract child molesters.
>
> They dont get too many goat fuckers tho, presumably thats a shortage of goats.
>
> > I sincerely doubt that a human being can suppress his sexual urges all the time.
>
> Some can.
>
> > Maybe someone like Gandhi could,
>
> Thats very arguable indeed. He used to sleep naked with one of his female child close relatives.
>
> > but it happened later in his life.
>
> Yeah, he used to fuck around in africa.
>
> > Someone told me that he was fooling around though it's likely to be a lie.
>
> He didnt even deny sleeping naked with one of his female child close relatives.
>
> Just maintained that there was nothing wrong with it.
>
> > Anyway, I like to dedicate the topic to Gandhi's way, and how we may adapt it today...
>
> I'm not into drinking my own piss.
>
> And he produced a hell of a lot of corpses too.
>
> > "The Truth is far more powerful than any weapon of mass destruction."
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gandhism
> > In this case we got neither one in Iraq. But I think most Christians are just HAPPY to live in the lie.
>
> Yeah, plenty of them are that stupid.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Thank you. Your responses seem to be pretty "wise," at least by jungle
standards.
Anyway here's how a I would arm the monkey to face the jungle...
1- THE TRUTH... OR SATYAGRAHA, the way of the truth based on Gandhi,
etc.
2- A BANANA... this is where it gets interesting. It could be LOVE for
the right person (particularly for a sexy girl) or PEACE, or it could
be THE FINGER (we all know what it means), and it could also mean the
SURPRISE WEAPON...
http://amazon.commerceguys.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/product_full/banana-gun-9818.jpg
In other words, you "keep 'em guessin' what you've got."
3- A BAG OF SHIT. That's pretty much common sense. You throw shit at
the jungle and its predators until they let you go. They all want good
PR, you know.
And that's it for the arsenal of the Wise Tibetan Monkey in the jungle.
== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 8 2010 4:12 pm
From: "Rod Speed"
TheTibetanMonkey showing-the-path-of-enlightenment-in-the-jungle wrote:
> On Feb 8, 1:14 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
>> TheTibetanMonkey showing-the-path-of-enlightenment-in-the-jungle
>> wrote
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote
>>>> TheTibetanMonkey showing-the-path-of-enlightenment-in-the-jungle
>>>> wrote
>>>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote
>>>>>> TheTibetanMonkey showing-the-path-of-enlightenment-in-the-jungle
>>>>>> wrote
>>>>>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote
>>>>>>>> TheTibetanMonkey wrote
>>>>>>>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote
>>>>>>>>>> TheTibetanMonkey
>>>>>>>>>> showing-the-path-of-enlightenment-in-the-jungle
>>>>>>>>>> wrote
>>>>>>>>>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote
>>>>>>>>>>>> TheTibetanMonkey
>>>>>>>>>>>> showing-the-path-of-enlightenment-in-the-jungle wrote
>>>>>>>>>>>>> e_space <espace1...@gmail.com> wrote
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> taken for granted by who? you call pacifists weak do
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you? i dont want to beat the crap out of you, therefore
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> i am weak? lol ... i can see why you consider yourself
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to be in a jungle. i presume your knuckles have evolved
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enough not to hurt too much from dragging them along
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> concrete rather than the jungle floor? ;^-]
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm sure that all the Christians that supported the war
>>>>>>>>>>>>> agree with me: IN THE JUNGLE YOU MUST STRIKE FIRST.
>>>>>>>>>>>> There is no jungle in Iraq, stupid.
>>>>>>>>>>> Still ruled by the Law of the Jungle, isn't it not?
>>>>>>>>>> Nope, ruled by the law of some rather swathy goat
>>>>>>>>>> fucker/child molester, actually.
>>>>>>>>>>> The little lion is being changed for the big ones.
>>>>>>>>>> There are no lions in Iraq, stupid.
>>>>>>>>>> And lions dont live in jungles either, stupid.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where we disagree is that they are happy with the jungle,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> and I'm not. But of course, I'm the Wise Tibetan Monkey.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Only in your pathetic little drug crazed fantasyland.
>>>>>>>>>>> See, you are obsessed with drugs...
>>>>>>>>>> Nope, you drug crazed loons stand out like dogs balls, child.
>>>>>>>>>>> yet another stupid war.
>>>>>>>>>> Indeed.
>>>>>>>>> Well, at least you don't support another stupid war.
>>>>>>>> Yeah, Afghanistan is never gunna fly.
>>>>>>>>> But if you can't even understand of the value of a basic
>>>>>>>>> metaphor, how can
>>>>>>>>> you even get the point that war --all wars-- feed some hungry
>>>>>>>>> predators?
>>>>>>>> Not all wars do, WW2 didnt.
>>>>>>> OK, I agree with that. Self defense.
>>
>> And that is what Afghanistan was initially too.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>>> You wouldn't believe that fairy tale of Adam and Eve being
>>>>>>>>> tempted by a serpent.
>>>>>>>> Or that the goat fucker/child molester had some angel whisper
>>>>>>>> in his ear either.
>>>>>>>>> Yes, the West believes that an evil snake doomed mankind
>>>>>>>>> to suffering and indifference --perhaps even martyrdom.
>>>>>>>>> We are so different from the Muslim world!?
>>>>>>>> Yeah, no 90 virgins for us, ours fuck around much too much for
>>>>>>>> that.
>>>>>>> I see there's no saints among us. Maybe not even the Pope.
>>>>>> Certainly not even the pope. The current one used to run the
>>>>>> Inquisition and it will be fascinating to see how many were
>>>>>> child molesters, just like so many other roman catholic priests.
>>>>> Laws that keep sexual predators away from the general
>>>>> population doesn't seem effective for Catholic priests.
>>>> Yeah, presumably because most cops are roman catholics.
>>>>> It would be a good question whether they would be willing to give
>>>>> up their manhood upon vow of priesthood. It should be a simple
>>>>> operation. ;)
>>>> Makes a lot more sense to let them marry.
>>
>> They have enough problems with recruiting enough new ones without
>> your 'solution'
>>
>>> Oh sure. At least they wouldn't have to live in the lie.
>>
>> Yeah, likely more of them fuck adult women than kids, tho there
>> is some evidence that the current rules do attract child molesters.
>>
>> They dont get too many goat fuckers tho, presumably thats a shortage
>> of goats.
>>
>>> I sincerely doubt that a human being can suppress his sexual urges
>>> all the time.
>>
>> Some can.
>>
>>> Maybe someone like Gandhi could,
>>
>> Thats very arguable indeed. He used to sleep naked with one of his
>> female child close relatives.
>>
>>> but it happened later in his life.
>>
>> Yeah, he used to fuck around in africa.
>>
>>> Someone told me that he was fooling around though it's likely to be
>>> a lie.
>>
>> He didnt even deny sleeping naked with one of his female child close
>> relatives.
>>
>> Just maintained that there was nothing wrong with it.
>>
>>> Anyway, I like to dedicate the topic to Gandhi's way, and how we
>>> may adapt it today...
>>
>> I'm not into drinking my own piss.
>>
>> And he produced a hell of a lot of corpses too.
>>
>>> "The Truth is far more powerful than any weapon of mass
>>> destruction." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gandhism
>>> In this case we got neither one in Iraq. But I think most
>>> Christians are just HAPPY to live in the lie.
>>
>> Yeah, plenty of them are that stupid.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> Thank you. Your responses seem to be pretty "wise," at least by jungle
> standards.
>
> Anyway here's how a I would arm the monkey to face the jungle...
>
> 1- THE TRUTH... OR SATYAGRAHA, the way of the truth based on Gandhi,
> etc.
>
> 2- A BANANA... this is where it gets interesting. It could be LOVE for
> the right person (particularly for a sexy girl) or PEACE, or it could
> be THE FINGER (we all know what it means), and it could also mean the
> SURPRISE WEAPON...
>
> http://amazon.commerceguys.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/product_full/banana-gun-9818.jpg
>
> In other words, you "keep 'em guessin' what you've got."
>
> 3- A BAG OF SHIT. That's pretty much common sense. You throw shit at
> the jungle and its predators until they let you go. They all want good
> PR, you know.
>
> And that's it for the arsenal of the Wise Tibetan Monkey in the
> jungle.
I stick with rotty and the shotty myself. Works very well indeed.
== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 8 2010 6:03 pm
From: TheTibetanMonkey showing-the-path-of-enlightenment-in-the-jungle
On Feb 8, 7:12 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
> TheTibetanMonkey showing-the-path-of-enlightenment-in-the-jungle wrote:
> > On Feb 8, 1:14 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> TheTibetanMonkey showing-the-path-of-enlightenment-in-the-jungle
> >> wrote
>
> >>> Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote
> >>>> TheTibetanMonkey showing-the-path-of-enlightenment-in-the-jungle
> >>>> wrote
> >>>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote
> >>>>>> TheTibetanMonkey showing-the-path-of-enlightenment-in-the-jungle
> >>>>>> wrote
> >>>>>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote
> >>>>>>>> TheTibetanMonkey wrote
> >>>>>>>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote
> >>>>>>>>>> TheTibetanMonkey
> >>>>>>>>>> showing-the-path-of-enlightenment-in-the-jungle
> >>>>>>>>>> wrote
> >>>>>>>>>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote
> >>>>>>>>>>>> TheTibetanMonkey
> >>>>>>>>>>>> showing-the-path-of-enlightenment-in-the-jungle wrote
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> e_space <espace1...@gmail.com> wrote
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> taken for granted by who? you call pacifists weak do
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> you? i dont want to beat the crap out of you, therefore
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> i am weak? lol ... i can see why you consider yourself
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> to be in a jungle. i presume your knuckles have evolved
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> enough not to hurt too much from dragging them along
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> concrete rather than the jungle floor? ;^-]
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm sure that all the Christians that supported the war
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> agree with me: IN THE JUNGLE YOU MUST STRIKE FIRST.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> There is no jungle in Iraq, stupid.
> >>>>>>>>>>> Still ruled by the Law of the Jungle, isn't it not?
> >>>>>>>>>> Nope, ruled by the law of some rather swathy goat
> >>>>>>>>>> fucker/child molester, actually.
> >>>>>>>>>>> The little lion is being changed for the big ones.
> >>>>>>>>>> There are no lions in Iraq, stupid.
> >>>>>>>>>> And lions dont live in jungles either, stupid.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Where we disagree is that they are happy with the jungle,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> and I'm not. But of course, I'm the Wise Tibetan Monkey.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Only in your pathetic little drug crazed fantasyland.
> >>>>>>>>>>> See, you are obsessed with drugs...
> >>>>>>>>>> Nope, you drug crazed loons stand out like dogs balls, child.
> >>>>>>>>>>> yet another stupid war.
> >>>>>>>>>> Indeed.
> >>>>>>>>> Well, at least you don't support another stupid war.
> >>>>>>>> Yeah, Afghanistan is never gunna fly.
> >>>>>>>>> But if you can't even understand of the value of a basic
> >>>>>>>>> metaphor, how can
> >>>>>>>>> you even get the point that war --all wars-- feed some hungry
> >>>>>>>>> predators?
> >>>>>>>> Not all wars do, WW2 didnt.
> >>>>>>> OK, I agree with that. Self defense.
>
> >> And that is what Afghanistan was initially too.
>
> >>>>>>>>> You wouldn't believe that fairy tale of Adam and Eve being
> >>>>>>>>> tempted by a serpent.
> >>>>>>>> Or that the goat fucker/child molester had some angel whisper
> >>>>>>>> in his ear either.
> >>>>>>>>> Yes, the West believes that an evil snake doomed mankind
> >>>>>>>>> to suffering and indifference --perhaps even martyrdom.
> >>>>>>>>> We are so different from the Muslim world!?
> >>>>>>>> Yeah, no 90 virgins for us, ours fuck around much too much for
> >>>>>>>> that.
> >>>>>>> I see there's no saints among us. Maybe not even the Pope.
> >>>>>> Certainly not even the pope. The current one used to run the
> >>>>>> Inquisition and it will be fascinating to see how many were
> >>>>>> child molesters, just like so many other roman catholic priests.
> >>>>> Laws that keep sexual predators away from the general
> >>>>> population doesn't seem effective for Catholic priests.
> >>>> Yeah, presumably because most cops are roman catholics.
> >>>>> It would be a good question whether they would be willing to give
> >>>>> up their manhood upon vow of priesthood. It should be a simple
> >>>>> operation. ;)
> >>>> Makes a lot more sense to let them marry.
>
> >> They have enough problems with recruiting enough new ones without
> >> your 'solution'
>
> >>> Oh sure. At least they wouldn't have to live in the lie.
>
> >> Yeah, likely more of them fuck adult women than kids, tho there
> >> is some evidence that the current rules do attract child molesters.
>
> >> They dont get too many goat fuckers tho, presumably thats a shortage
> >> of goats.
>
> >>> I sincerely doubt that a human being can suppress his sexual urges
> >>> all the time.
>
> >> Some can.
>
> >>> Maybe someone like Gandhi could,
>
> >> Thats very arguable indeed. He used to sleep naked with one of his
> >> female child close relatives.
>
> >>> but it happened later in his life.
>
> >> Yeah, he used to fuck around in africa.
>
> >>> Someone told me that he was fooling around though it's likely to be
> >>> a lie.
>
> >> He didnt even deny sleeping naked with one of his female child close
> >> relatives.
>
> >> Just maintained that there was nothing wrong with it.
>
> >>> Anyway, I like to dedicate the topic to Gandhi's way, and how we
> >>> may adapt it today...
>
> >> I'm not into drinking my own piss.
>
> >> And he produced a hell of a lot of corpses too.
>
> >>> "The Truth is far more powerful than any weapon of mass
> >>> destruction."http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gandhism
> >>> In this case we got neither one in Iraq. But I think most
> >>> Christians are just HAPPY to live in the lie.
>
> >> Yeah, plenty of them are that stupid.- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> - Show quoted text -
>
> > Thank you. Your responses seem to be pretty "wise," at least by jungle
> > standards.
>
> > Anyway here's how a I would arm the monkey to face the jungle...
>
> > 1- THE TRUTH... OR SATYAGRAHA, the way of the truth based on Gandhi,
> > etc.
>
> > 2- A BANANA... this is where it gets interesting. It could be LOVE for
> > the right person (particularly for a sexy girl) or PEACE, or it could
> > be THE FINGER (we all know what it means), and it could also mean the
> > SURPRISE WEAPON...
>
> >http://amazon.commerceguys.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/product...
>
> > In other words, you "keep 'em guessin' what you've got."
>
> > 3- A BAG OF SHIT. That's pretty much common sense. You throw shit at
> > the jungle and its predators until they let you go. They all want good
> > PR, you know.
>
> > And that's it for the arsenal of the Wise Tibetan Monkey in the
> > jungle.
>
> I stick with rotty and the shotty myself. Works very well indeed.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Explain your wisdom please. Or is that your surprise weapon... ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYQ18A77MTo
== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 8 2010 8:20 pm
From: TheTibetanMonkey showing-the-path-of-enlightenment-in-the-jungle
ARE CHRISTIANS A PLAGUE OR A DISEASE?
The revelations seem to be coming true: These are indeed times of
plagues and disease.* They are everywhere!
And what is the difference between a plague and a disease? I confess
my total ignorance in the area of microbiology and even insects. My
wisdom goes to what I see without instruments or even old books.
*Their predatory ways may earn them that name.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THE WISE TIBETAN MONKEY SAYS:
"The truth is within plain view, but it's smartly camouflaged"
http://webspawner.com/users/DONQUIJOTE6
==============================================================================
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "misc.consumers.frugal-living"
group.
To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living?hl=en
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to misc.consumers.frugal-living+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/subscribe?hl=en
To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com
==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en
