http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living?hl=en
misc.consumers.frugal-living@googlegroups.com
Today's topics:
* Is America waiting for the automatic bike? - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/8219630bbcdae831?hl=en
* Revolution and "bare necessities" - 4 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/8d6abfd29d135dfa?hl=en
* Rod vs. Ed... you be the referee - 16 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/22a2ed7ad85856b3?hl=en
* Mr Ed the donkey Dolan - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/0deefff98b9882ed?hl=en
* Tibetan Monkey vs. Rod Speed - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/4269caaef8eecd9f?hl=en
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Is America waiting for the automatic bike?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/8219630bbcdae831?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Wed, Mar 2 2011 11:50 am
From: "His Highness the TibetanMonkey, originator of the Stop the Bullshit
Campaign"
On Mar 2, 1:47 pm, Mike A Schwab <mike.a.sch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 2, 7:56 am, "His Highness the TibetanMonkey, originator of the
> Stop the Bullshit Campaign" <comandante.ban...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> They won't sell to other people the landrider automatic rear derailer
> to install on their bicycles, which is a lot cheaper.
>
> http://www.landriderbikes.com/
Interesting. Is it too good to be true? The other ones work with
computers.
Does anyone know any bike with Browning automatic? It senses torque as
well as speed.
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Wed, Mar 2 2011 5:15 pm
From: Mike A Schwab
On Mar 2, 1:50 pm, "His Highness the TibetanMonkey, originator of the
Stop the Bullshit Campaign" <nolionnoprob...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Mar 2, 1:47 pm, Mike A Schwab <mike.a.sch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 2, 7:56 am, "His Highness the TibetanMonkey, originator of the
> > Stop the Bullshit Campaign" <comandante.ban...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > They won't sell to other people the landrider automatic rear derailer
> > to install on their bicycles, which is a lot cheaper.
>
> >http://www.landriderbikes.com/
>
> Interesting. Is it too good to be true? The other ones work with
> computers.
>
> Does anyone know any bike with Browning automatic? It senses torque as
> well as speed.
A co-workers spouse got one, really liked it. But you see the one
hybrid and one road frame they sell.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Revolution and "bare necessities"
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/8d6abfd29d135dfa?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Wed, Mar 2 2011 11:58 am
From: "His Highness the TibetanMonkey, originator of the Stop the Bullshit
Campaign"
(Let's forget about America. The revolution here won't start until
drivers are grounded because they can't afford the gas and don't know
any solution. So let's talk about Africa or something)
Oh, something predatory capitalism dismisses. We must constantly
progress or else we are losers, left to rot in poverty. Well, that's
not the point of a revolution. The point is that everybody has the
bare necessities covered. And what are they?
1- FREEDOM: We can't have a revolution without freedom of speech and
freedom to protest,
2- SAFETY: We don't care about freedom if we are not safe, so we must
be safe in the community (no need for gated community). We may
legalize drugs if it contributes to peace and stability. Worst
criminals will be subject to the Law of the Jungle (whatever it takes
to get the job done),
3- HEALTHCARE: C'mon, we all get sick sooner or later. Let's make
nonprofit healthcare a goal,
4- EDUCATION: Free up to technical level, then affordable at the
higher lever,
5- TRANSPORTATION: No, the revolution won't make it easy for you,
people in Africa, to own a car. We reject the idea of an SUV in an
urban civilized environment. The revolution will guarantee you the
right to have a bike and to be safe on the road. Of course, public
transportation is also part of the revolution and Curitiba, Brazil,
has been doing a quiet revolution in that respect,
6- HOMELESSNESS: No homeless. They will be interned in mental
institutions (as appropriate) or made to contribute to the community
where they live in exchange for the bare necessities.
7- HEALTHY FOOD: Affordable rice and beans, bananas and peanuts, or
popcorn as it may be the case.
Bare Necessities from the Jungle Book...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ogQ0uge06o
Don't let the lion dictate your necessities!!!
------------------------------------------------------------------
"Wisdom of the Jungle"
http://webspawner.com/users/BANANAREVOLUTION
== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Wed, Mar 2 2011 1:42 pm
From: "Rod Speed"
His Highness the TibetanMonkey, originator of the Stop the Bullshit Campaign wrote
> (Let's forget about America. The revolution here won't start
You dont get revolutions in the great democracys, stupid.
> until drivers are grounded because they can't afford the gas
Taint gunna happen. In the ultimate, if gasoline does end
up very expensive, natural gas will be used, and when thats
gone too, hydrogen from nukes. Cars will carry on fine.
> and don't know any solution.
There are solutions already in use right now.
> So let's talk about Africa
No point, its always been a dismal failure.
They're so stupid that they cant even manage to work out that
having hordes of kids cant work, or what causes HIV/AIDS
either or that nasty people cant cause lightning strikes.
> or something)
> Oh, something predatory capitalism dismisses. We must
> constantly progress or else we are losers, left to rot in poverty.
Thats just plain wrong. Plenty of places stopped constantly
progressing and didnt rot in poverty when they did.
> Well, that's not the point of a revolution. The point
> is that everybody has the bare necessities covered.
Almost the entire modern first and second world worked out how to do that LONG ago now.
> And what are they?
> 1- FREEDOM: We can't have a revolution without
> freedom of speech and freedom to protest,
You dont get revolutions in the great democracys, stupid.
> 2- SAFETY: We don't care about freedom if we are not safe,
Mindlessly silly. Teenagers are absolutely notorious for not
giving a damn about safety. They really do believe that they
are bulletproof. Thats why we have always used them in wars.
> so we must be safe in the community (no need for gated community).
Easier said than done. There will always be criminals, stupid.
> We may legalize drugs if it contributes to peace and stability.
Open slather on drugs isnt going to do that.
> Worst criminals will be subject to the Law of the
> Jungle (whatever it takes to get the job done),
Thats not peace and stability, stupid.
> 3- HEALTHCARE: C'mon, we all get sick sooner or later.
Not everyone does, some are just healthy until they die in their sleep.
> Let's make nonprofit healthcare a goal,
Why should that be uniquely non profit ?
We all need to eat and drink. Only a fool would demand
that that be non profit because its something we all need.
> 4- EDUCATION: Free up to technical level,
It is right thruout the modern first and second world.
> then affordable at the higher lever,
Waffle. Define affordable.
With technical education it makes a lot of sense to have a
mechanism whereby you can pay for the technical education
with the better job you get with the technical education.
But you cant actually justify your line that up to technical level
should be free but not after that.
> 5- TRANSPORTATION: No, the revolution won't make
> it easy for you, people in Africa, to own a car. We reject
> the idea of an SUV in an urban civilized environment.
Only one eyed fools do.
> The revolution will guarantee you the right to have a bike and to be safe on the road.
Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed fantasys.
> Of course, public transportation is also part of the revolution
Hopeless outside urban areas and cars leave that for dead.
> and Curitiba, Brazil, has been doing a quiet revolution in that respect,
Pity about the rest of the country.
> 6- HOMELESSNESS: No homeless.
There will always be some loons that choose to 'live' like that.
> They will be interned in mental institutions (as appropriate)
Most of them prefer not to be forced into those.
> or made to contribute to the community where
> they live in exchange for the bare necessities.
Not even possible with the worst of the drug addicts and drunks.
> 7- HEALTHY FOOD: Affordable rice and beans, bananas
> and peanuts, or popcorn as it may be the case.
No thanks.
<reams of even sillier crap flushed where it belongs>
== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Wed, Mar 2 2011 2:11 pm
From: "Edward Dolan"
"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:8t7rteFteoU1@mid.individual.net...
> His Highness the TibetanMonkey, originator of the Stop the Bullshit
> Campaign wrote
>
>> (Let's forget about America. The revolution here won't start
>
> You dont get revolutions in the great democracys, stupid.
The hell you say! How do we know you are not lying?
>> until drivers are grounded because they can't afford the gas
>
> Taint gunna happen. In the ultimate, if gasoline does end
> up very expensive, natural gas will be used, and when thats
> gone too, hydrogen from nukes. Cars will carry on fine.
The hell you say! How do we know you are not lying?
>> and don't know any solution.
>
> There are solutions already in use right now.
>
>> So let's talk about Africa
>
> No point, its always been a dismal failure.
The hell you say! How do we know you are not lying?
> They're so stupid that they cant even manage to work out that
> having hordes of kids cant work, or what causes HIV/AIDS
> either or that nasty people cant cause lightning strikes.
The hell you say! How do we know you are not lying?
>> or something)
>
>> Oh, something predatory capitalism dismisses. We must
>> constantly progress or else we are losers, left to rot in poverty.
>
> Thats just plain wrong. Plenty of places stopped constantly
> progressing and didnt rot in poverty when they did.
The hell you say! How do we know you are not lying?
>> Well, that's not the point of a revolution. The point
>> is that everybody has the bare necessities covered.
>
> Almost the entire modern first and second world worked out how to do that
> LONG ago now.
The hell you say! How do we know you are not lying?
>> And what are they?
>
>> 1- FREEDOM: We can't have a revolution without
>> freedom of speech and freedom to protest,
>
> You dont get revolutions in the great democracys, stupid.
The hell you say! How do we know you are not lying?
>> 2- SAFETY: We don't care about freedom if we are not safe,
>
> Mindlessly silly. Teenagers are absolutely notorious for not
> giving a damn about safety. They really do believe that they
> are bulletproof. Thats why we have always used them in wars.
The hell you say! How do we know you are not lying?
>> so we must be safe in the community (no need for gated community).
>
> Easier said than done. There will always be criminals, stupid.
The hell you say! How do we know you are not lying?
>> We may legalize drugs if it contributes to peace and stability.
>
> Open slather on drugs isnt going to do that.
The hell you say! How do we know you are not lying?
>> Worst criminals will be subject to the Law of the
>> Jungle (whatever it takes to get the job done),
>
> Thats not peace and stability, stupid.
The hell you say! How do we know you are not lying?
>> 3- HEALTHCARE: C'mon, we all get sick sooner or later.
>
> Not everyone does, some are just healthy until they die in their sleep.
The hell you say! How do we know you are not lying?
>> Let's make nonprofit healthcare a goal,
>
> Why should that be uniquely non profit ?
The hell you say! How do we know you are not lying?
> We all need to eat and drink. Only a fool would demand
> that that be non profit because its something we all need.
The hell you say! How do we know you are not lying?
>> 4- EDUCATION: Free up to technical level,
>
> It is right thruout the modern first and second world.
The hell you say! How do we know you are not lying?
>> then affordable at the higher lever,
>
> Waffle. Define affordable.
>
> With technical education it makes a lot of sense to have a
> mechanism whereby you can pay for the technical education
> with the better job you get with the technical education.
The hell you say! How do we know you are not lying?
> But you cant actually justify your line that up to technical level
> should be free but not after that.
The hell you say! How do we know you are not lying?
>> 5- TRANSPORTATION: No, the revolution won't make
>> it easy for you, people in Africa, to own a car. We reject
>> the idea of an SUV in an urban civilized environment.
>
> Only one eyed fools do.
The hell you say! How do we know you are not lying?
>> The revolution will guarantee you the right to have a bike and to be safe
>> on the road.
>
> Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed fantasys.
The hell you say! How do we know you are not lying?
>> Of course, public transportation is also part of the revolution
>
> Hopeless outside urban areas and cars leave that for dead.
The hell you say! How do we know you are not lying?
>> and Curitiba, Brazil, has been doing a quiet revolution in that respect,
>
> Pity about the rest of the country.
The hell you say! How do we know you are not lying?
>> 6- HOMELESSNESS: No homeless.
>
> There will always be some loons that choose to 'live' like that.
The hell you say! How do we know you are not lying?
>> They will be interned in mental institutions (as appropriate)
>
> Most of them prefer not to be forced into those.
The hell you say! How do we know you are not lying?
>> or made to contribute to the community where
>> they live in exchange for the bare necessities.
>
> Not even possible with the worst of the drug addicts and drunks.
The hell you say! How do we know you are not lying?
>> 7- HEALTHY FOOD: Affordable rice and beans, bananas
>> and peanuts, or popcorn as it may be the case.
>
> No thanks.
>
> <reams of even sillier crap flushed where it belongs>
The hell you say! How do we know you are not lying?
== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Wed, Mar 2 2011 4:12 pm
From: "Rod Speed"
Mr Ed the donkey Dolan wrote just the puerile shit any 2 year old could leave for dead.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Rod vs. Ed... you be the referee
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/22a2ed7ad85856b3?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 16 ==
Date: Wed, Mar 2 2011 12:28 pm
From: "His Highness the TibetanMonkey, originator of the Stop the Bullshit
Campaign"
On Mar 2, 1:14 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
> Not in the american sense, but I am in the sense of the second
> one here, I do support modern welfare system, basically social
> safetynets tho I dont like the fact that any safetynet does see
> some choose to not bother to make their own provision for life
> after work, or between jobs and just use the safetynet instead.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_conservative
Your philosophy seems very fitting for the outback: It provides for
casual contact between species, but not cooperation in crowded spaces.
I'll explain: A philosophy born in Amsterdam must be very different.
== 2 of 16 ==
Date: Wed, Mar 2 2011 12:55 pm
From: "Edward Dolan"
"His Highness the TibetanMonkey, originator of the Stop the Bullshit
Campaign" <comandante.banana@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:8410eec7-168c-4200-ba95-a425a09653a2@y31g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
On Mar 2, 1:14 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
> Not in the american sense, but I am in the sense of the second
> one here, I do support modern welfare system, basically social
> safetynets tho I dont like the fact that any safetynet does see
> some choose to not bother to make their own provision for life
> after work, or between jobs and just use the safetynet
> instead.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_conservative
>> Your philosophy seems very fitting for the outback: It provides for
casual contact between species, but not cooperation in crowded spaces.
I'll explain: A philosophy born in Amsterdam must be very different.
Bravo TM! You have no idea how I am going to start reading your posts if
only you can keep off of your crusade.
I could take some lessons from you in how to remain civil I must admit. Your
good nature is priceless on these newsgroups.
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
== 3 of 16 ==
Date: Wed, Mar 2 2011 1:10 pm
From: "Rod Speed"
Mr Ed the donkey Dolan wrote just the puerile shit any 2 year old could leave for dead.
== 4 of 16 ==
Date: Wed, Mar 2 2011 1:14 pm
From: "Rod Speed"
Edward Dolan wrote
> Jeff Thies <jeff_thies@att.net> wrote
>> I think not. He [Rod Speed] is a libertarian/liberal/lunatic (lll).
>> Definitely not a social conservative.
> Jeff has got that exactly right.
Nope, miles out.
== 5 of 16 ==
Date: Wed, Mar 2 2011 1:15 pm
From: "Rod Speed"
Mr Ed the donkey Dolan wrote just the puerile shit any 2 year old could leave for dead.
== 6 of 16 ==
Date: Wed, Mar 2 2011 1:23 pm
From: "Rod Speed"
Edward Dolan wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>> Jeff Thies wrote
>>> Definitely not a social conservative.
>> Not in the american sense, but I am in the sense of the second
>> one here, I do support modern welfare system, basically social
>> safetynets tho I dont like the fact that any safetynet does see
>> some choose to not bother to make their own provision for life
>> after work, or between jobs and just use the safetynet instead.
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_conservative
> Nope, you are a libertarian whether you realize it or not.
Nope. I have never ever advocated very small govt.
A decent modern universal health care system is nothing even remotely resembling anything like libertarian.
> There is more to society than a safety net.
Never said there wasnt. Thats just the evidence that I am a social
conservative in the sense of the second one in that wikipedia entry.
> Life is full of accidents
Yes, but govt safetynets arent the only way to handle those.
I do support govt safetynets for those, basically because so
many dont bother to do anything about the alternatives particularly
when they are young and assume it cant happen to them and for
those whose parents are too stupid to bother with the alternatives etc.
> and the race is not to the swift nor the fight to the strong.
More of your mindlessly superficial shit.
<reams of your puerile attempts at insults any 2 year old could leave for dead flushed where they belong>
== 7 of 16 ==
Date: Wed, Mar 2 2011 1:29 pm
From: "Edward Dolan"
"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:8t7q8pFht6U1@mid.individual.net...
> Mr Ed the donkey Dolan wrote just the puerile shit any 2 year old could
> leave for dead.
After its recent emergence in the thread "How to calculate increase
of home wireless router range?", readers of this group may find
this useful. [based on a post in comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage]
Who or What is Rod Speed?
Rod Speed is an entirely modern phenomenon. Essentially, Rod
Speed is an insecure and worthless individual who has discovered
he can enhance his own self-esteem in his own eyes by playing "the
big, hard man" on the InterNet.
Rod is believed to be from Australia.
Rod certainly posts a lot. Why is that?
It relates back to the point about boosting his own self esteem by
what amounts to effectively having a wank in public. Rod's
personality, as exemplified by his posts, means he is practically
unemployable which means he sits around at home all day festering
away and getting worse and worse. This means he posts more and
more try and boost the old failing self esteem. Being unemployed
also means he as a lot of time on his hands to post in he first
place.
But maybe Rod really is a very clever and knowledgable person?
Clever? His posts wouldn't support that theory. As far as being
knowledgable, well, Rod has posted to various aus newsgroups
including invest, comms, and politics. He has posted to all as a
self professed "expert" and flames any and all who disagree with
him. Logically, here's no way any single individual could be
more than a jack of all trades across such a wide spread of
subject matter.
But maybe Rod really is an expert in some areas?
Possibly. However, his "bedside manner" prevents him from being
taken seriously by most normal people. Also, he has damaged his
credibility in areas where he might know what he's on about by
shooting his self in the foot in areas where he does not. For
example, in the case of subject matter such as politics, even a
view held by Albert Einstein cannot be little more than an
opinion and to vociferously denigrate an opposing opinion is
simply small mindedness and bigotry, the kind of which Einstein
himself fought against his whole life.
What is Rod Speed's main modus operandi?
Simple! He shoots off a half brained opinion in response to any
other post and touts that opinion as fact. When challenged, he
responds with vociferous and rabid denigration. He has an
instantly recognisable set of schoolboy put downs limited pretty
much to the following: "Pathetic, Puerile, Little Boy, try
harder, trivial, more lies, gutless wonder, wanker, etc etc".
The fact that Rod has been unable to come up with any new insults
says a lot about his outlook and intelligence.
But why do so many people respond to Rod in turn?
It has to do with effrontery and a lack of logic. Most people
who post have some basis of reason for what they write and when
Rod retorts with his usual denigration and derision they respond
emotionally rather than logically. It's like a teacher in a
class room who has a misbehaving pupil. The teacher challenges
the pupil to explain himself and the student responds with "***
off, Big Nose!" Even thought the teacher has a fairly normal
proboscis, he gets a dent in his self-esteem and might resort to
an emotional repsonse like "yeah? well your *** wouldn't fill a
pop rivet, punk", which merely invites some oneupmanship from the
naughty pupil. Of course, the teacher should not have justified
the initial comment with a response, especially in front of the
class. The correct response was "please report to the
headmaster's office right NOW!"
What is a "RodBot"?
Some respondents in aus.invest built a "virtual Rod" which was
indiscernable from the "real" Rod. Net users could enter an
opinion or even a fact and the RoDBot would tell them they were
pathetic lying schoolboys who should be able to do better or some
equally pithy Rod Speedism.
Are you saying that Rod Speed is a Troll?
You got it!
What is the best way to handle Rod Speed?
KillFile!
>
== 8 of 16 ==
Date: Wed, Mar 2 2011 1:44 pm
From: "Rod Speed"
His Highness the TibetanMonkey, originator of the Stop the Bullshit Campaign wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote
>> Not in the american sense, but I am in the sense of the second
>> one here, I do support modern welfare system, basically social
>> safetynets tho I dont like the fact that any safetynet does see
>> some choose to not bother to make their own provision for life
>> after work, or between jobs and just use the safetynet instead.
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_conservative
> Your philosophy seems very fitting for the outback:
You wouldnt know what the outback was if it bit you on your lard arse, child.
> It provides for casual contact between species, but not cooperation in crowded spaces.
Try telling that to western europe. Dont be too surprised
when they just laugh in your stupid pig ignorant face, again.
> I'll explain: A philosophy born in Amsterdam must be very different.
Wrong, as always.
== 9 of 16 ==
Date: Wed, Mar 2 2011 1:45 pm
From: "Rod Speed"
Mr Ed the donkey Dolan wrote just the puerile shit any 2 year old could leave for dead.
== 10 of 16 ==
Date: Wed, Mar 2 2011 1:53 pm
From: "Edward Dolan"
"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:8t7qotFlchU1@mid.individual.net...
> Edward Dolan wrote
>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>> Jeff Thies wrote
>
>>>> Definitely not a social conservative.
>
>>> Not in the american sense, but I am in the sense of the second
>>> one here, I do support modern welfare system, basically social
>>> safetynets tho I dont like the fact that any safetynet does see
>>> some choose to not bother to make their own provision for life
>>> after work, or between jobs and just use the safetynet instead.
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_conservative
>
>> Nope, you are a libertarian whether you realize it or not.
>
> Nope. I have never ever advocated very small govt.
You do not want to provide for the down and outers. Why is that? Don't ever
think you can be down and out? Think again. Chance and happenstance is
available for every human being who has ever lived. How about a stroke or
heart attack to set you on the path to sanity! Maybe cancer is more your
speed.
>
> A decent modern universal health care system is nothing even remotely
> resembling anything like libertarian.\
Well, it is like a decent universal school system K-12. It will cost society
an enormous amount of its resources. It is well on the road to socialism.
But hey, if you are NOT a libertarian, then more credit to you.
>> There is more to society than a safety net.
>
> Never said there wasnt. Thats just the evidence that I am a social
> conservative in the sense of the second one in that wikipedia entry.
I would never go to a link of yours. Just how crazy do you think I am?
You seem to delight in kicking those who are less fortunate than you. Is
that what social conservatives do?
>> Life is full of accidents
>
> Yes, but govt safetynets arent the only way to handle those.
Unfortunately private charities never seem to do much. They only want to
help those who they deem "deserving".
> I do support govt safetynets for those, basically because so
> many dont bother to do anything about the alternatives particularly
> when they are young and assume it cant happen to them and for
> those whose parents are too stupid to bother with the alternatives etc.
You are arguing against what we all know human nature to be.
>> and the race is not to the swift nor the fight to the strong.
>
> More of your mindlessly superficial shit.
No more mindless than any of your superficial shit!
> <reams of your puerile attempts at insults any 2 year old could leave for
> dead flushed where they belong>
You should get a new tag line. Why bore everyone to death! But I understand.
You are not only a stupid son of a bitch, you are also a lazy son of a
bitch. Those two qualities often go together
== 11 of 16 ==
Date: Wed, Mar 2 2011 1:58 pm
From: "Edward Dolan"
"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:8t7q8rFht6U2@mid.individual.net...
> Edward Dolan wrote
>> Jeff Thies <jeff_thies@att.net> wrote
>
>>> I think not. He [Rod Speed] is a libertarian/liberal/lunatic (lll).
>>> Definitely not a social conservative.
>
>> Jeff has got that exactly right.
>
> Nope, miles out.
Nope, nope, nope to you too, you god damn stupid son of a bitch. Hells
Bells, you are not even a libertarian. You are a bastard pure and simple.
Now go fuck yourself and quit bothering the noble members of these honorable
newsgroups.
== 12 of 16 ==
Date: Wed, Mar 2 2011 2:26 pm
From: "Edward Dolan"
"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:8t7s1kFu9qU1@mid.individual.net...
> His Highness the TibetanMonkey, originator of the Stop the Bullshit
> Campaign wrote
>> Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote
>
>>> Not in the american sense, but I am in the sense of the second
>>> one here, I do support modern welfare system, basically social
>>> safetynets tho I dont like the fact that any safetynet does see
>>> some choose to not bother to make their own provision for life
>>> after work, or between jobs and just use the safetynet instead.
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_conservative
>
>> Your philosophy seems very fitting for the outback:
>
> You wouldnt know what the outback was if it bit you on your lard arse,
> child.
Nope, TM is not nearly so stupid as you are. In fact, he is the embodiment
of wisdom compared to you.
>> It provides for casual contact between species, but not cooperation in
>> crowded spaces.
>
> Try telling that to western europe. Dont be too surprised
> when they just laugh in your stupid pig ignorant face, again.
There is no face more ignorant than yours. After all, you are just an Aussie
Aborigine with a flat nose taking up 50% of your ugly face. Now go piss and
shit and fuck so as to clean yourself like the animal that you are ... and
quit bothering the noble members of these honorable newsgroups.
>> I'll explain: A philosophy born in Amsterdam must be very different.
>
> Wrong, as always.
But never so wrong you are! Only Ed Dolan the Great is always and forever
RIGHT! Just ask Tom Sherman!
== 13 of 16 ==
Date: Wed, Mar 2 2011 4:11 pm
From: "Rod Speed"
Edward Dolan wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>> Edward Dolan wrote
>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>>> Jeff Thies wrote
>>>>> Definitely not a social conservative.
>>>> Not in the american sense, but I am in the sense of the second
>>>> one here, I do support modern welfare system, basically social
>>>> safetynets tho I dont like the fact that any safetynet does see
>>>> some choose to not bother to make their own provision for life
>>>> after work, or between jobs and just use the safetynet instead.
>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_conservative
>>> Nope, you are a libertarian whether you realize it or not.
>> Nope. I have never ever advocated very small govt.
> You do not want to provide for the down and outers.
Thats a lie. I think that the loonys we used to keep in locked wards should
be provided for. They prefer anything other than the old locked wards.
I certainly dont want to provide for drug addicts, but thats
not libertarian, most dont want to provide for drug addicts.
> Why is that? Don't ever think you can be down and out?
I know I wont ever be.
> Think again. Chance and happenstance is available for every human being who has ever lived.
Yes, but some of us will never be down and out as a result.
> How about a stroke or heart attack
Had one of those. Our health care system handled it fine,
didnt cost me a cent exept for a couple of papers to read.
> to set you on the path to sanity! Maybe cancer is more your speed.
Our health care system ensures that that cant make me down and out either.
>> A decent modern universal health care system is nothing even remotely resembling anything like libertarian.
> Well, it is like a decent universal school system K-12. It will cost society an enormous amount of its resources.
Its very affordable for any first and second world country.
> It is well on the road to socialism.
Yes, and I have rubbed stupid's noses in that fact.
Even someone as stupid as you should be able to find that using groups.google.
> But hey, if you are NOT a libertarian, then more credit to you.
>>> There is more to society than a safety net.
>> Never said there wasnt. Thats just the evidence that I am a social
>> conservative in the sense of the second one in that wikipedia entry.
> I would never go to a link of yours. Just how crazy do you think I am?
You're welcome to find it for yourself, the wikipedia articles show up
right up the top of a google search on <social conservative>, stupid.
> You seem to delight in kicking those who are less fortunate than you.
Then you need to get your seems machinery seen to, child.
> Is that what social conservatives do?
>>> Life is full of accidents
>> Yes, but govt safetynets arent the only way to handle those.
> Unfortunately private charities never seem to do much.
Those arent the only alternatives. The other obvious way to handle accidents is insurance.
> They only want to help those who they deem "deserving".
They are welcome to do anything they like.
With govt safetynets what matters is what you are legally entitled to.
>> I do support govt safetynets for those, basically because so many dont bother to do anything about the alternatives
>> particularly when they are young and assume it cant happen to them and for those whose parents are too stupid to
>> bother with the alternatives etc.
> You are arguing against what we all know human nature to be.
Nope.
<reams of your puerile attempts at insults any 2 year old could leave for dead flushed where they belong>
== 14 of 16 ==
Date: Wed, Mar 2 2011 4:12 pm
From: "Rod Speed"
Mr Ed the donkey Dolan wrote just the puerile shit any 2 year old could leave for dead.
== 15 of 16 ==
Date: Wed, Mar 2 2011 4:12 pm
From: "Rod Speed"
Mr Ed the donkey Dolan wrote just the puerile shit any 2 year old could leave for dead.
== 16 of 16 ==
Date: Wed, Mar 2 2011 5:43 pm
From: "Edward Dolan"
"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:8t84lvFlobU1@mid.individual.net...
> Edward Dolan wrote
>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>> Edward Dolan wrote
>>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>>>> Jeff Thies wrote
>
>>>>>> Definitely not a social conservative.
>
>>>>> Not in the american sense, but I am in the sense of the second
>>>>> one here, I do support modern welfare system, basically social
>>>>> safetynets tho I dont like the fact that any safetynet does see
>>>>> some choose to not bother to make their own provision for life
>>>>> after work, or between jobs and just use the safetynet instead.
>>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_conservative
>
>>>> Nope, you are a libertarian whether you realize it or not.
>
>>> Nope. I have never ever advocated very small govt.
>
>> You do not want to provide for the down and outers.
>
> Thats a lie. I think that the loonys we used to keep in locked wards
> should
> be provided for. They prefer anything other than the old locked wards.
Listen up you god damn fucking asshole, we have got you figured out to a T.
You need to be dropped in Libya where you could survive or not. With an
asshole like you, it is all about survival of the fittest. Too much of you
and I will turn into a progressive liberal like Tom Sherman.
> I certainly dont want to provide for drug addicts, but thats
> not libertarian, most dont want to provide for drug addicts.
Yes, I agree with you on that. Providing drugs only perpetuates the problem.
Folks on drugs are not good for society.
>> Why is that? Don't ever think you can be down and out?
>
> I know I wont ever be.
That is because you are a god damn fool!
>> Think again. Chance and happenstance is available for every human being
>> who has ever lived.
>
> Yes, but some of us will never be down and out as a result.
You are a god damn fool!
>> How about a stroke or heart attack
>
> Had one of those. Our health care system handled it fine,
> didnt cost me a cent exept for a couple of papers to read.
You paid for every last cent of what it cost to take care your ailment?
>> to set you on the path to sanity! Maybe cancer is more your speed.
>
> Our health care system ensures that that cant make me down and out either.
That is because of the liberal socialist elements, not your god damn social
conservatism - you fucking idiot!
>>> A decent modern universal health care system is nothing even remotely
>>> resembling anything like libertarian.
>
>> Well, it is like a decent universal school system K-12. It will cost
>> society an enormous amount of its resources.
>
> Its very affordable for any first and second world country.
It is NOT! It is extremely costly. The United States is going broke trying
to finance all these socialist welfare measures.
>> It is well on the road to socialism.
>
> Yes, and I have rubbed stupid's noses in that fact.
At last, something we can agree on!
> Even someone as stupid as you should be able to find that using
> groups.google.
Fuck Google Groups!
>> But hey, if you are NOT a libertarian, then more credit to you.
>
>>>> There is more to society than a safety net.
>
>>> Never said there wasnt. Thats just the evidence that I am a social
>>> conservative in the sense of the second one in that wikipedia entry.
>
>> I would never go to a link of yours. Just how crazy do you think I am?
>
> You're welcome to find it for yourself, the wikipedia articles show up
> right up the top of a google search on <social conservative>, stupid.
Fuck Wikipedia!
>> You seem to delight in kicking those who are less fortunate than you.
>
> Then you need to get your seems machinery seen to, child.
You are nothing but a fuck-you type of poster. You should model yourself
after me - if you had any brains.
>> Is that what social conservatives do?
>
>>>> Life is full of accidents
>
>>> Yes, but govt safetynets arent the only way to handle those.
>
>> Unfortunately private charities never seem to do much.
>
> Those arent the only alternatives. The other obvious way to handle
> accidents is insurance.
God damn insurance companies are all crooks. The only way you can get
anything out of them is to hire a lawyer and sue. Jesus, just how stupid are
you anyway?
>> They only want to help those who they deem "deserving".
>
> They are welcome to do anything they like.
Yes, it is like fuck you too!
> With govt safetynets what matters is what you are legally entitled to.
It is all in the fine print though, isn't it?
>>> I do support govt safetynets for those, basically because so many dont
>>> bother to do anything about the alternatives particularly when they are
>>> young and assume it cant happen to them and for those whose parents are
>>> too stupid to bother with the alternatives etc.
>
>> You are arguing against what we all know human nature to be.
>
> Nope.
The bottom line is that you do not know one god damn thing about human
nature. Your moronic copy and paste shit proves it beyond a doubt - you god
damn moron!
> <reams of your puerile attempts at insults any 2 year old could leave for
> dead flushed where they belong>
You bet, fuck you too - asshole/shithead!
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Mr Ed the donkey Dolan
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/0deefff98b9882ed?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Mar 2 2011 1:14 pm
From: "Rod Speed"
Mr Ed the donkey Dolan wrote just the puerile shit any 2 year old could leave for dead.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Tibetan Monkey vs. Rod Speed
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/4269caaef8eecd9f?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Wed, Mar 2 2011 3:01 pm
From: "Edward Dolan"
As most of you know, I have been opposed to TM and his crusade since it is
monotonous and mostly senseless. But TM is a genius almost on my level
compared to RS. So, what is wrong with RS?
RS is a fraud through and through. He only knows how to put down those who
are less fortunate than him. I am a social conservative, but he gives the
term a bad name. It is pointless to excoriate those who are down and out,
yet he seems to delight in it. This makes him out for the poor dumb bastard
that he is.
But what is really funny is that he gratuitously insults those on these
newsgroups with whom he has the slightest disagreement. I have never done
that nor has TM. Note the word "gratuitously". That is the key. What does
this tell us about him? It tells me that he is as dumb as a post and
insecure to boot. Note how he likes to pick on those who are somewhat naive.
Is not this ever the hallmark of a weak-kneed bastard and a bully? Yea, I
can spot them a mile off even if the rest of you can't
I will support TM in whatever he says in opposition to RS. TM is at least
human and RS is nothing but an inhuman bastard. Fuck him all the way to Hell
and back!
Regards,
Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Wed, Mar 2 2011 4:13 pm
From: "Rod Speed"
Mr Ed the donkey Dolan wrote just the puerile shit any 2 year old could leave for dead.
==============================================================================
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
No comments:
Post a Comment