Digest for rec.sport.golf@googlegroups.com - 22 updates in 10 topics

Thursday, June 22, 2017

tomseim2g@gmail.com: Jun 21 07:57PM -0700

Typical response:
 
"No. The logical proof starts with your answer. I already told you that."
 
Alan, if you have any proof state it now or shut up.
Dene <gdstrue@aol.com>: Jun 21 09:37PM -0700

ail.com
Typical response:
 
"No. The logical proof starts with your answer. I already told you that."
 
Alan, if you have any proof state it now or shut up.
 
You expect more from a troll.
Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net>: Jun 22 12:41AM -0700

> Typical response:
 
> "No. The logical proof starts with your answer. I already told you that."
 
> Alan, if you have any proof state it now or shut up.
 
I told you: it starts with your position.
 
Why won't you answer?
tomseim2g@gmail.com: Jun 21 05:56PM -0700

On Wednesday, June 21, 2017 at 3:10:31 PM UTC-7, DumbedDownUSA wrote:
 
> It seems to me you are crowing about holding onto a very safe seat by a
> relatively small margin.
 
> That's a bit lame.
 
I just listened to another Libtard make the same, lame argument. Bottom line: a loss is a loss (just ask Shrillary). To answer your question, Dims spent a boat load of money to increase Dim turnout, and they still fell short. Is this their (flawed) strategy for 2018? If so, Soros is going to have to write some BIG checks!
Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net>: Jun 21 06:14PM -0700

On 2017-06-21 6:04 PM, Moderate wrote:
 
> How much of that money went to support single mothers? Poverty?
> Homeless? Veterans? Healthcare National debt?
 
> The mush heads don't care.
 
You realize it is the Republicans plan to basically reduce funding to
every group you just mentioned...
 
...and give tax cuts to the uber-rich...
 
...right?
BK@Onramp.net: Jun 21 08:27PM -0500

On Wed, 21 Jun 2017 20:04:02 -0500 (CDT), Moderate
 
>How much of that money went to support single mothers? Poverty?
> Homeless? Veterans? Healthcare National debt?
 
>The mush heads don't care.
 
You didn't read what was spent by the GOP. They must not care either.
Carbon <nobrac@nospam.tampabay.rr.com>: Jun 21 09:49PM -0400

On 06/21/2017 09:14 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
> every group you just mentioned...
 
> ....and give tax cuts to the uber-rich...
 
> ....right?

At no time does it ever dawn on any of these low-information propaganda victims that they have again been conned into voting against their own interests.
 
As for the propagandists, they count on being able to get away with lying to the suckers even as they laugh at their gullibility:
 
Jared Kushner on Trump's birtherism: "He doesn't really believe it, Elizabeth. He just knows Republicans are stupid and they'll buy it."
 
https://goo.gl/ziqDWt
 
There you go, you fools. A rare honest moment from Trump's inner circle. Enjoy.
tomseim2g@gmail.com: Jun 21 07:49PM -0700

On Wednesday, June 21, 2017 at 6:14:28 PM UTC-7, Alan Baker wrote:
> every group you just mentioned...
 
> ...and give tax cuts to the uber-rich...
 
> ...right?
 
Dimocrats want to increase taxes on EVERYBODY because they want bigger, more expensive government which everybody will have to pay for, EITHER thru taxes or more expensive goods and services, or both. Republicans want to decrease taxes for EVERYBODY by decreasing the size of government. BTW, the so-called uber rich DON'T get paychecks: they own the companies! Haven't you dimwits figured this out after all this time? I guess not...
"DumbedDownUSA" <dumb.america@gmail.com>: Jun 22 05:58AM

> > by a relatively small margin.
 
> > That's a bit lame.
 
> I just listened to another Libtard make the same, lame argument.
 
No you didn't.
 
Your mistake as always is making assumptions about things of which you
have absolutely no knowledge.
 
Your first thought is to make a dergatory remark no matter how
untruthful.
 
That says a lot about you and your ilk for whom the first line of
argument is ad hominen attack.
 
I don't know what impression you think it gives but it makes you look
unintelligent and extremely ignorant.
 
> question, Dims spent a boat load of money to increase Dim turnout,
> and they still fell short. Is this their (flawed) strategy for 2018?
> If so, Soros is going to have to write some BIG checks!
 
So this is why the insult; you have no reasonable response.
 
Of course the more intelligent observer might note that is was not
actually a loss for the dems, it was a hold for the republicans.
 
So the dems couldn't quite turn a massive majority.
 
I don't think I'd be crying too much if I was them and I certainly
wouldn't be crowing as loud if I were you.
 
It's a bit like a major league team doing a victory lap for narrowly
beating a part time side.
"DumbedDownUSA" <dumb.america@gmail.com>: Jun 22 06:02AM

Moderate wrote:
 
 
> How much of that money went to support single mothers? Poverty?
> Homeless? Veterans? Healthcare National debt?
 
> The mush heads don't care.
 
OMG, do you hear yourself?
 
How old are you? Five?
 
Are all your comments as well thought out? How deos that go "I think
I'll have a few then go post on t'internets"?
Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net>: Jun 21 06:02PM -0700


>> But it starts with you answering my question.
 
>> :-)
 
> No, it starts with you providing the PROOF! If you had a logical proof you would have provided it, but you don't. Your SILENCE is DEAFENING!!
 
No. The logical proof starts with your answer. I already told you that.
 
Why can't you answer? What prevents you?
BK@Onramp.net: Jun 21 08:22PM -0500


>> http://www.essence.com/news/politics/100-days-donald-trumps-lies-and-failed-promises
 
>> https://www.thenation.com/article/donald-trump-intentionally-lies-to-us/
 
>I already picked one - you guys CAN'T PROVEN EVEN ONE!
 
You are a blithering idiot. You asked for proof of one Trump lie.
I've shown hundreds. ESAD
tomseim2g@gmail.com: Jun 21 07:51PM -0700


> >I already picked one - you guys CAN'T PROVEN EVEN ONE!
 
> You are a blithering idiot. You asked for proof of one Trump lie.
> I've shown hundreds. ESAD
 
I haven't seen proof of ANYTHING.
tomseim2g@gmail.com: Jun 21 07:52PM -0700

On Wednesday, June 21, 2017 at 6:02:11 PM UTC-7, Alan Baker wrote:
 
> > No, it starts with you providing the PROOF! If you had a logical proof you would have provided it, but you don't. Your SILENCE is DEAFENING!!
 
> No. The logical proof starts with your answer. I already told you that.
 
> Why can't you answer? What prevents you?
 
Your so-called "proof" is as non-existent as Dimocrats victories...
"John B." <johnb505@gmail.com>: Jun 21 07:44PM -0700

On Tuesday, June 20, 2017 at 10:25:26 PM UTC-4, Dene wrote:
> didn't do what Trump said he hoped he would do and the next thing
> he knew he was fired.
 
> I wouldn't let my boss be this vague. I doubt Trump is vague either. When he issues an order, you know it.
 
You've completely missed the point. I wasn't talking about your boss's
management style. I was asking what you would do in that situation.
Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net>: Jun 21 06:17PM -0700

Well.. ...I guess that's something.
 
'Mitch McConnell and his tiny cabal of fellow senators are finally ready
to unveil their plan to take away health insurance from millions of
people. The official presentation of the new bill will happen tomorrow
morning but some outlets received a preview of what it contains on
Wednesday. It sounds ever so slightly less "mean" than the House bill.'
 
<http://gizmodo.com/it-looks-like-the-senates-health-bill-is-almost-as-vile-1796315881>
 
'Another key difference between the House and Senate's plan is that the
new bill will delay cuts to Obamacare's Medicaid expansion provisions.
The program covers more than 70 million low-income Americans. The Senate
bill is expected to make deeper cuts into the program but they won't
kick in until 2025, easing the worries of Senators having to face their
constituents on the issue any time soon. Federal subsidies will also be
pegged to income rather than age, which was the guideline in the House
proposal.'
"Tony G" <anthonygeee@aol.com>: Jun 21 09:12PM -0400

What?
 
Love? Is it love you think?
Moderate <nospam@noemail.com>: Jun 21 08:04PM -0500


> I just listened to another Libtard make the same, lame argument. Bottom line: a loss is a loss (just ask Shrillary). To answer your question, Dims spent a boat load of money to increase Dim turnout, and they still fell short. Is this their (flawed) strategy for 2018? If so, Soros is going to have to write some BIG checks!
 
How much of that money went to support single mothers? Poverty?
Homeless? Veterans? Healthcare National debt?
 
The mush heads don't care.
--
"Willie Brennan" <bbren@aol.com>: Jun 21 08:39PM -0400

Really? Do they melt like sugar plums when they get wet?
tomseim2g@gmail.com: Jun 21 05:52PM -0700

On Wednesday, June 21, 2017 at 5:39:35 PM UTC-7, Willie Brennan wrote:
> Really? Do they melt like sugar plums when they get wet?
 
Dims melt in the rain, don't you know?
tomseim2g@gmail.com: Jun 21 05:51PM -0700

On Wednesday, June 21, 2017 at 3:33:37 PM UTC-7, Dene wrote:
> NYT article. Some Dems are waking up.
 
> https://apple.news/APOv4cUjAQpqaYAbuKaadaw
 
And this one in the HuffPost:
 
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/nancy-pelosi-democrats-georgia_us_594ad93ee4b0312cfb613993?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009
 
Pelosi is Trump's best friend...
tomseim2g@gmail.com: Jun 21 05:37PM -0700

"We are losing by a smaller margin."
 
Take that one to the bank after spending $32,000,000.
You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to rec.sport.golf+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

0 comments:

Post a Comment