Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.checkmate > #245411 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Ted <ted@sam.street> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2019-01-05 01:53 +0000 |
| Last post | 2019-01-07 04:05 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 196 — 18 participants |
Back to article view | Back to alt.checkmate
Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Ted <ted@sam.street> - 2019-01-05 01:53 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-04 20:00 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks % <persent@gmail.com> - 2019-01-04 20:03 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-05 06:07 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Ted <ted@sam.street> - 2019-01-05 12:48 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Meteorite Debris <WTF@whoknows.com> - 2019-01-05 15:03 +1030
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Mitchell Holman <noemail@verizont.net> - 2019-01-05 07:32 -0600
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Ted <ted@sam.street> - 2019-01-05 13:59 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2019-01-05 06:42 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks bookwurm <bookwurm8@gmail.com> - 2019-01-05 14:22 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Meteorite Debris <WTF@whoknows.com> - 2019-01-05 15:05 +1030
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Ted <ted@sam.street> - 2019-01-05 12:48 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Klaus Schadenfreude <klausschadenfreude@null.net> - 2019-01-05 03:11 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Ted <ted@sam.street> - 2019-01-05 12:48 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Klaus Schadenfreude <klausschadenfreude@null.net> - 2019-01-05 04:57 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Ted <ted@sam.street> - 2019-01-05 13:04 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Patrick <PBARKER002@woh.rr.com> - 2019-01-05 09:20 -0500
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Ted <ted@sam.street> - 2019-01-05 14:27 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> - 2019-01-05 15:28 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Ted <ted@sam.street> - 2019-01-05 23:41 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> - 2019-01-05 15:43 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Ted <ted@sam.street> - 2019-01-05 23:53 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> - 2019-01-05 15:56 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Ted <ted@sam.street> - 2019-01-06 00:11 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> - 2019-01-05 16:24 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Ted <ted@sam.street> - 2019-01-06 00:57 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> - 2019-01-06 10:14 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-06 18:30 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Ted <ted@sam.street> - 2019-01-06 21:20 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Just Wondering <JW@me.com> - 2019-01-06 14:44 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-06 22:00 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Just Wondering <JW@me.com> - 2019-01-06 15:06 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-06 22:12 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Ted <ted@sam.street> - 2019-01-06 22:32 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks % <persent@gmail.com> - 2019-01-06 15:42 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Ted <ted@sam.street> - 2019-01-06 22:53 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks % <persent@gmail.com> - 2019-01-06 16:00 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Ted <ted@sam.street> - 2019-01-06 23:32 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks % <persent@gmail.com> - 2019-01-06 16:36 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Ted <ted@sam.street> - 2019-01-06 23:42 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks % <persent@gmail.com> - 2019-01-06 16:45 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Ted <ted@sam.street> - 2019-01-07 00:42 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2019-01-07 22:02 -0500
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-06 22:43 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Ted <ted@sam.street> - 2019-01-06 22:53 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-06 22:00 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks % <persent@gmail.com> - 2019-01-06 15:13 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-06 22:23 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks % <persent@gmail.com> - 2019-01-06 15:25 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-06 22:43 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks % <persent@gmail.com> - 2019-01-06 15:51 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Ted <ted@sam.street> - 2019-01-06 22:53 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Ted <ted@sam.street> - 2019-01-06 22:53 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks % <persent@gmail.com> - 2019-01-06 16:02 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Ted <ted@sam.street> - 2019-01-06 23:32 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> - 2019-01-06 15:00 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Ted <ted@sam.street> - 2019-01-06 23:34 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-06 16:47 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Ted <ted@sam.street> - 2019-01-07 00:42 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-06 17:43 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Ted <ted@sam.street> - 2019-01-07 01:07 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-06 18:31 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Ted <ted@sam.street> - 2019-01-07 01:51 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-06 18:58 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> - 2019-01-07 13:07 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-07 16:13 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> - 2019-01-07 15:16 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-07 16:28 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> - 2019-01-07 16:02 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-07 17:19 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> - 2019-01-07 16:49 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-07 17:57 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> - 2019-01-07 17:12 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-07 18:40 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> - 2019-01-07 22:28 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-08 07:01 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> - 2019-01-07 23:09 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-08 13:58 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> - 2019-01-08 11:48 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-08 13:11 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Patrick <PBARKER002@woh.rr.com> - 2019-01-08 15:25 -0500
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks "DoD" <danskisanjar@gmail.com> - 2019-01-08 14:26 -0600
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> - 2019-01-08 12:54 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks "DoD" <danskisanjar@gmail.com> - 2019-01-08 14:59 -0600
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Mattb - 2019-01-08 14:01 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-08 14:25 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Patrick <PBARKER002@woh.rr.com> - 2019-01-08 15:22 -0500
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> - 2019-01-08 12:56 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks % <persent@gmail.com> - 2019-01-08 14:00 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-06 16:46 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> - 2019-01-06 15:54 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-06 17:07 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> - 2019-01-06 16:27 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-06 17:33 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> - 2019-01-06 16:56 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-06 18:06 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> - 2019-01-06 17:12 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-06 18:35 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> - 2019-01-06 17:42 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-06 18:47 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Rudy Canoza <cap@philhendrie.con> - 2019-01-06 17:54 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Rudy Canoza <cap@philhendrie.con> - 2019-01-06 17:57 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Ted <ted@sam.street> - 2019-01-07 04:17 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-07 04:56 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-06 19:08 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Rudy Canoza <cap@philhendrie.con> - 2019-01-06 18:13 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-07 02:37 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Rudy Canoza <cap@philhendrie.con> - 2019-01-07 12:29 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Ted <ted@sam.street> - 2019-01-07 04:17 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Just Wondering <JW@me.com> - 2019-01-06 20:21 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-07 04:56 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Just Wondering <JW@me.com> - 2019-01-07 01:18 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-07 14:11 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2019-01-07 22:00 -0500
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Clave <ChrisShitbagious@TheMonastery.com> - 2019-01-07 19:24 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> - 2019-01-07 22:59 -0500
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-08 06:18 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-05 18:48 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-05 18:48 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> - 2019-01-05 17:56 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-05 19:09 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Ted <ted@sam.street> - 2019-01-06 02:16 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-05 19:27 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Ted <ted@sam.street> - 2019-01-06 02:37 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-05 19:41 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Ted <ted@sam.street> - 2019-01-06 03:06 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-05 20:11 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Ted <ted@sam.street> - 2019-01-06 03:35 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-05 20:50 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks % <persent@gmail.com> - 2019-01-05 20:12 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> - 2019-01-05 20:36 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-05 22:00 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> - 2019-01-06 09:22 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-06 18:13 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> - 2019-01-06 10:16 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-06 18:30 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> - 2019-01-06 15:03 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-06 16:07 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Ted <ted@sam.street> - 2019-01-06 23:32 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-06 16:48 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Ted <ted@sam.street> - 2019-01-07 00:45 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-06 17:48 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Ted <ted@sam.street> - 2019-01-07 01:12 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-06 18:35 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Ted <ted@sam.street> - 2019-01-07 02:13 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-07 02:37 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> - 2019-01-06 15:51 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-06 17:12 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> - 2019-01-06 16:30 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-06 17:37 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> - 2019-01-06 16:58 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-06 18:04 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> - 2019-01-06 17:09 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-06 18:32 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> - 2019-01-06 17:40 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-06 18:45 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> - 2019-01-06 18:12 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-07 02:37 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Rudy Canoza <cap@philhendrie.con> - 2019-01-06 17:52 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-06 19:03 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Rudy Canoza <cap@philhendrie.con> - 2019-01-06 18:12 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-07 02:30 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Rudy Canoza <cap@philhendrie.con> - 2019-01-07 12:29 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-07 22:05 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Rudy Canoza <cap@philhendrie.con> - 2019-01-07 14:10 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-07 16:27 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Rudy Canoza <cap@philhendrie.con> - 2019-01-07 15:29 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> - 2019-01-06 18:14 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-07 02:37 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> - 2019-01-07 13:17 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Ted <ted@sam.street> - 2019-01-07 04:17 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-07 04:56 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Ted <ted@sam.street> - 2019-01-07 00:45 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> - 2019-01-06 15:51 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-06 17:11 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> - 2019-01-06 16:30 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-06 17:36 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> - 2019-01-06 17:03 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-06 18:30 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> - 2019-01-06 17:37 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-06 18:41 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> - 2019-01-06 17:47 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-06 18:55 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> - 2019-01-06 18:08 -0800
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Ted <ted@sam.street> - 2019-01-07 02:13 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-07 02:37 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks % <persent@gmail.com> - 2019-01-06 18:39 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-06 18:43 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Ted <ted@sam.street> - 2019-01-07 02:13 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Bob Robertson <bobrobertsontsy66@gmail.com> - 2019-01-05 20:05 -0600
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-05 19:16 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks % <persent@gmail.com> - 2019-01-05 19:18 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-05 19:27 -0700
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Avenging Angel <Not.fucking.likely@NoWay.com> - 2019-01-06 13:18 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2019-01-06 18:13 +0000
Re: Bernie Sanders' fans can't be allowed to poison another Democratic primary with personal attacks Avenging Angel <Not.fucking.likely@NoWay.com> - 2019-01-07 04:05 +0000
Page 6 of 10 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 10 Next page →
| From | Rudy Canoza <cap@philhendrie.con> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-01-06 17:54 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <gjyYD.162854$L44.53347@fx07.iad> |
| In reply to | #246093 |
On 1/6/2019 5:47 PM, Snit wrote: > On 1/6/19 6:42 PM, Mattb wrote: > ... >>>>> Investments into the country... infrastructure, education, going to >>>>> greener tech, energy infrastructure, data infrastructure, roads and >>>>> bridges and the like, oversight where needed, etc. >>>> >>>> I'd agree to a limited tax increase I pay about 33% now but won't go >>>> for 70%. >>> >>> I would want to see studies to show what works best. There will be >>> disagreement in those studies, of course, and biases. But we had 70% >>> before the 1980s... moving away from it may very well be a big part of >>> our growing income inequality. >> >> I believe you want to fix the current system it is the deductions that >> are the problem. > > I absolutely agree we need to fix that. And to be fair, when we had 70% top > tax rates, or even up to 93% (I think) we had all sorts of deductions. No one - literally - paid those top rates. The highest *effective* marginal tax rate, paid by very few, was in the 50-60% range. -- Snot's '.sig' is wrong, sophomoric and indicative of his bloated ego. Snot fancies himself the Great Tribune of Usenet, who is going to tell all the rest of us What It All Means. Well...no. Just no.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rudy Canoza <cap@philhendrie.con> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-01-06 17:57 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <mmyYD.162855$L44.116946@fx07.iad> |
| In reply to | #246097 |
On 1/6/2019 5:54 PM, Rudy Canoza wrote: > On 1/6/2019 5:47 PM, Snit wrote: >> On 1/6/19 6:42 PM, Mattb wrote: >> ... >>>>>> Investments into the country... infrastructure, education, going to >>>>>> greener tech, energy infrastructure, data infrastructure, roads and >>>>>> bridges and the like, oversight where needed, etc. >>>>> >>>>> I'd agree to a limited tax increase I pay about 33% now but won't go >>>>> for 70%. >>>> >>>> I would want to see studies to show what works best. There will be >>>> disagreement in those studies, of course, and biases. But we had 70% >>>> before the 1980s... moving away from it may very well be a big part of >>>> our growing income inequality. >>> >>> I believe you want to fix the current system it is the deductions that >>> are the problem. >> >> I absolutely agree we need to fix that. And to be fair, when we had 70% >> top tax rates, or even up to 93% (I think) we had all sorts of deductions. > > No one - literally - paid those top rates. The highest *effective* > marginal tax rate, paid by very few, was in the 50-60% range. This explains it to you fuckwits: https://taxfoundation.org/taxes-rich-1950-not-high/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ted <ted@sam.street> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-01-07 04:17 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <652668549568520583.352492ted-sam.street@news.alt.net> |
| In reply to | #246099 |
Rudy Canoza <cap@philhendrie.con> wrote: > On 1/6/2019 5:54 PM, Rudy Canoza wrote: >> On 1/6/2019 5:47 PM, Snit wrote: >>> On 1/6/19 6:42 PM, Mattb wrote: >>> ... >>>>>>> Investments into the country... infrastructure, education, going to >>>>>>> greener tech, energy infrastructure, data infrastructure, roads and >>>>>>> bridges and the like, oversight where needed, etc. >>>>>> >>>>>> I'd agree to a limited tax increase I pay about 33% now but won't go >>>>>> for 70%. >>>>> >>>>> I would want to see studies to show what works best. There will be >>>>> disagreement in those studies, of course, and biases. But we had 70% >>>>> before the 1980s... moving away from it may very well be a big part of >>>>> our growing income inequality. >>>> >>>> I believe you want to fix the current system it is the deductions that >>>> are the problem. >>> >>> I absolutely agree we need to fix that. And to be fair, when we had 70% >>> >> top tax rates, or even up to 93% (I think) we had all sorts of deductions. >>> No one - literally - paid those top rates. The highest *effective* > >>> marginal tax rate, paid by very few, was in the 50-60% range. > > This explains it to you fuckwits: > > https://taxfoundation.org/taxes-rich-1950-not-high/ Thanks Rudy.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-01-07 04:56 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <g9g4g9F1tv3U3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #246137 |
Ted <ted@sam.street> wrote: > Rudy Canoza <cap@philhendrie.con> wrote: >> On 1/6/2019 5:54 PM, Rudy Canoza wrote: >>> On 1/6/2019 5:47 PM, Snit wrote: >>>> On 1/6/19 6:42 PM, Mattb wrote: >>>> ... >>>>>>>> Investments into the country... infrastructure, education, going to >>>>>>>> greener tech, energy infrastructure, data infrastructure, roads and >>>>>>>> bridges and the like, oversight where needed, etc. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'd agree to a limited tax increase I pay about 33% now but won't go >>>>>>> for 70%. >>>>>> >>>>>> I would want to see studies to show what works best. There will be >>>>>> disagreement in those studies, of course, and biases. But we had 70% >>>>>> before the 1980s... moving away from it may very well be a big part of >>>>>> our growing income inequality. >>>>> >>>>> I believe you want to fix the current system it is the deductions that >>>>> are the problem. >>>> >>>> I absolutely agree we need to fix that. And to be fair, when we had 70% >>>>>> top tax rates, or even up to 93% (I think) we had all sorts of deductions. >>>> No one - literally - paid those top rates. The highest *effective* > >>>> marginal tax rate, paid by very few, was in the 50-60% range. >> >> This explains it to you fuckwits: >> >> https://taxfoundation.org/taxes-rich-1950-not-high/ > > > Thanks Rudy. > ——- [3] It is worth noting that, per the Piketty, Saez, and Zucman data, the tax rates of the top 0.1 and 0.01 percent of taxpayers have dropped substantially since the 1950s. The average tax rate on the 0.1 percent highest-income Americans was 50.6 percent in the 1950s, compared to 39.8 percent today. The average tax rate on the top 0.01 percent was 55.3 percent in the 1950s, compared to 40.8 percent today. ——- And it excludes things like subsidies. How much of the cost of labor was subsidized then?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-01-06 19:08 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <g9fqkcFuejeU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #246097 |
On 1/6/19 6:54 PM, Rudy Canoza wrote: > On 1/6/2019 5:47 PM, Snit wrote: >> On 1/6/19 6:42 PM, Mattb wrote: >> ... >>>>>> Investments into the country... infrastructure, education, going to >>>>>> greener tech, energy infrastructure, data infrastructure, roads and >>>>>> bridges and the like, oversight where needed, etc. >>>>> >>>>> I'd agree to a limited tax increase I pay about 33% now but won't go >>>>> for 70%. >>>> >>>> I would want to see studies to show what works best. There will be >>>> disagreement in those studies, of course, and biases. But we had 70% >>>> before the 1980s... moving away from it may very well be a big part of >>>> our growing income inequality. >>> >>> I believe you want to fix the current system it is the deductions that >>> are the problem. >> >> I absolutely agree we need to fix that. And to be fair, when we had >> 70% top tax rates, or even up to 93% (I think) we had all sorts of >> deductions. > > No one - literally - paid those top rates. The highest *effective* > marginal tax rate, paid by very few, was in the 50-60% range. > Good to see you gaining some knowledge of how the tax system works. Right... NOBODY pays those top tax rates on their income in general. Here are the tax rates since the start of the income tax: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/kw0detup56kbqkc/AAA9zogff0JYBLmTCmo6nUqra?dl=0&fbclid=IwAR023QhlgZyWwPU3U7pOMrrOVMNvGxVhvS91_9NmWmucaZEH_YR8P-xEiGw Check out 1944 when the top rate was 94.0%. My 93% was pretty close. :) -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again. <https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rudy Canoza <cap@philhendrie.con> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-01-06 18:13 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <hByYD.95512$0e.68123@fx29.iad> |
| In reply to | #246103 |
On 1/6/2019 6:08 PM, Snit wrote: > On 1/6/19 6:54 PM, Rudy Canoza wrote: >> On 1/6/2019 5:47 PM, Snit wrote: >>> On 1/6/19 6:42 PM, Mattb wrote: >>> ... >>>>>>> Investments into the country... infrastructure, education, going to >>>>>>> greener tech, energy infrastructure, data infrastructure, roads and >>>>>>> bridges and the like, oversight where needed, etc. >>>>>> >>>>>> I'd agree to a limited tax increase I pay about 33% now but won't go >>>>>> for 70%. >>>>> >>>>> I would want to see studies to show what works best. There will be >>>>> disagreement in those studies, of course, and biases. But we had 70% >>>>> before the 1980s... moving away from it may very well be a big part of >>>>> our growing income inequality. >>>> >>>> I believe you want to fix the current system it is the deductions that >>>> are the problem. >>> >>> I absolutely agree we need to fix that. And to be fair, when we had 70% >>> top tax rates, or even up to 93% (I think) we had all sorts of deductions. >> >> No one - literally - paid those top rates. The highest *effective* >> marginal tax rate, paid by very few, was in the 50-60% range. >> > > Good to see you gaining some knowledge I have had this knowledge since before you were born, Snot. -- Snot's '.sig' is wrong, sophomoric and indicative of his bloated ego. Snot fancies himself the Great Tribune of Usenet, who is going to tell all the rest of us What It All Means. Well...no. Just no.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-01-07 02:37 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <g9fsbsFbbjU4@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #246109 |
Rudy Canoza <cap@philhendrie.con> wrote: > On 1/6/2019 6:08 PM, Snit wrote: >> On 1/6/19 6:54 PM, Rudy Canoza wrote: >>> On 1/6/2019 5:47 PM, Snit wrote: >>>> On 1/6/19 6:42 PM, Mattb wrote: >>>> ... >>>>>>>> Investments into the country... infrastructure, education, going to >>>>>>>> greener tech, energy infrastructure, data infrastructure, roads and >>>>>>>> bridges and the like, oversight where needed, etc. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'd agree to a limited tax increase I pay about 33% now but won't go >>>>>>> for 70%. >>>>>> >>>>>> I would want to see studies to show what works best. There will be >>>>>> disagreement in those studies, of course, and biases. But we had 70% >>>>>> before the 1980s... moving away from it may very well be a big part of >>>>>> our growing income inequality. >>>>> >>>>> I believe you want to fix the current system it is the deductions that >>>>> are the problem. >>>> >>>> I absolutely agree we need to fix that. And to be fair, when we had 70% >>>> top tax rates, or even up to 93% (I think) we had all sorts of deductions. >>> >>> No one - literally - paid those top rates. The highest *effective* >>> marginal tax rate, paid by very few, was in the 50-60% range. >>> >> >> Good to see you gaining some knowledge > > I have had this knowledge since before you were born, Snot. > Why do you focus on your insecurities like that — in a public forum. Not a rhetorical question.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rudy Canoza <cap@philhendrie.con> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-01-07 12:29 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <ZEOYD.842$wz4.372@fx10.iad> |
| In reply to | #246116 |
On 1/6/2019 6:37 PM, Snit wrote: > Rudy Canoza <cap@philhendrie.con> wrote: >> On 1/6/2019 6:08 PM, Snit wrote: >>> On 1/6/19 6:54 PM, Rudy Canoza wrote: >>>> On 1/6/2019 5:47 PM, Snit wrote: >>>>> On 1/6/19 6:42 PM, Mattb wrote: >>>>> ... >>>>>>>>> Investments into the country... infrastructure, education, going to >>>>>>>>> greener tech, energy infrastructure, data infrastructure, roads and >>>>>>>>> bridges and the like, oversight where needed, etc. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I'd agree to a limited tax increase I pay about 33% now but won't go >>>>>>>> for 70%. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I would want to see studies to show what works best. There will be >>>>>>> disagreement in those studies, of course, and biases. But we had 70% >>>>>>> before the 1980s... moving away from it may very well be a big part of >>>>>>> our growing income inequality. >>>>>> >>>>>> I believe you want to fix the current system it is the deductions that >>>>>> are the problem. >>>>> >>>>> I absolutely agree we need to fix that. And to be fair, when we had 70% >>>>> top tax rates, or even up to 93% (I think) we had all sorts of deductions. >>>> >>>> No one - literally - paid those top rates. The highest *effective* >>>> marginal tax rate, paid by very few, was in the 50-60% range. >>>> >>> >>> Good to see you gaining some knowledge >> >> I have had this knowledge since before you were born, Snot. >> > > Why do you focus on my insecurities like that Because it's fun. -- Snot's '.sig' is wrong, sophomoric and indicative of his bloated ego. Snot fancies himself the Great Tribune of Usenet, who is going to tell all the rest of us What It All Means. Well...no. Just no.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ted <ted@sam.street> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-01-07 04:17 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <1007338917568520501.266408ted-sam.street@news.alt.net> |
| In reply to | #246097 |
Rudy Canoza <cap@philhendrie.con> wrote: > On 1/6/2019 5:47 PM, Snit wrote: >> On 1/6/19 6:42 PM, Mattb wrote: >> ... >>>>>> Investments into the country... infrastructure, education, going to >>>>>> greener tech, energy infrastructure, data infrastructure, roads and >>>>>> bridges and the like, oversight where needed, etc. >>>>> >>>>> I'd agree to a limited tax increase I pay about 33% now but won't go >>>>> for 70%. >>>> >>>> I would want to see studies to show what works best. There will be >>>> disagreement in those studies, of course, and biases. But we had 70% >>>> before the 1980s... moving away from it may very well be a big part of >>>> our growing income inequality. >>> >>> I believe you want to fix the current system it is the deductions that >>> are the problem. >>> I absolutely agree we need to fix that. And to be fair, when we had 70% >>> top > tax rates, or even up to 93% (I think) we had all sorts of deductions. > > No one - literally - paid those top rates. The highest *effective* > marginal tax rate, paid by very few, was in the 50-60% range. Interesting.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Just Wondering <JW@me.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-01-06 20:21 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <MAzYD.261730$W_2.17238@fx05.iad> |
| In reply to | #246072 |
On 1/6/2019 6:06 PM, Snit wrote: > > And where did the money go in the 1970s and before? In the '60s some of > it went to getting us to the moon. I am all for going back. And beyond. By all means go right ahead, to to the moon and beyond. Send us a postcard.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-01-07 04:56 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <g9g4g9F1tv3U2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #246129 |
Just Wondering <JW@me.com> wrote: > On 1/6/2019 6:06 PM, Snit wrote: >> >> And where did the money go in the 1970s and before? In the '60s some of >> it went to getting us to the moon. I am all for going back. And beyond. > > By all means go right ahead, to to the moon and beyond. > Send us a postcard. > Do you not see the value in space exploration?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Just Wondering <JW@me.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-01-07 01:18 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <YWDYD.295525$vH3.180295@fx36.iad> |
| In reply to | #246145 |
On 1/6/2019 9:56 PM, Snit wrote: > Just Wondering <JW@me.com> wrote: >> On 1/6/2019 6:06 PM, Snit wrote: >>> >>> And where did the money go in the 1970s and before? In the '60s some of >>> it went to getting us to the moon. I am all for going back. And beyond. >> >> By all means go right ahead, to to the moon and beyond. >> Send us a postcard. > > Do you not see the value in space exploration? Yes. Along with it's more obvious benefits, postcards sent from the moon would have a great deal of value.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-01-07 14:11 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <g9h4voF8s1cU6@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #246165 |
Just Wondering <JW@me.com> wrote: > On 1/6/2019 9:56 PM, Snit wrote: >> Just Wondering <JW@me.com> wrote: >>> On 1/6/2019 6:06 PM, Snit wrote: >>>> >>>> And where did the money go in the 1970s and before? In the '60s some of >>>> it went to getting us to the moon. I am all for going back. And beyond. >>> >>> By all means go right ahead, to to the moon and beyond. >>> Send us a postcard. >> >> Do you not see the value in space exploration? > > Yes. Along with it's more obvious benefits, postcards sent > from the moon would have a great deal of value. > The restaurant there is great. Well, great food — no atmosphere.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-01-07 22:00 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <q113vc$stt$5@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #245962 |
"Ted" <ted@sam.street> wrote in message news:551043737568502146.190837ted-sam.street@news.alt.net... > Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Sun, 6 Jan 2019 00:57:43 +0000 (UTC), Ted <ted@sam.street> wrote: >> >>> Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On Sun, 6 Jan 2019 00:11:46 +0000 (UTC), Ted <ted@sam.street> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> On Sat, 5 Jan 2019 23:53:10 +0000 (UTC), Ted <ted@sam.street> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Jan 2019 23:41:11 +0000 (UTC), Ted <ted@sam.street> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Jan 2019 01:53:06 +0000 (UTC), Ted <ted@sam.street> >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I've already posted links to NYT, HuffPo, and WaPo articles >>>>>>>>>>> exposing Bernie >>>>>>>>>>> Sanders as a misogynist who ignores people of color and whom >>>>>>>>>>> Russia >>>>>>>>>>> supported during the 2016 primary (and I'll repost them on >>>>>>>>>>> request), so >>>>>>>>>>> it's obvious that we can't allow him to repeat his shenanigans >>>>>>>>>>> in 2020. We >>>>>>>>>>> have to take whatever steps are necessary to silence him and >>>>>>>>>>> other Russian >>>>>>>>>>> stooges like Jill Stein and Julian Assange. Our freedom depends >>>>>>>>>>> on it. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Would you rather Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez run? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> LOL. I read recently that Biden is the most popular so far. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Maybe we can get Romney and Biden? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Or Kang and Kodos. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://tv.avclub.com/the-simpsons-classic-treehouse-of-horror-vii-1798181639 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> There was a Warren underneath. ;-)) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 1/2020th. >>>> >>>> >>>> I would rather Romney run than Trump. >>>> >>>> Maybe you will have a Bernie/Warren ticket on the Dem side. >>> >>> >>> The left would like that. But the DNC won't let it happen. >> >> If this Ocasio-Cortez keep talking Bernie won't have a chance. Bernie >> style has a chance with this Ocasio-Cortez's brand of socialism being >> pushed as representing the Dems most logical people will reject it. >> >> The Dems want a 70% tax rate? > > > Does she want for everybody to be taxed at 70%? I think that that Ocasio-Cortez should send in 70% of her Congressional pay and other income to show us how this process is going to work. What do you want to bet she wouldn't accept such 'taxation'?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Clave <ChrisShitbagious@TheMonastery.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-01-07 19:24 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <AJUYD.426224$gk1.84835@fx47.iad> |
| In reply to | #246415 |
On 1/7/2019 7:00 PM, Scout wrote: > > > "Ted" <ted@sam.street> wrote in message > news:551043737568502146.190837ted-sam.street@news.alt.net... >> Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Sun, 6 Jan 2019 00:57:43 +0000 (UTC), Ted <ted@sam.street> wrote: >>> >>>> Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> On Sun, 6 Jan 2019 00:11:46 +0000 (UTC), Ted <ted@sam.street> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Jan 2019 23:53:10 +0000 (UTC), Ted <ted@sam.street> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Jan 2019 23:41:11 +0000 (UTC), Ted <ted@sam.street> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Jan 2019 01:53:06 +0000 (UTC), Ted <ted@sam.street> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I've already posted links to NYT, HuffPo, and WaPo articles >>>>>>>>>>>> exposing Bernie >>>>>>>>>>>> Sanders as a misogynist who ignores people of color and whom >>>>>>>>>>>> Russia >>>>>>>>>>>> supported during the 2016 primary (and I'll repost them on >>>>>>>>>>>> request), so >>>>>>>>>>>> it's obvious that we can't allow him to repeat his shenanigans >>>>>>>>>>>> in 2020. We >>>>>>>>>>>> have to take whatever steps are necessary to silence him and >>>>>>>>>>>> other Russian >>>>>>>>>>>> stooges like Jill Stein and Julian Assange. Our freedom depends >>>>>>>>>>>> on it. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Would you rather Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez run? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> LOL. I read recently that Biden is the most popular so far. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Maybe we can get Romney and Biden? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Or Kang and Kodos. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> https://tv.avclub.com/the-simpsons-classic-treehouse-of-horror-vii-1798181639 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> There was a Warren underneath. ;-)) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> 1/2020th. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I would rather Romney run than Trump. >>>>> >>>>> Maybe you will have a Bernie/Warren ticket on the Dem side. >>>> >>>> >>>> The left would like that. But the DNC won't let it happen. >>> >>> If this Ocasio-Cortez keep talking Bernie won't have a chance. Bernie >>> style has a chance with this Ocasio-Cortez's brand of socialism being >>> pushed as representing the Dems most logical people will reject it. >>> >>> The Dems want a 70% tax rate? >> >> >> Does she want for everybody to be taxed at 70%? > > I think that that Ocasio-Cortez should send in 70% of her Congressional pay > and other income to show us how this process is going to work. You, too, are too stupid to understand that she's proposing a 70% marginal, not average, rate. You don't know what marginal tax rates are. Got it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Scout" <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-01-07 22:59 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <q11cfi$2ff$8@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #246422 |
"Clave" <ChrisShitbagious@TheMonastery.com> wrote in message news:AJUYD.426224$gk1.84835@fx47.iad... > On 1/7/2019 7:00 PM, Scout wrote: >> >> >> "Ted" <ted@sam.street> wrote in message >> news:551043737568502146.190837ted-sam.street@news.alt.net... >>> Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On Sun, 6 Jan 2019 00:57:43 +0000 (UTC), Ted <ted@sam.street> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> On Sun, 6 Jan 2019 00:11:46 +0000 (UTC), Ted <ted@sam.street> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Jan 2019 23:53:10 +0000 (UTC), Ted <ted@sam.street> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Jan 2019 23:41:11 +0000 (UTC), Ted <ted@sam.street> >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Jan 2019 01:53:06 +0000 (UTC), Ted <ted@sam.street> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I've already posted links to NYT, HuffPo, and WaPo articles >>>>>>>>>>>>> exposing Bernie >>>>>>>>>>>>> Sanders as a misogynist who ignores people of color and whom >>>>>>>>>>>>> Russia >>>>>>>>>>>>> supported during the 2016 primary (and I'll repost them on >>>>>>>>>>>>> request), so >>>>>>>>>>>>> it's obvious that we can't allow him to repeat his shenanigans >>>>>>>>>>>>> in 2020. We >>>>>>>>>>>>> have to take whatever steps are necessary to silence him and >>>>>>>>>>>>> other Russian >>>>>>>>>>>>> stooges like Jill Stein and Julian Assange. Our freedom >>>>>>>>>>>>> depends on it. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Would you rather Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez run? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> LOL. I read recently that Biden is the most popular so far. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Maybe we can get Romney and Biden? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Or Kang and Kodos. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> https://tv.avclub.com/the-simpsons-classic-treehouse-of-horror-vii-1798181639 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> There was a Warren underneath. ;-)) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 1/2020th. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I would rather Romney run than Trump. >>>>>> >>>>>> Maybe you will have a Bernie/Warren ticket on the Dem side. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The left would like that. But the DNC won't let it happen. >>>> >>>> If this Ocasio-Cortez keep talking Bernie won't have a chance. Bernie >>>> style has a chance with this Ocasio-Cortez's brand of socialism being >>>> pushed as representing the Dems most logical people will reject it. >>>> >>>> The Dems want a 70% tax rate? >>> >>> >>> Does she want for everybody to be taxed at 70%? >> >> I think that that Ocasio-Cortez should send in 70% of her Congressional >> pay and other income to show us how this process is going to work. > > You, too, are too stupid to understand that she's proposing a 70% > marginal, not average, rate. With an annual income of $1,764,000 plus she qualifies as being in the top marginal rate in all respects. So she should, by her own standards, be paying 70% in federal income tax. Then she can pay another 8.82% to the state of New York Then she can pay another 3.876% to New York City. Making her total income tax rate 82.696% Leaving her at least $305,242.56 That should, by her standards, be more than enough for anyone. So let's see her show her dedication by showing us how this tax rate is going to work for her.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-01-08 06:18 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <g9itmeFknokU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #246439 |
Scout <me4guns@removethis.this2.spam.centurylink.net> wrote: > > > "Clave" <ChrisShitbagious@TheMonastery.com> wrote in message > news:AJUYD.426224$gk1.84835@fx47.iad... >> On 1/7/2019 7:00 PM, Scout wrote: >>> >>> >>> "Ted" <ted@sam.street> wrote in message >>> news:551043737568502146.190837ted-sam.street@news.alt.net... >>>> Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> On Sun, 6 Jan 2019 00:57:43 +0000 (UTC), Ted <ted@sam.street> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> On Sun, 6 Jan 2019 00:11:46 +0000 (UTC), Ted <ted@sam.street> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Jan 2019 23:53:10 +0000 (UTC), Ted <ted@sam.street> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Jan 2019 23:41:11 +0000 (UTC), Ted <ted@sam.street> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Jan 2019 01:53:06 +0000 (UTC), Ted <ted@sam.street> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've already posted links to NYT, HuffPo, and WaPo articles >>>>>>>>>>>>>> exposing Bernie >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sanders as a misogynist who ignores people of color and whom >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Russia >>>>>>>>>>>>>> supported during the 2016 primary (and I'll repost them on >>>>>>>>>>>>>> request), so >>>>>>>>>>>>>> it's obvious that we can't allow him to repeat his shenanigans >>>>>>>>>>>>>> in 2020. We >>>>>>>>>>>>>> have to take whatever steps are necessary to silence him and >>>>>>>>>>>>>> other Russian >>>>>>>>>>>>>> stooges like Jill Stein and Julian Assange. Our freedom >>>>>>>>>>>>>> depends on it. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Would you rather Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez run? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> LOL. I read recently that Biden is the most popular so far. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Maybe we can get Romney and Biden? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Or Kang and Kodos. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> https://tv.avclub.com/the-simpsons-classic-treehouse-of-horror-vii-1798181639 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> There was a Warren underneath. ;-)) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 1/2020th. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I would rather Romney run than Trump. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Maybe you will have a Bernie/Warren ticket on the Dem side. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> The left would like that. But the DNC won't let it happen. >>>>> >>>>> If this Ocasio-Cortez keep talking Bernie won't have a chance. Bernie >>>>> style has a chance with this Ocasio-Cortez's brand of socialism being >>>>> pushed as representing the Dems most logical people will reject it. >>>>> >>>>> The Dems want a 70% tax rate? >>>> >>>> >>>> Does she want for everybody to be taxed at 70%? >>> >>> I think that that Ocasio-Cortez should send in 70% of her Congressional >>> pay and other income to show us how this process is going to work. >> >> You, too, are too stupid to understand that she's proposing a 70% >> marginal, not average, rate. > > With an annual income of $1,764,000 plus she qualifies as being in the top > marginal rate in all respects. > > So she should, by her own standards, be paying 70% in federal income tax. You really have no clue how marginal rates work. > > Then she can pay another 8.82% to the state of New York > > Then she can pay another 3.876% to New York City. > > Making her total income tax rate 82.696% > > Leaving her at least $305,242.56 > > That should, by her standards, be more than enough for anyone. > > So let's see her show her dedication by showing us how this tax rate is > going to work for her. > > > > > >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-01-05 18:48 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <g9d535FckshU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #245763 |
On 1/5/19 5:24 PM, Mattb wrote: > On Sun, 6 Jan 2019 00:11:46 +0000 (UTC), Ted <ted@sam.street> wrote: > >> Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Sat, 5 Jan 2019 23:53:10 +0000 (UTC), Ted <ted@sam.street> wrote: >>> >>>> Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> On Sat, 5 Jan 2019 23:41:11 +0000 (UTC), Ted <ted@sam.street> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Jan 2019 01:53:06 +0000 (UTC), Ted <ted@sam.street> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I've already posted links to NYT, HuffPo, and WaPo articles exposing Bernie >>>>>>>> Sanders as a misogynist who ignores people of color and whom Russia >>>>>>>> supported during the 2016 primary (and I'll repost them on request), so >>>>>>>> it's obvious that we can't allow him to repeat his shenanigans in 2020. We >>>>>>>> have to take whatever steps are necessary to silence him and other Russian >>>>>>>> stooges like Jill Stein and Julian Assange. Our freedom depends on it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Would you rather Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez run? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> LOL. I read recently that Biden is the most popular so far. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Maybe we can get Romney and Biden? >>>> >>>> >>>> Or Kang and Kodos. >>>> >>>> https://tv.avclub.com/the-simpsons-classic-treehouse-of-horror-vii-1798181639 >>> >>> >>> There was a Warren underneath. ;-)) >> >> >> 1/2020th. > > > I would rather Romney run than Trump. > > Maybe you will have a Bernie/Warren ticket on the Dem side. > I would not mind that. -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again. <https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-01-05 18:48 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <g9d52gFckshU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #245740 |
On 1/5/19 4:28 PM, Mattb wrote: > On Sat, 5 Jan 2019 01:53:06 +0000 (UTC), Ted <ted@sam.street> wrote: > >> I've already posted links to NYT, HuffPo, and WaPo articles exposing Bernie >> Sanders as a misogynist who ignores people of color and whom Russia >> supported during the 2016 primary (and I'll repost them on request), so >> it's obvious that we can't allow him to repeat his shenanigans in 2020. We >> have to take whatever steps are necessary to silence him and other Russian >> stooges like Jill Stein and Julian Assange. Our freedom depends on it. > > Would you rather Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez run? > She is too young to be able to... but she is an interesting person. We shall have to see where she goes. Will she let her knew-found celebrity status get to her? I hope not. -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again. <https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mattb <trdell12345@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-01-05 17:56 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <e1o23e5r60merc4h4m9pojb7tm6h3t2khs@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #245775 |
On Sat, 5 Jan 2019 18:48:00 -0700, Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote: >On 1/5/19 4:28 PM, Mattb wrote: >> On Sat, 5 Jan 2019 01:53:06 +0000 (UTC), Ted <ted@sam.street> wrote: >> >>> I've already posted links to NYT, HuffPo, and WaPo articles exposing Bernie >>> Sanders as a misogynist who ignores people of color and whom Russia >>> supported during the 2016 primary (and I'll repost them on request), so >>> it's obvious that we can't allow him to repeat his shenanigans in 2020. We >>> have to take whatever steps are necessary to silence him and other Russian >>> stooges like Jill Stein and Julian Assange. Our freedom depends on it. >> >> Would you rather Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez run? >> > >She is too young to be able to... but she is an interesting person. We >shall have to see where she goes. Will she let her knew-found celebrity >status get to her? I hope not. Think it already has suggesting a 70% tax rate.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 6 of 10 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 10 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | alt.checkmate
csiph-web