Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #366298 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-08-22 20:04 +0000 |
| Last post | 2016-08-25 08:38 -0400 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 382 — 16 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy
Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-22 20:04 +0000
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-22 13:35 -0700
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-22 20:47 +0000
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-22 13:51 -0700
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-22 21:07 +0000
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-22 14:16 -0700
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-22 21:32 +0000
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-22 14:38 -0700
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-22 22:04 +0000
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-22 15:22 -0700
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-22 23:00 +0000
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-22 16:13 -0700
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-23 16:00 +0000
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-23 09:11 -0700
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-23 16:22 +0000
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-23 09:37 -0700
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-23 16:54 +0000
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-23 10:14 -0700
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-23 17:21 +0000
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-23 10:29 -0700
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-23 17:43 +0000
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-23 11:03 -0700
Re: Another day DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-08-24 09:51 -0400
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-24 14:17 +0000
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-24 09:05 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-24 11:51 -0600
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-24 11:01 -0700
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-24 18:27 +0000
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-24 11:46 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-24 21:17 -0600
Re: Another day Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-08-25 10:07 -0400
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-25 09:41 -0700
Re: Another day DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-08-25 20:06 -0400
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-26 00:13 +0000
Re: Another day DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-08-25 20:33 -0400
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-26 01:24 +0000
Re: Another day Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-08-26 08:14 -0400
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-25 17:26 -0700
Re: Another day Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-08-26 08:10 -0400
Re: Another day DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-08-26 09:07 -0400
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-26 13:37 +0000
Re: Another day DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-08-26 09:56 -0400
Re: Another day Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-08-26 10:42 -0400
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-26 08:23 -0700
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-26 08:29 -0700
Re: Another day Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-08-26 10:41 -0400
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-26 08:23 -0700
Re: Another day Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-08-26 09:17 -0700
Re: Another day Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-08-26 13:08 -0400
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-26 10:17 -0700
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-26 08:32 -0700
Re: Another day Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-08-26 09:24 -0700
Re: Another day chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-08-26 11:27 -0500
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-26 11:36 -0600
Re: Another day Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-08-26 13:45 -0400
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-26 13:52 -0600
Re: Another day Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-08-26 13:43 -0700
Re: Another day Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-08-26 17:18 -0400
Re: Another day Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-08-26 14:39 -0700
Re: Another day Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-08-26 18:42 -0400
Re: Another day Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-08-26 17:24 -0700
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-27 00:09 +0000
Re: Another day Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-08-26 17:33 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-27 12:29 -0600
Re: Another day Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-08-27 12:08 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-27 18:26 -0600
Re: Another day ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2016-08-27 04:21 +0000
Re: Another day Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-08-26 21:46 -0700
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-27 05:15 +0000
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-27 05:42 +0000
Re: Another day Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-08-27 00:07 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-27 12:30 -0600
Re: Another day Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-08-27 12:09 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-27 18:27 -0600
Re: Another day Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-08-27 19:06 -0700
Re: Another day Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-08-27 09:20 +0200
Re: Another day Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-08-27 10:04 +0200
Re: Another day Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-08-27 01:06 -0700
Re: Another day Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-08-27 10:23 +0200
Re: Another day Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-08-27 01:39 -0700
Re: Another day Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-08-27 01:09 -0700
Re: Another day Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-08-27 01:27 -0700
Re: Another day Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-08-27 15:10 -0400
Re: Another day Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-08-27 21:58 +0200
Re: Another day Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-08-27 13:17 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-27 18:28 -0600
Re: Another day Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-08-27 19:15 -0700
Re: Another day Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-08-28 09:38 -0400
Re: Another day Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-08-27 22:22 +0200
Re: Another day Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-08-27 13:37 -0700
Re: Another day Andy Rains <andyrains@myself.com> - 2016-08-27 19:10 -0400
Re: Another day ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2016-08-28 03:20 +0000
Re: Another day Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-08-28 09:35 -0400
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-28 09:16 -0700
Re: Another day Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-08-28 10:03 -0700
Re: Another day Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-08-27 15:02 -0400
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-26 16:19 -0600
Re: Another day Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-08-26 15:34 -0700
Re: Another day Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-08-26 19:03 -0400
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-27 12:28 -0600
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-27 12:27 -0600
Re: Another day Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-08-27 12:06 -0700
Re: Another day -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2016-08-27 15:30 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-27 18:20 -0600
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-27 18:24 -0600
Re: Another day Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-08-27 19:01 -0700
Re: Another day Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-08-27 19:42 -0700
Re: Another day Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-08-28 07:39 -0700
Re: Another day William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2016-08-28 16:22 +0100
Re: Another day Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-08-28 09:50 -0700
Re: Another day Andy Rains <andyrains@myself.com> - 2016-08-28 15:29 -0400
Re: Another day ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2016-08-28 20:16 +0000
Re: Another day Andy Rains <andyrains@myself.com> - 2016-08-28 17:40 -0400
Re: Another day Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2016-08-28 15:14 -0700
Re: Another day Andy Rains <andyrains@myself.com> - 2016-08-28 18:19 -0400
Re: Another day Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-08-28 16:18 -0700
Re: Another day Andy Rains <andyrains@myself.com> - 2016-08-28 19:40 -0400
Re: Another day Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-08-28 16:42 -0700
Re: Another day Andy Rains <andyrains@myself.com> - 2016-08-28 19:44 -0400
Re: Another day Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-08-28 16:56 -0700
Re: Another day Andy Rains <andyrains@myself.com> - 2016-08-28 19:59 -0400
Re: Another day Andy Rains <andyrains@myself.com> - 2016-08-28 18:16 -0400
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-28 09:08 -0700
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-28 09:17 -0700
Re: Another day DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-08-29 09:06 -0400
Re: Another day Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-08-28 09:42 -0400
Re: Another day Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-08-28 08:12 -0700
Re: Another day Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-08-28 11:50 -0400
Re: Another day Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-08-28 10:00 -0700
Re: Another day Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-08-28 19:22 -0400
Re: Another day Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-08-28 16:57 -0700
Re: Another day Tattoo Vampire <sitting@this.computer> - 2016-08-29 18:39 -0400
Re: Another day Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-08-29 15:43 -0700
Re: Another day ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2016-08-29 23:12 +0000
Re: Another day ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2016-08-29 23:15 +0000
Re: Another day Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-08-29 17:09 -0700
Re: Another day Tattoo Vampire <sitting@this.computer> - 2016-08-29 20:52 -0400
Re: Another day Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-08-29 18:13 -0700
Re: Another day Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-08-29 19:34 -0400
Re: Another day Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-08-30 01:49 +0200
Re: Another day Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-08-30 01:46 +0200
Re: Another day Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-08-29 17:21 -0700
Re: Another day Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-08-30 02:26 +0200
Re: Another day Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-08-29 17:33 -0700
Re: Another day Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-08-30 09:16 -0400
Re: Another day Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-08-30 15:26 +0200
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-28 12:38 -0600
Re: Another day Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-08-26 17:16 -0400
Re: Another day Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-08-26 14:23 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-26 16:20 -0600
Re: Another day Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-08-26 15:35 -0700
Re: Another day Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-08-26 18:38 -0400
Re: Another day Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-08-27 01:50 +0200
Re: Another day Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-08-26 20:13 -0400
Re: Another day Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-08-27 09:19 +0200
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-27 12:35 -0600
Re: Another day Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-08-27 12:15 -0700
Re: Another day DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-08-29 11:02 -0400
Re: Another day Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-08-29 08:08 -0700
Re: Another day Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-08-27 15:10 -0400
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-26 16:21 -0600
Re: Another day Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-08-26 09:36 -0700
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-26 16:43 +0000
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-26 10:00 -0700
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-26 17:08 +0000
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-26 10:16 -0700
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-26 17:32 +0000
Re: Another day Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-08-26 10:39 -0700
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-26 18:04 +0000
Re: Another day Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-08-26 13:39 -0400
Re: Another day Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-08-26 10:53 -0700
Re: Another day Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-08-26 14:26 -0400
Re: Another day Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-08-26 12:23 -0700
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-26 18:06 +0000
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-26 19:11 +0000
Re: Another day Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-08-26 13:22 -0400
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-26 10:11 -0700
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-26 17:29 +0000
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-26 18:12 +0000
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-26 19:19 +0000
Re: Another day Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-08-26 10:33 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-24 21:20 -0600
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-24 21:27 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-25 14:04 -0600
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-25 13:07 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-25 18:00 -0600
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-25 18:18 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-25 23:40 -0600
Re: Another day Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-08-26 08:26 -0400
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-26 08:37 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-26 11:42 -0600
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-24 11:49 -0600
Re: Another day DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-08-24 14:08 -0400
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-24 21:18 -0600
Re: Another day Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-08-25 09:47 -0400
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-23 12:00 -0600
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-23 11:13 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-23 15:57 -0600
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-23 15:16 -0700
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-23 22:31 +0000
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-23 15:44 -0700
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-23 23:00 +0000
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-23 16:07 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-23 22:25 -0600
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-23 21:40 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-23 22:22 -0600
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-23 21:39 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-24 11:59 -0600
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-24 11:41 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-24 21:14 -0600
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-24 20:50 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-25 12:39 -0600
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-25 12:07 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-25 17:44 -0600
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-25 18:17 -0700
Re: Another day DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-08-23 20:07 -0400
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-24 01:02 +0000
Re: Another day DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-08-24 09:59 -0400
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-24 14:25 +0000
Re: Another day DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-08-24 10:58 -0400
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-24 15:16 +0000
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-23 22:16 -0600
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-23 21:34 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-24 12:09 -0600
Re: Another day DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-08-23 20:08 -0400
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-24 01:10 +0000
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-23 22:28 -0600
Re: Another day DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-08-24 10:12 -0400
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-24 09:03 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-24 12:20 -0600
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-24 11:41 -0700
Re: Another day Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-08-24 12:29 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-24 13:55 -0600
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-24 13:11 -0700
Re: Another day Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-08-24 13:20 -0700
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-24 20:33 +0000
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-24 13:45 -0700
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-24 20:50 +0000
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-24 14:02 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-24 13:54 -0600
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-24 13:10 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-24 12:19 -0600
Re: Another day Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-08-25 09:32 -0400
Re: Another day DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-08-25 10:54 -0400
Re: Another day Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-08-25 11:08 -0400
Re: Another day DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-08-25 12:03 -0400
Re: Another day Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-08-25 12:47 -0400
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-25 12:19 -0600
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-23 11:59 -0600
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-23 11:16 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-23 15:59 -0600
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-23 22:13 +0000
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-23 15:18 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-23 22:29 -0600
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-23 15:14 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-23 22:33 -0600
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-24 07:56 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-24 12:23 -0600
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-24 11:43 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-24 13:53 -0600
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-24 13:10 -0700
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-24 20:22 +0000
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-24 13:26 -0700
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-24 20:36 +0000
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-24 13:46 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-24 20:58 -0600
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-24 20:14 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-25 12:18 -0600
Re: Another day DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-08-23 20:47 -0400
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-24 01:24 +0000
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-23 22:48 -0600
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-24 05:06 +0000
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-24 12:27 -0600
Re: Another day DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-08-24 10:24 -0400
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-24 14:34 +0000
Re: Another day DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-08-24 10:58 -0400
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-24 15:14 +0000
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-24 12:30 -0600
Re: Another day Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-08-25 10:00 -0400
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-24 08:58 -0700
Re: Another day Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-08-24 09:24 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-24 12:31 -0600
Re: Another day Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-08-24 12:16 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-24 13:51 -0600
Re: Another day Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-08-24 13:17 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-24 20:56 -0600
Re: Another day Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-08-24 20:33 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-25 12:16 -0600
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-24 12:30 -0600
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-24 11:49 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-24 13:48 -0600
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-24 13:09 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-24 20:55 -0600
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-24 20:13 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-25 12:15 -0600
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-25 11:44 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-25 17:22 -0600
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-25 17:48 -0700
Re: Another day Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-08-26 07:57 -0400
Re: Another day -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2016-08-26 06:41 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-26 11:35 -0600
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-26 13:51 -0600
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-26 16:17 -0600
Re: Another day Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-08-26 13:03 -0700
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-26 08:36 -0700
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-26 16:09 +0000
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-26 09:27 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-26 11:33 -0600
Re: Another day Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-08-26 13:44 -0400
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-26 13:44 -0600
Re: Another day Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-08-26 17:14 -0400
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-26 16:10 -0600
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-26 13:48 -0600
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-26 16:16 -0600
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-27 12:24 -0600
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-24 12:28 -0600
Re: Another day Tattoo Vampire <sitting@this.computer> - 2016-08-25 07:10 -0400
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-23 22:46 -0600
Re: Another day DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-08-24 09:58 -0400
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-24 14:28 +0000
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-24 08:54 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-24 13:47 -0600
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-24 13:08 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-24 20:45 -0600
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-24 20:03 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-25 12:00 -0600
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-25 11:12 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-25 17:09 -0600
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-25 17:37 -0700
Re: Another day Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-08-25 14:50 -0400
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-25 17:07 -0600
Re: Another day Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-08-25 19:23 -0400
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-25 18:25 -0700
Re: Another day Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-08-25 10:44 -0400
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-25 09:47 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-25 11:58 -0600
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-25 11:04 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-25 17:05 -0600
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-25 17:37 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-25 23:38 -0600
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-26 08:39 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-26 11:26 -0600
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-26 13:42 -0600
Re: Another day Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-08-25 14:47 -0400
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-25 11:53 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-25 17:04 -0600
Re: Another day Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-08-25 19:20 -0400
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-25 18:24 -0700
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-25 17:36 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-25 23:37 -0600
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-26 07:53 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-25 11:56 -0600
Re: Another day DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-08-25 11:04 -0400
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-25 11:53 -0600
Re: Another day DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-08-25 19:16 -0400
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-25 23:22 +0000
Re: Another day DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-08-25 19:24 -0400
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-25 23:37 +0000
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-25 18:26 -0700
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-26 02:51 +0000
Re: Another day DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-08-25 22:54 -0400
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-25 19:59 -0700
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-26 03:01 +0000
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-25 21:19 -0700
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-25 19:56 -0700
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-26 03:00 +0000
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-25 20:31 -0700
Re: Another day DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-08-25 22:29 -0400
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-26 02:50 +0000
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-25 19:57 -0700
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-26 03:04 +0000
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-25 20:31 -0700
Re: Another day Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-08-26 08:22 -0400
Re: Another day Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-08-26 07:58 -0400
Re: Another day Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-08-25 18:26 -0700
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-24 12:44 -0600
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-24 12:43 -0600
Re: Another day "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-08-24 19:15 +0000
Re: Another day Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-08-25 10:19 -0400
Re: Another day GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-08-25 11:51 -0600
Re: Another day Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-08-25 14:42 -0400
Re: Another day Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-08-25 08:38 -0400
Page 13 of 20 — ← Prev page 1 … 11 12 [13] 14 15 … 20 Next page →
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-24 13:10 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D3E34D63.79FA1%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #366538 |
On 8/24/16, 12:54 PM, in article npku1u$940$5@dont-email.me, "GreyCloud" <mist@cumulus.com> wrote: >>>>> The other night Trump said "I will be your agent of change." The last >>>>> politician I heard say that? Bill Clinton. >>>> >>>> I am not sure Trump lies more but he lies more directly. Clinton is a >>>> trained lawyer and is very good at lying by innuendo, using deception, >>>> changing the topic, etc. Politifact percentages "show" her to be >>>> relatively honest but they do not account for such things (and based on >>>> their methodology it is not clear they should). >>> >>> Trained lawyer? LOL!!! >>> >>> http://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/barexam.asp >>> >> Yes, trained lawyer. As the link you provided shows. >> > And failed her bar exam. Not too talented a lawyer, I'd say. Well, many fail the first time... but it is clear she has that training and temperament. She twists and lies and deceives and changes the topic. -- * OS X / Linux: What is a file? <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI> * Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE> * Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0> * Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8> * Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8> * Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI> * Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA> * Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk> * OS / Word Processor Comparison: <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-24 12:19 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <npkofj$l8v$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #366474 |
On 08/24/16 08:12, DFS wrote:
> On 8/24/2016 12:28 AM, GreyCloud wrote:
>> On 08/23/16 18:08, DFS wrote:
>>> On 8/23/2016 5:57 PM, GreyCloud wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Funny thing, it is the media that is ragging on trump but not one bad
>>>> word about hillary.
>>>
>>>
>>> Ridiculous lie.
>>>
>>
>> No, even trump made that point. She lies like a dog.
>
>
> Trump lies 10x as much. In 1/2 hour he spews so much idiocy and
> half-truths and unfulfillable promises that I can only sit there and gape.
>
Oh, bullshit. Even the masses know that she lies.
> The other night Trump said "I will be your agent of change." The last
> politician I heard say that? Bill Clinton.
>
Guffaw!!! He was just getting under her skin to irritate the bitch is all.
>
>
>>> An hour ago on CNN she was being hammered by Trump surrogates for
>>> supposed crossover/access between the Clinton Foundation and the State
>>> Dept.
>>>
>>> And the CNN hostess asked some pointed questions about it, too, such as
>>> "Why is Clinton promising to refuse foreign donations to the Foundation
>>> now, as opposed to a year ago?"
>>>
>>>
>> You watch... if Hillary ever gets to the debate... he'll cream the
>> stupid bitch into seizures and they'll just have to give her more
>> diazepam.
>
>
> She'll get to the debates - it's Trump that will hem and haw and set as
> many conditions as he can. Guarantee it.
>
HAH!!! She doesn't even know how to debate well, and also doesn't do
very good at all on stage.
> And then you'll see who's stupid and unprepared and unfit. Trump will
> resort to his shouting, idiocy, lowlife bullying and bringing up
> non-issues. Clinton will simply, calmly annihilate him.
>
Guffaw!!! I highly doubt it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zXXy4bvCHFE
What the hell do you call this then?
> I agree with a good many of his positions (those he hasn't backed down
> from yet), but he doesn't nearly have the temperament, judgement or
> experience to be President of the US. Other than a year of campaigning
> and lying and insulting everyone, he has no political experience
> whatsoever. To me, he just sounds lost on most topics.
>
> He'll get a solid percent of the votes, because he's an anomaly: a
> blunt-talking, non-politician, successful businessman with a good slogan
> ("Make America great again"). That doesn't mean he's worth voting for,
> or that he can deliver on his claims and promises.
>
Of course it does. The bitch lies out her ass all the time. How can
you tell? When she opens her mouth of course.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-25 09:32 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <npms12$vpa$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #366424 |
On 2016-08-23 8:08 PM, DFS wrote: > On 8/23/2016 5:57 PM, GreyCloud wrote: > > >> Funny thing, it is the media that is ragging on trump but not one bad >> word about hillary. > > > Ridiculous lie. > > An hour ago on CNN she was being hammered by Trump surrogates for > supposed crossover/access between the Clinton Foundation and the State > Dept. > > And the CNN hostess asked some pointed questions about it, too, such as > "Why is Clinton promising to refuse foreign donations to the Foundation > now, as opposed to a year ago?" Actually, she is refusing to accept foreign donations if she is _elected_ . Until then, it's a free-for-all. However, she has already promised such things in the past and never gone through with the promise. She will simply find a better way of hiding what the foundation does. -- Silver Slimer
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | DFS <nospam@dfs.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-25 10:54 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <npn0sr$fju$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #366661 |
On 8/25/2016 9:32 AM, Silver Slimer wrote: > On 2016-08-23 8:08 PM, DFS wrote: >> On 8/23/2016 5:57 PM, GreyCloud wrote: >> >> >>> Funny thing, it is the media that is ragging on trump but not one bad >>> word about hillary. >> >> >> Ridiculous lie. >> >> An hour ago on CNN she was being hammered by Trump surrogates for >> supposed crossover/access between the Clinton Foundation and the State >> Dept. >> >> And the CNN hostess asked some pointed questions about it, too, such as >> "Why is Clinton promising to refuse foreign donations to the Foundation >> now, as opposed to a year ago?" > > Actually, she is refusing to accept foreign donations if she is > _elected_ .Until then, it's a free-for-all. However, she has already > promised such things in the past and never gone through with the > promise. She will simply find a better way of hiding what the foundation > does. It does charitable work. No hiding necessary.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-25 11:08 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <npn1m3$hsk$5@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #366679 |
On 2016-08-25 10:54 AM, DFS wrote: > On 8/25/2016 9:32 AM, Silver Slimer wrote: >> On 2016-08-23 8:08 PM, DFS wrote: >>> On 8/23/2016 5:57 PM, GreyCloud wrote: >>> >>> >>>> Funny thing, it is the media that is ragging on trump but not one bad >>>> word about hillary. >>> >>> >>> Ridiculous lie. >>> >>> An hour ago on CNN she was being hammered by Trump surrogates for >>> supposed crossover/access between the Clinton Foundation and the State >>> Dept. >>> >>> And the CNN hostess asked some pointed questions about it, too, such as >>> "Why is Clinton promising to refuse foreign donations to the Foundation >>> now, as opposed to a year ago?" >> >> Actually, she is refusing to accept foreign donations if she is >> _elected_ .Until then, it's a free-for-all. However, she has already >> promised such things in the past and never gone through with the >> promise. She will simply find a better way of hiding what the foundation >> does. > > It does charitable work. No hiding necessary. Provide examples of charitable work she has done. The Clinton Cash documentary has already demonstrated what the effects of the Clinton Foundation's "charity" has been on Haiti; any funds meant to be used in Haiti instead went into the foundation's coffers and they, not Haitians, decided how it would be spent. In the end, the country did not benefit even remotely from the money sent in their direction and they were left to resolve the issues on their own. Only with great delusion can someone truly believe that the Clinton Foundation is charitable. -- Silver Slimer
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | DFS <nospam@dfs.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-25 12:03 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <npn4u3$ub1$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #366687 |
On 8/25/2016 11:08 AM, Silver Slimer wrote: > On 2016-08-25 10:54 AM, DFS wrote: >> On 8/25/2016 9:32 AM, Silver Slimer wrote: >>> On 2016-08-23 8:08 PM, DFS wrote: >>>> On 8/23/2016 5:57 PM, GreyCloud wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> Funny thing, it is the media that is ragging on trump but not one bad >>>>> word about hillary. >>>> >>>> >>>> Ridiculous lie. >>>> >>>> An hour ago on CNN she was being hammered by Trump surrogates for >>>> supposed crossover/access between the Clinton Foundation and the State >>>> Dept. >>>> >>>> And the CNN hostess asked some pointed questions about it, too, such as >>>> "Why is Clinton promising to refuse foreign donations to the Foundation >>>> now, as opposed to a year ago?" >>> >>> Actually, she is refusing to accept foreign donations if she is >>> _elected_ .Until then, it's a free-for-all. However, she has already >>> promised such things in the past and never gone through with the >>> promise. She will simply find a better way of hiding what the foundation >>> does. >> >> It does charitable work. No hiding necessary. > > Provide examples of charitable work she has done. Who said anything about 'she'? But since you ask: <quote> As for charitable donations, the Clintons gave just under $15 million over the eight-year period, which is 10.8 percent of their total income. The vast majority of that — about $14.8 million — went through the Clinton Family Foundation, the vehicle the Clintons frequently use to make personal donations, and another $57,000 went to the Clinton Global Initiative. The Clintons' other donations were to the Nelson Mandela Foundation ($60,000), Humana Challenge ($46,000), the First Methodist United Church ($20,000), Exploring the Arts ($4,100), St. Stephen's Armenian Apostolic Church ($2,500) and the Hot Springs Class of '64, Bill Clinton's high school graduating class in Arkansas ($200). </quote> http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/07/hillary-clinton-releases-her-tax-returns/457896/ So she/they donate nearly 11% of their income to charitable institutions. How about Trump? Well, we don't know, since that liar is hiding multiple somethings in his tax returns and won't release them. In fact, I predict he will never release them. (note: you have to work to make money to donate - it's not the same as picking up a hammer and building Habitat For Humanity homes like ex-USA President Jimmy Carter does, but it's charitable work nonetheless. It's more than I've done or ever will do - I think charity saps people's will to achieve.) > The Clinton Cash > documentary has already demonstrated what the effects of the Clinton > Foundation's "charity" has been on Haiti; any funds meant to be used in > Haiti instead went into the foundation's coffers and they, not Haitians, > decided how it would be spent. Good. Haitians are too stupid and corrupt to manage money. 6.5 years and $13.5 billion in donations after the big quake, and many, many thousands are still living in tents. > In the end, the country did not benefit > even remotely from the money sent in their direction and they were left > to resolve the issues on their own. I'm 100% sure some lazy, thieving Haitians benefitted greatly. > Only with great delusion can someone truly believe that the Clinton > Foundation is charitable. <quote> How does it work? It's what philanthropists call an operating foundation, which means it doesn't give much money to outside groups to fulfill its mission. In 2014, the foundation gave less than 3% of revenue to other non-profits. Instead, the foundation does its own work, with staff and partners around the world. What kind of work? Health is a big focus. In more than 70 countries, according to the foundation, it helps 11.5 million people, including 800,000 children, with HIV/AIDS get their medication at 90% lower cost -- more than half the adults and three-quarters of the children getting treatment in the world today. But it does all kinds of other work as well. For instance, it helps East African farmers get better seeds and fertilizers. It supported Nepal's reconstruction after the 2015 earthquakes. And it has connected more than 500,000 Latin Americans to job training and entrepreneurship opportunities. Okay. So it's an international do-good group? Yes. And no. The Clinton Foundation does tons of work in the US, too. Some examples: It has a school program that operates in every state, affecting more than 31,000 schools and 18 million students by its count. That program is to improve physical education, child nutrition, health education and staff wellness programs. They also work on prescription drug addiction. The foundation wants to halve the number of opioid overdoses -- right now those drugs kill more Americans than car accidents. How does the philanthropic world see the Clinton Foundation? They're held in high esteem. There are watchdog groups that judge charities on how they're run, how transparent they are and how much they spend on programs -- some charities raise a ton of money, but spend a large percentage on salaries and bonuses instead of their actual cause. Charity Watch gave the Clinton Foundation an A grade, while GuideStar gave it a platinum rating. </quote> http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/24/politics/clinton-foundation-explainer/ Note: I don't like Clinton, and I don't hate her like some people. But listening to the idiotic, fantasy babbling of Octavian and GreyCloud is too much.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-25 12:47 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <npn7en$a9e$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #366695 |
On 2016-08-25 12:03 PM, DFS wrote: > On 8/25/2016 11:08 AM, Silver Slimer wrote: >> On 2016-08-25 10:54 AM, DFS wrote: >>> On 8/25/2016 9:32 AM, Silver Slimer wrote: >>>> On 2016-08-23 8:08 PM, DFS wrote: >>>>> On 8/23/2016 5:57 PM, GreyCloud wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Funny thing, it is the media that is ragging on trump but not one bad >>>>>> word about hillary. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Ridiculous lie. >>>>> >>>>> An hour ago on CNN she was being hammered by Trump surrogates for >>>>> supposed crossover/access between the Clinton Foundation and the State >>>>> Dept. >>>>> >>>>> And the CNN hostess asked some pointed questions about it, too, >>>>> such as >>>>> "Why is Clinton promising to refuse foreign donations to the >>>>> Foundation >>>>> now, as opposed to a year ago?" >>>> >>>> Actually, she is refusing to accept foreign donations if she is >>>> _elected_ .Until then, it's a free-for-all. However, she has already >>>> promised such things in the past and never gone through with the >>>> promise. She will simply find a better way of hiding what the >>>> foundation >>>> does. >>> >>> It does charitable work. No hiding necessary. >> >> Provide examples of charitable work she has done. > > Who said anything about 'she'? But since you ask: > > <quote> > As for charitable donations, the Clintons gave just under $15 million > over the eight-year period, which is 10.8 percent of their total income. > The vast majority of that — about $14.8 million — went through the > Clinton Family Foundation, the vehicle the Clintons frequently use to > make personal donations, and another $57,000 went to the Clinton Global > Initiative. The Clintons' other donations were to the Nelson Mandela > Foundation ($60,000), Humana Challenge ($46,000), the First Methodist > United Church ($20,000), Exploring the Arts ($4,100), St. Stephen's > Armenian Apostolic Church ($2,500) and the Hot Springs Class of '64, > Bill Clinton's high school graduating class in Arkansas ($200). > </quote> > > http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/07/hillary-clinton-releases-her-tax-returns/457896/ > > > > So she/they donate nearly 11% of their income to charitable > institutions. How about Trump? Well, we don't know, since that liar is > hiding multiple somethings in his tax returns and won't release them. In > fact, I predict he will never release them. He is being audited and has been for as long as anyone can remember. He is in no obligation to release them at the moment and in fact, it would be unethical to do so considering the circumstances. Add to that the fact that the mainstream media will look for anything they can turn into a problem (like they did with Romney) and it is truly a lose-lose situation he would be walking into. In his place, I wouldn't release them unless Hillary releases an independently-verified health assessment. > (note: you have to work to make money to donate - it's not the same as > picking up a hammer and building Habitat For Humanity homes like ex-USA > President Jimmy Carter does, but it's charitable work nonetheless. It's > more than I've done or ever will do - I think charity saps people's will > to achieve.) So 11% went to a handful of supposedly charitable organizations but where did the other 89% go? Into the Clintons' pockets. Those contributions of theirs are not charitable as they were made to take advantage of tax breaks which essentially resulted in them not spending any money at all. I'd be just as willing to give you $200 in charity as they were to give to Negro Mandela if I knew that I'd get all of it back in my tax report at the end of the year. >> The Clinton Cash >> documentary has already demonstrated what the effects of the Clinton >> Foundation's "charity" has been on Haiti; any funds meant to be used in >> Haiti instead went into the foundation's coffers and they, not Haitians, >> decided how it would be spent. > > Good. Haitians are too stupid and corrupt to manage money. 6.5 years > and $13.5 billion in donations after the big quake, and many, many > thousands are still living in tents. They are living in tents not because they choose to but because they have no choice; Hillary and the Clinton Foundation did _nothing_ to help them and pocketed the money countries around the world gave to help Haiti in its time of need. Do me a favour and take a 90-minute vacation from your Linux-bashing to watch Clinton Cash. You can find it for free on Youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LYRUOd_QoM . >> In the end, the country did not benefit >> even remotely from the money sent in their direction and they were left >> to resolve the issues on their own. > > I'm 100% sure some lazy, thieving Haitians benefitted greatly. Except that they didn't and it's one of the reasons Haitians protested against her. http://freebeacon.com/politics/haitians-protest-hillary-clintons-destruction-of-country/ >> Only with great delusion can someone truly believe that the Clinton >> Foundation is charitable. > > <quote> > How does it work? > It's what philanthropists call an operating foundation, which means it > doesn't give much money to outside groups to fulfill its mission. In > 2014, the foundation gave less than 3% of revenue to other non-profits. > Instead, the foundation does its own work, with staff and partners > around the world. > > What kind of work? > Health is a big focus. In more than 70 countries, according to the > foundation, it helps 11.5 million people, including 800,000 children, > with HIV/AIDS get their medication at 90% lower cost -- more than half > the adults and three-quarters of the children getting treatment in the > world today. > > But it does all kinds of other work as well. For instance, it helps East > African farmers get better seeds and fertilizers. It supported Nepal's > reconstruction after the 2015 earthquakes. And it has connected more > than 500,000 Latin Americans to job training and entrepreneurship > opportunities. > > Okay. So it's an international do-good group? > Yes. And no. The Clinton Foundation does tons of work in the US, too. > Some examples: It has a school program that operates in every state, > affecting more than 31,000 schools and 18 million students by its count. > That program is to improve physical education, child nutrition, health > education and staff wellness programs. They also work on prescription > drug addiction. The foundation wants to halve the number of opioid > overdoses -- right now those drugs kill more Americans than car accidents. > > How does the philanthropic world see the Clinton Foundation? > They're held in high esteem. There are watchdog groups that judge > charities on how they're run, how transparent they are and how much they > spend on programs -- some charities raise a ton of money, but spend a > large percentage on salaries and bonuses instead of their actual cause. > Charity Watch gave the Clinton Foundation an A grade, while GuideStar > gave it a platinum rating. > </quote> > > > http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/24/politics/clinton-foundation-explainer/ OMG! CNN said good things about Hillary Clinton and her foundation?! I'm shocked. > Note: I don't like Clinton, and I don't hate her like some people. But > listening to the idiotic, fantasy babbling of Octavian and GreyCloud is > too much. Except that the "fantasy babbling of Octavian and GreyCloud" is based on a lot more reality than what you're saying at the very moment. No offense but Hillary Clinton is indefensible and I'm truly disappointed that you're doing it. -- Silver Slimer
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-25 12:19 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <npncqk$t6u$4@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #366679 |
DFS wrote: > On 8/25/2016 9:32 AM, Silver Slimer wrote: >> On 2016-08-23 8:08 PM, DFS wrote: >>> On 8/23/2016 5:57 PM, GreyCloud wrote: >>> >>> >>>> Funny thing, it is the media that is ragging on trump but not one bad >>>> word about hillary. >>> >>> >>> Ridiculous lie. >>> >>> An hour ago on CNN she was being hammered by Trump surrogates for >>> supposed crossover/access between the Clinton Foundation and the State >>> Dept. >>> >>> And the CNN hostess asked some pointed questions about it, too, such as >>> "Why is Clinton promising to refuse foreign donations to the Foundation >>> now, as opposed to a year ago?" >> >> Actually, she is refusing to accept foreign donations if she is >> _elected_ .Until then, it's a free-for-all. However, she has already >> promised such things in the past and never gone through with the >> promise. She will simply find a better way of hiding what the foundation >> does. > > It does charitable work. No hiding necessary. But that is not what is actually happening. It has already been proven. -- My problem is that I don't have enough middle fingers.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-23 11:59 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <npi2tk$a7o$4@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #366301 |
On 08/22/16 14:35, Snit wrote: > On 8/22/16, 1:04 PM, in article hjgsuaf93.nbmcju@perch.invalid, "Octavian W. > Lagrange"<olagrang@perch.invalid> wrote: > >> Another day, another 15,000 Hillary emails discovered. >> > I have (no surprise) a rather lengthy write-up on my view of Comey's > testimony. The short version: I see no reason to think he is anything other > than a decent and moral person. While he did not recommend indictment DID > show Clinton is not in any way a good candidate for president. > > And that is just the tip of the iceberg for her. The DNC has been absurd in > selecting her. She is Trump's best chance to get to the White House. > > I agree on this point. Hillary has serious health issues tho. A Dr. said that anyone on Cuomadin (blood thinner) is only supposed to be on it for a short time. She is one this stuff now since 2013 when she had that nasty fall. No real press conferences for over 240 days now.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-23 11:16 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D3E1E10C.79E1A%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #366373 |
On 8/23/16, 10:59 AM, in article npi2tk$a7o$4@dont-email.me, "GreyCloud" <mist@cumulus.com> wrote: > On 08/22/16 14:35, Snit wrote: >> On 8/22/16, 1:04 PM, in article hjgsuaf93.nbmcju@perch.invalid, "Octavian W. >> Lagrange"<olagrang@perch.invalid> wrote: >> >>> Another day, another 15,000 Hillary emails discovered. >>> >> I have (no surprise) a rather lengthy write-up on my view of Comey's >> testimony. The short version: I see no reason to think he is anything other >> than a decent and moral person. While he did not recommend indictment DID >> show Clinton is not in any way a good candidate for president. >> >> And that is just the tip of the iceberg for her. The DNC has been absurd in >> selecting her. She is Trump's best chance to get to the White House. >> > I agree on this point. > Hillary has serious health issues tho. A Dr. said that anyone on > Cuomadin (blood thinner) is only supposed to be on it for a short time. > She is one this stuff now since 2013 when she had that nasty fall. > No real press conferences for over 240 days now. I have heard those rumors as well... could be true. She has done interviews and opened pickle jars (?!?!). Not sure what that proves. But she is likely backing off the public lime light because she, like Trump, is unable to be honest... but she is a more clever liar. -- * OS X / Linux: What is a file? <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI> * Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE> * Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0> * Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8> * Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8> * Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI> * Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA> * Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk> * OS / Word Processor Comparison: <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-23 15:59 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <npigvd$tkm$4@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #366380 |
On 08/23/16 12:16, Snit wrote: > On 8/23/16, 10:59 AM, in article npi2tk$a7o$4@dont-email.me, "GreyCloud" > <mist@cumulus.com> wrote: > >> On 08/22/16 14:35, Snit wrote: >>> On 8/22/16, 1:04 PM, in article hjgsuaf93.nbmcju@perch.invalid, "Octavian W. >>> Lagrange"<olagrang@perch.invalid> wrote: >>> >>>> Another day, another 15,000 Hillary emails discovered. >>>> >>> I have (no surprise) a rather lengthy write-up on my view of Comey's >>> testimony. The short version: I see no reason to think he is anything other >>> than a decent and moral person. While he did not recommend indictment DID >>> show Clinton is not in any way a good candidate for president. >>> >>> And that is just the tip of the iceberg for her. The DNC has been absurd in >>> selecting her. She is Trump's best chance to get to the White House. >>> >> I agree on this point. >> Hillary has serious health issues tho. A Dr. said that anyone on >> Cuomadin (blood thinner) is only supposed to be on it for a short time. >> She is one this stuff now since 2013 when she had that nasty fall. >> No real press conferences for over 240 days now. > > I have heard those rumors as well... could be true. She has done interviews > and opened pickle jars (?!?!). Not sure what that proves. Hehe... maybe she tried to stick her head in the pickle jar. > > But she is likely backing off the public lime light because she, like Trump, > is unable to be honest... but she is a more clever liar. > I find Trump mostly honest. I don't know what lies he's told yet.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-23 22:13 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <h11.kafd8@perch.invalid> |
| In reply to | #366403 |
GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> wrote: > On 08/23/16 12:16, Snit wrote: >> >> >> I have heard those rumors as well... could be true. She has done interviews >> and opened pickle jars (?!?!). Not sure what that proves. > > Hehe... maybe she tried to stick her head in the pickle jar. > They should have had her try to keep her hand out of a cookie jar.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-23 15:18 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D3E219AC.79E78%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #366408 |
On 8/23/16, 3:13 PM, in article h11.kafd8@perch.invalid, "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> wrote: > GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> wrote: >> On 08/23/16 12:16, Snit wrote: >>> >>> >>> I have heard those rumors as well... could be true. She has done interviews >>> and opened pickle jars (?!?!). Not sure what that proves. >> >> Hehe... maybe she tried to stick her head in the pickle jar. >> > > They should have had her try to keep her hand out of a cookie jar. Well played. :) -- * OS X / Linux: What is a file? <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI> * Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE> * Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0> * Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8> * Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8> * Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI> * Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA> * Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk> * OS / Word Processor Comparison: <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-23 22:29 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <npj7rf$oi8$4@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #366408 |
On 08/23/16 16:13, Octavian W. Lagrange wrote: > GreyCloud<mist@cumulus.com> wrote: >> On 08/23/16 12:16, Snit wrote: >>> >>> >>> I have heard those rumors as well... could be true. She has done interviews >>> and opened pickle jars (?!?!). Not sure what that proves. >> >> Hehe... maybe she tried to stick her head in the pickle jar. >> > > They should have had her try to keep her hand out of a cookie jar. > Too much temptation for her. Put 100 dollar bills in a cookie jar, and you won't even see her hand move, but the jar empty.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-23 15:14 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D3E218E3.79E70%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #366403 |
On 8/23/16, 2:59 PM, in article npigvd$tkm$4@dont-email.me, "GreyCloud" <mist@cumulus.com> wrote: > On 08/23/16 12:16, Snit wrote: >> On 8/23/16, 10:59 AM, in article npi2tk$a7o$4@dont-email.me, "GreyCloud" >> <mist@cumulus.com> wrote: >> >>> On 08/22/16 14:35, Snit wrote: >>>> On 8/22/16, 1:04 PM, in article hjgsuaf93.nbmcju@perch.invalid, "Octavian >>>> W. >>>> Lagrange"<olagrang@perch.invalid> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Another day, another 15,000 Hillary emails discovered. >>>>> >>>> I have (no surprise) a rather lengthy write-up on my view of Comey's >>>> testimony. The short version: I see no reason to think he is anything other >>>> than a decent and moral person. While he did not recommend indictment DID >>>> show Clinton is not in any way a good candidate for president. >>>> >>>> And that is just the tip of the iceberg for her. The DNC has been absurd in >>>> selecting her. She is Trump's best chance to get to the White House. >>>> >>> I agree on this point. >>> Hillary has serious health issues tho. A Dr. said that anyone on >>> Cuomadin (blood thinner) is only supposed to be on it for a short time. >>> She is one this stuff now since 2013 when she had that nasty fall. >>> No real press conferences for over 240 days now. >> >> I have heard those rumors as well... could be true. She has done interviews >> and opened pickle jars (?!?!). Not sure what that proves. > > Hehe... maybe she tried to stick her head in the pickle jar. :) >> But she is likely backing off the public lime light because she, like Trump, >> is unable to be honest... but she is a more clever liar. > > I find Trump mostly honest. I don't know what lies he's told yet. <http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/> I am NOT going to say such a report is as telling as some. Heck, if you take that without context you can "prove" Clinton is honest (which is utter BS) but they list a LOT of lies by him. Some they list as such I will disagree with -- such as when they say him noting the fact the election is "rigged" is a "pants on fire" lie. Of course it is rigged... we have the evidence to prove it. But many are flat out lies on his part. -- * OS X / Linux: What is a file? <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI> * Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE> * Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0> * Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8> * Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8> * Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI> * Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA> * Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk> * OS / Word Processor Comparison: <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-23 22:33 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <npj82q$pvs$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #366409 |
On 08/23/16 16:14, Snit wrote: > On 8/23/16, 2:59 PM, in article npigvd$tkm$4@dont-email.me, "GreyCloud" > <mist@cumulus.com> wrote: > >> On 08/23/16 12:16, Snit wrote: >>> On 8/23/16, 10:59 AM, in article npi2tk$a7o$4@dont-email.me, "GreyCloud" >>> <mist@cumulus.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On 08/22/16 14:35, Snit wrote: >>>>> On 8/22/16, 1:04 PM, in article hjgsuaf93.nbmcju@perch.invalid, "Octavian >>>>> W. >>>>> Lagrange"<olagrang@perch.invalid> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Another day, another 15,000 Hillary emails discovered. >>>>>> >>>>> I have (no surprise) a rather lengthy write-up on my view of Comey's >>>>> testimony. The short version: I see no reason to think he is anything other >>>>> than a decent and moral person. While he did not recommend indictment DID >>>>> show Clinton is not in any way a good candidate for president. >>>>> >>>>> And that is just the tip of the iceberg for her. The DNC has been absurd in >>>>> selecting her. She is Trump's best chance to get to the White House. >>>>> >>>> I agree on this point. >>>> Hillary has serious health issues tho. A Dr. said that anyone on >>>> Cuomadin (blood thinner) is only supposed to be on it for a short time. >>>> She is one this stuff now since 2013 when she had that nasty fall. >>>> No real press conferences for over 240 days now. >>> >>> I have heard those rumors as well... could be true. She has done interviews >>> and opened pickle jars (?!?!). Not sure what that proves. >> >> Hehe... maybe she tried to stick her head in the pickle jar. > > :) > >>> But she is likely backing off the public lime light because she, like Trump, >>> is unable to be honest... but she is a more clever liar. >> >> I find Trump mostly honest. I don't know what lies he's told yet. > > <http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/> > > I am NOT going to say such a report is as telling as some. Heck, if you take > that without context you can "prove" Clinton is honest (which is utter BS) > but they list a LOT of lies by him. Some they list as such I will disagree > with -- such as when they say him noting the fact the election is "rigged" > is a "pants on fire" lie. Of course it is rigged... we have the evidence to > prove it. But many are flat out lies on his part. > I looked at the politfact site. Unfortunately, they are taking a lot of things out of context making his statements look false... hence the free ride hillary is getting. And as far as the voting machines are concerned... they're rigged to favor whoever they want to win. The votes can be skewed enough for a win. However, landslide elections are very tough for them to commit fraud without getting caught and thrown in jail.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-24 07:56 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D3E303C5.79F0D%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #366452 |
On 8/23/16, 9:33 PM, in article npj82q$pvs$1@dont-email.me, "GreyCloud" <mist@cumulus.com> wrote: > On 08/23/16 16:14, Snit wrote: >> On 8/23/16, 2:59 PM, in article npigvd$tkm$4@dont-email.me, "GreyCloud" >> <mist@cumulus.com> wrote: >> >>> On 08/23/16 12:16, Snit wrote: >>>> On 8/23/16, 10:59 AM, in article npi2tk$a7o$4@dont-email.me, "GreyCloud" >>>> <mist@cumulus.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 08/22/16 14:35, Snit wrote: >>>>>> On 8/22/16, 1:04 PM, in article hjgsuaf93.nbmcju@perch.invalid, "Octavian >>>>>> W. >>>>>> Lagrange"<olagrang@perch.invalid> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Another day, another 15,000 Hillary emails discovered. >>>>>>> >>>>>> I have (no surprise) a rather lengthy write-up on my view of Comey's >>>>>> testimony. The short version: I see no reason to think he is anything >>>>>> other >>>>>> than a decent and moral person. While he did not recommend indictment DID >>>>>> show Clinton is not in any way a good candidate for president. >>>>>> >>>>>> And that is just the tip of the iceberg for her. The DNC has been absurd >>>>>> in >>>>>> selecting her. She is Trump's best chance to get to the White House. >>>>>> >>>>> I agree on this point. >>>>> Hillary has serious health issues tho. A Dr. said that anyone on >>>>> Cuomadin (blood thinner) is only supposed to be on it for a short time. >>>>> She is one this stuff now since 2013 when she had that nasty fall. >>>>> No real press conferences for over 240 days now. >>>> >>>> I have heard those rumors as well... could be true. She has done interviews >>>> and opened pickle jars (?!?!). Not sure what that proves. >>> >>> Hehe... maybe she tried to stick her head in the pickle jar. >> >> :) >> >>>> But she is likely backing off the public lime light because she, like >>>> Trump, >>>> is unable to be honest... but she is a more clever liar. >>> >>> I find Trump mostly honest. I don't know what lies he's told yet. >> >> <http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/> >> >> I am NOT going to say such a report is as telling as some. Heck, if you take >> that without context you can "prove" Clinton is honest (which is utter BS) >> but they list a LOT of lies by him. Some they list as such I will disagree >> with -- such as when they say him noting the fact the election is "rigged" >> is a "pants on fire" lie. Of course it is rigged... we have the evidence to >> prove it. But many are flat out lies on his part. >> > > I looked at the politfact site. Unfortunately, they are taking a lot of > things out of context making his statements look false... hence the free > ride hillary is getting. She is a better liar... lying by innuendo and omission. She is a trained lawyer and it shows. But both are grossly dishonest. An example I use for Clinton fans is to watch her NY debate with Sanders. Try to find ANY question she answers directly. I have yet to have anyone point one out (I have not re-watched looking specifically for this, but if there are any they are rare). > And as far as the voting machines are concerned... they're rigged to > favor whoever they want to win. The votes can be skewed enough for a > win. However, landslide elections are very tough for them to commit > fraud without getting caught and thrown in jail. For Bush II and Clinton the evidence shows fraud when using older machines and no paper trail. -- * OS X / Linux: What is a file? <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI> * Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE> * Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0> * Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8> * Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8> * Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI> * Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA> * Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk> * OS / Word Processor Comparison: <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-24 12:23 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <npkoms$l8v$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #366481 |
On 08/24/16 08:56, Snit wrote: > On 8/23/16, 9:33 PM, in article npj82q$pvs$1@dont-email.me, "GreyCloud" > <mist@cumulus.com> wrote: > >> On 08/23/16 16:14, Snit wrote: >>> On 8/23/16, 2:59 PM, in article npigvd$tkm$4@dont-email.me, "GreyCloud" >>> <mist@cumulus.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On 08/23/16 12:16, Snit wrote: >>>>> On 8/23/16, 10:59 AM, in article npi2tk$a7o$4@dont-email.me, "GreyCloud" >>>>> <mist@cumulus.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On 08/22/16 14:35, Snit wrote: >>>>>>> On 8/22/16, 1:04 PM, in article hjgsuaf93.nbmcju@perch.invalid, "Octavian >>>>>>> W. >>>>>>> Lagrange"<olagrang@perch.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Another day, another 15,000 Hillary emails discovered. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> I have (no surprise) a rather lengthy write-up on my view of Comey's >>>>>>> testimony. The short version: I see no reason to think he is anything >>>>>>> other >>>>>>> than a decent and moral person. While he did not recommend indictment DID >>>>>>> show Clinton is not in any way a good candidate for president. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> And that is just the tip of the iceberg for her. The DNC has been absurd >>>>>>> in >>>>>>> selecting her. She is Trump's best chance to get to the White House. >>>>>>> >>>>>> I agree on this point. >>>>>> Hillary has serious health issues tho. A Dr. said that anyone on >>>>>> Cuomadin (blood thinner) is only supposed to be on it for a short time. >>>>>> She is one this stuff now since 2013 when she had that nasty fall. >>>>>> No real press conferences for over 240 days now. >>>>> >>>>> I have heard those rumors as well... could be true. She has done interviews >>>>> and opened pickle jars (?!?!). Not sure what that proves. >>>> >>>> Hehe... maybe she tried to stick her head in the pickle jar. >>> >>> :) >>> >>>>> But she is likely backing off the public lime light because she, like >>>>> Trump, >>>>> is unable to be honest... but she is a more clever liar. >>>> >>>> I find Trump mostly honest. I don't know what lies he's told yet. >>> >>> <http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/> >>> >>> I am NOT going to say such a report is as telling as some. Heck, if you take >>> that without context you can "prove" Clinton is honest (which is utter BS) >>> but they list a LOT of lies by him. Some they list as such I will disagree >>> with -- such as when they say him noting the fact the election is "rigged" >>> is a "pants on fire" lie. Of course it is rigged... we have the evidence to >>> prove it. But many are flat out lies on his part. >>> >> >> I looked at the politfact site. Unfortunately, they are taking a lot of >> things out of context making his statements look false... hence the free >> ride hillary is getting. > > She is a better liar... lying by innuendo and omission. She is a trained > lawyer and it shows. But both are grossly dishonest. http://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/barexam.asp I don't think she is a good lawyer, but an expert liar. > > An example I use for Clinton fans is to watch her NY debate with Sanders. > Try to find ANY question she answers directly. I have yet to have anyone > point one out (I have not re-watched looking specifically for this, but if > there are any they are rare). > >> And as far as the voting machines are concerned... they're rigged to >> favor whoever they want to win. The votes can be skewed enough for a >> win. However, landslide elections are very tough for them to commit >> fraud without getting caught and thrown in jail. > > For Bush II and Clinton the evidence shows fraud when using older machines > and no paper trail. > > Imagine if when you go to vote that you get a copy of your vote with a unique serial number to check after the vote. It's been tried here and the precinct committee officer was kicked out for cheating. Too many people wanted to see if this type of system worked... oh did it work well.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-24 11:43 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D3E338C6.79F6D%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
| In reply to | #366510 |
On 8/24/16, 11:23 AM, in article npkoms$l8v$3@dont-email.me, "GreyCloud" <mist@cumulus.com> wrote: ... >>> I looked at the politfact site. Unfortunately, they are taking a lot of >>> things out of context making his statements look false... hence the free >>> ride hillary is getting. >> >> She is a better liar... lying by innuendo and omission. She is a trained >> lawyer and it shows. But both are grossly dishonest. > > http://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/barexam.asp > > I don't think she is a good lawyer, but an expert liar. Oh, I never said she was a good lawyer... but she is trained as a lawyer. And an expert liar. Sure. >> An example I use for Clinton fans is to watch her NY debate with Sanders. >> Try to find ANY question she answers directly. I have yet to have anyone >> point one out (I have not re-watched looking specifically for this, but if >> there are any they are rare). >> >>> And as far as the voting machines are concerned... they're rigged to >>> favor whoever they want to win. The votes can be skewed enough for a >>> win. However, landslide elections are very tough for them to commit >>> fraud without getting caught and thrown in jail. >> >> For Bush II and Clinton the evidence shows fraud when using older machines >> and no paper trail. > > Imagine if when you go to vote that you get a copy of your vote with a > unique serial number to check after the vote. It's been tried here and > the precinct committee officer was kicked out for cheating. Too many > people wanted to see if this type of system worked... oh did it work well. I would love to see it. I do see where there is a risk it could lead to people buying votes. -- * OS X / Linux: What is a file? <http://youtu.be/_dMbXGLW9PI> * Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE> * Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0> * Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8> * Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8> * Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI> * Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA> * Easy on OS X / Hard on Linux: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk> * OS / Word Processor Comparison: <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-08-24 13:53 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <npku0l$940$4@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #366519 |
Snit wrote: > On 8/24/16, 11:23 AM, in article npkoms$l8v$3@dont-email.me, "GreyCloud" > <mist@cumulus.com> wrote: > > ... >>>> I looked at the politfact site. Unfortunately, they are taking a lot >>>> of things out of context making his statements look false... hence the >>>> free ride hillary is getting. >>> >>> She is a better liar... lying by innuendo and omission. She is a trained >>> lawyer and it shows. But both are grossly dishonest. >> >> http://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/barexam.asp >> >> I don't think she is a good lawyer, but an expert liar. > > Oh, I never said she was a good lawyer... but she is trained as a lawyer. > And an expert liar. Sure. > Isn't that what lawyers do best if they can? LOL!!! One lawyer told me in the spirit of sarcasm, said "You want to see my heart in the jar I keep? When I retire I'll have it sewn back in". >>> An example I use for Clinton fans is to watch her NY debate with >>> Sanders. Try to find ANY question she answers directly. I have yet to >>> have anyone point one out (I have not re-watched looking specifically >>> for this, but if there are any they are rare). >>> >>>> And as far as the voting machines are concerned... they're rigged to >>>> favor whoever they want to win. The votes can be skewed enough for a >>>> win. However, landslide elections are very tough for them to commit >>>> fraud without getting caught and thrown in jail. >>> >>> For Bush II and Clinton the evidence shows fraud when using older >>> machines and no paper trail. >> >> Imagine if when you go to vote that you get a copy of your vote with a >> unique serial number to check after the vote. It's been tried here and >> the precinct committee officer was kicked out for cheating. Too many >> people wanted to see if this type of system worked... oh did it work >> well. > > I would love to see it. I do see where there is a risk it could lead to > people buying votes. > > > And I'm sure with George Soros money paying for them too. I like to call him SoreAss because he doesn't like borders. -- My problem is that I don't have enough middle fingers.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 13 of 20 — ← Prev page 1 … 11 12 [13] 14 15 … 20 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy
csiph-web