Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #598804
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.os.linux.advocacy, sci.physics |
| Subject | Re: Today's Presidential Debate. |
| Date | 2016-09-29 10:21 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <D4129BBF.7EDC3%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> (permalink) |
| References | (14 earlier) <nsgtrq$i38$1@dont-email.me> <D4115672.7EC03%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> <nsh84k$sbv$1@dont-email.me> <D41179F1.7EC5E%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> <nsjg59$9o9$1@dont-email.me> |
Cross-posted to 2 groups.
On 9/29/16, 9:40 AM, in article nsjg59$9o9$1@dont-email.me, "GreyCloud" <Cumulus@mist.com> wrote: ... >>> I have. Remember when Bill Clinton during the Monica Lewinsky hearings, >>> where he said "It depends on what you mean by is." >> >> At least with the Clintons they are god liars. Trump is not even that. Well, >> not sure being a good liar is a quality I want in a leader either. > > Masons don't lie. > They police their own. What we know is Trump lies. He lies a whole lot. He lied repeatedly during the debate. This is a simple fact. Heck, here are just some of his lies: <http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/statements/byruling/fa lse/> OR <https://goo.gl/DISoKD> <http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/statements/byruling/pa nts-fire/> OR <https://goo.gl/xOrqnI> You can argue that some of those are incorrect... and some might be. But most are solid, easy to show, irrefutable lies of his. The defense that he is a part of a group you think is honest is meaningless. He lies. His own words. That is simply a fact. Let us just look at a couple: "Our African-American communities are absolutely in the worst shape they've ever been in before. Ever. Ever. Ever." Worse than when they were slaves? I mean, really, his comment is so amazingly stupid nobody can possibly accept that as reasonable or honest. Even ignoring slavery, and looking just at recent history, his comment is just beyond stupid. "My opponent has no child care plan." A 30 second trip to her site proves this wrong: <https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/early-childhood-education/> Trump flat out lied. On and on and on. Unlike Clinton, Trump is not even a good liar. >> Sigh. >> >>>> I think we can question if they unfairly selected his comments, but really, >>>> pretty much any time you hear him speak it is the same thing. >>> >>> And Hillary won't comment on it either, because in this instance she >>> lied thru omission. >> >> She does that a LOT. A whole lot. Through omission and innuendo and more. >> This is going to be used by those who troll but she DOES lie in ways that >> are hard to quote... so some of her supporters think she is honest. >> >> Trump does not even do that... he just flat out lies. > > So you say that he does lie, but I doubt it. Your doubt is not relevant... remember, it is a fact he lies a lot. A proven fact. Denial in the face of facts, such as what many conservatives do in the face of the facts tied to climate science, are of no value in a conversation about facts. > What would you prefer, someone that will clean up this mess or someone > that will be business as usual and everybody suffers from it? False dichotomy. Trump admits to being a part of the problem: he admits to paying very low taxes and blames the system THEN says he wants to control the system so he and others in his income bracket can pay even LESS. His followers, though, are all about emotion. One cannot use reason and accept these nonsense answers from him. ... >> When I hear those who get so caught up over Benghazi show the same level of >> outrage at other deaths I will take them more seriously. YES, Clinton has >> said some dumb things about Benghazi but it is not the issue some make it. > > The real issue on that one is that she brought down Libya, then ISIS > stepped in and finished the country off... now she has a route to funnel > weapons for ISIS into Syria. Stevens knew it, and was going to reveal > it. He got killed because she wanted that kept quiet. > Stevens repeatedly called for protective backup, but she didn't supply > any help. But the real biggie here is that only the president can order > any military support into a foreign country, she cannot. She didn't > tell Obama about it. That pissed Obama off pretty bad. > > All it tells me is that she thinks she has a lot of power, when in fact > she does not. Clinton screwed up heavily in Libya. No argument here. Then again, when the Republicans pulled funding from embassy security they ALSO screwed up. You never hear the media talk about that... the so-called "liberal" media. Why do you think that is? > >> ... >>>>> Yes, he has blamed Obama. >>>> >>>> What time stamp? >>> >>> 2016. >> >> On the video you linked to! > > Should be there somewhere. But, as far as you can tell, it is not. I think that settles things. OK. >>>> >>>>> You should then watch Trumps speech then to figure it out. >>>> >>>> I have watched Trump... he is all emotion and no thought. >>> >>> So you say. >>> I do not think that. >> >> I gave some examples... I can give more. > > But these are left-wing biased lies. When you deem videos of Trump doing as I note he does, and direct quotes of him doing as I note he does, to be "liberal" it comes down to you are simply rejecting facts and deeming reality to be "liberal." To a large extent I think you are right: being liberal means to accept facts more than being conservative does. Being conservative generally means denying reality, such as climate science and even direct videos of people saying things. Again: it is not as if I am pointing to videos of a misspeak at some small gathering... ALL politicians have those. No consequence. I pointed to a video, from FOX (a very conservative source) showing Trump say IN A DEBATE that wages were too high. And you dismiss this as coming from a liberal source... ignoring the fact that Fox is grossly conservative (and, being conservative grossly in accurate in many of their claims -- more so than any other mainstream media source) and it was a direct video of Trump in a debate. You will never speak to the actual fact: yes, Trump did directly say that WAGES are too high. Absolutely. And not as a mistake but as a part of an argument he was making about why China gets jobs... they have lower wages. >> ... >>>>>> Have you watched any where he has not? Listen to him talk about his >>>>>> hands. >>>>>> Listen to him brag about his money and his influence and his power. >>>>> >>>>> That would make him a great leader. >>>> >>>> The fact he is all style (and not a good style at that) and no substance is >>>> not exactly something that makes me think he would be a good leader. >>> >>> That's just your personal preferences. To me it looks like his wife is >>> very good looking, and of course she married him. >>> >>> If you think looks makes a good leader, then Obama is pretty ugly. >> >> Why bring up looks? > > Looks like you did. Nope. But nice attempt to turn things around. Trump speaks of looks often... esp. of women. And he makes horrid sexist attacks. But his supporters do not care. > Or is this the other CIA agent that didn't read the > turn-over log. > >> >>>> The fact he attacks people who are not of his religion would make him a >>>> HORRIBLE leader. >>> >>> Why worry about that? >> >> Why worry about equality? Why worry about the first amendment? Why worry >> about Nazi-like slogans and sentiments? >> >> Because these things matter! > > They do? Yet we still support limited slavery. Shouldn't that also matter. It does matter... and it is one of the things liberals are fighting against (well, some). Was a big part of Sander's movement, for example. But it is also not relevant to the bigger picture here: The fact Trump attacks people who are not of his religion would make him a HORRIBLE leader. You asked why. I noted why... and you worked to change the topic. >>> After all, this is our country, not theirs. >> >> See: the idea that a Muslim is any less an American than you are or I am or >> anyone else is just bigoted, Nazi-like thinking. That type nonsense should >> NEVER be accepted! > > When they are coming into this country, they are NOT citizens. When American Muslims come to this country they remain citizens. Does not matter where they have been. Does not mean that there are non-American Muslims, but OF MUSLIMS IN GENERAL you said this is not their country. That included MUSLIM AMERICANS. And you are flat out wrong. Muslim Americans are as American as any other American. They have the same rights as any other American. And Muslim refugees have as many rights as any other refugees. > And when they manage to get into this country, they are invaders. > It is the law. Replace what you just said with Christians... do you think Christian Americans and Christian refugees are "invaders"? Of course not. As such your claim is absolutely, unabashedly, bigoted. >>>> The fact he mocks women for their weight and judges them by it would make >>>> him a HORRRIBLE leader. >>> >>> Yeah, something that happened 20 years ago. Something that Hillary >>> forgot to mention. >> >> He STILL mocks women for their looks and for having menstrual cycles and >> breast feeding and more. > > I don't think you understood the humour in his comments. Sure I did... he mocks women for their looks, for them having menstrual cycles, for breast feeding, and more. He is repulsive and bigoted and nasty. I understand that very well. > He nailed some of these idiots that were using the left-wing tactic of > "Politically Correct Speech"... which is pure BS. Trump hires all kinds of > people and he has praised the good and smart ones. > > Remember Kelly Megyn trying to ask a very stupid question about how he treats > women? The question was totally stupid and off topic. Nope. Noting his bigotry toward people is a VERY relevant topic about a president. Absolutely. They should focus on that more. > How about Lyndon Baines Johnson? He used to go thru the secretarial pool to > pinch womens butts! Yet we hear nothing of that either. > > Or how about Bills treatment of women? LOL!!! > >> >>>> The fact he is a lousy business man who's only bragging points are how he >>>> screwed others over would make him a HORRIBLE leader. >>> >>> You keep saying that he is a lousy business man, yet he is successful in >>> his business enterprise. >> >> Successful in what? Not making much money? Screwing over others? How are >> these good things? > > He didn't screw over others. He openly admitted he did in the debate and called it "business" and "smart." Denial does not change that. > If you did a bad contracting job, why should he pay for it? There is no evidence of a bad job... NONE. And he uses the same excuse over and over. > Just like taking your car to a dealership to get it fixed and the mechanic > butchered your carburator and then gives you the bill... would you pay for > shoddiness? I wouldn't. > > You keep bringing in the left-wing lies using their play book. Why? > >>> That is what you call good leadership. >> >> How is not making much money a sign of "good leadership"? > > If he didn't, then he's just an average businessmen, but there are not > many businessmen that made as much as he has. We have looked at this and seen that to be a direct lie. He did less well than the stock market and many others did better. Next. > Case in point: Bill Gates. He made a lot of money doing business. So much so > that he is known as a philanthropist. > >>> A loser, we don't need for president at this point in time. I'd rather have >>> an ogre that has our own interests at heart and protect us, than some >>> psychopathic liar like Hillary. >> >> Trump lies as much or more than Clinton. > > I'd love to see proof of that claim. See above where I link to a bunch of his lies. If you can show Clinton making as many I would love to see it. To be fair, she does lie by omission and in more clever ways than Trump, so hers are harder to show. >>>> The fact he has claimed our wages are too high would make him a HORRIBLE >>>> leader. >>> >>> He never said that. >> >> This is what I mean: his followers have no idea what he has said. Here, >> direct video proof he said it... and not as a slip of the tongue or >> whatever, but as a talking point he tried to defend! And in one of the >> debates! >> >> <https://youtu.be/MbZ-o1T6F5Y?t=1m21s> > > You didn't follow it very closely then, because he did explain it. Go on. Show it. >> Seriously, no offense but how can you NOT have known this? Again, not some >> side issue at some talk he gave where it is being taken out context. > > I think you just didn't understand what he meant. I did. He said wages were too high in America and pointed to China with their lower wages. >> Of course, as with almost all of his views, he flip flops on this like crazy >> (even more than Clinton does on her views): <https://goo.gl/qaUfvg>. >> >> He is ALL emotion... nobody can look at his content and agree because HE >> does not agree with his own content! > > You can believe what ever you want. But the entire country is just > getting sick and tired of being lied to by the current administration. > They want real change, not a giant lie done by Obama. The current administration is not relevant here. >> >>>> The fact he denies climate change (except when he is not, and even then he >>>> shows he lacks understanding) would make him a HORRIBLE leader. >>> >>> Only a fools agenda to believe in it. Many other world leaders don't >>> believe in it either. >> >> If you cease to believe in seasons they still come. If you fail to believe >> in gravity you still fall. Who else believes it is not even slightly >> relevant to the fact that Trump denies basic science... science that is key >> to being able to make decent policy and lead well. His denial of science >> makes him a horrible leader. > > And if you think that climate change isn't natural, then you are in > denial of climate history. I ask you this: When doesn't the climate > ever change? Nobody said the climate has not changed over time. But that does not excuse denying facts about man-made global climate change. But the modern conservative movement is filled with people who deny basic science... basic facts. When you have a movement such as the conservative movement that deems facts irrelevant and evidence to have a liberal bias then you have a movement that is of no value to people who look at evidence and facts. >> Remember: Climate change is not even a political topic... except when it is >> made so by people denying it. It is science... and it is well supported. > > No, and wrong. It has been made political by dishonest people. That is what I said: those who deny the facts try to make it political. But the fact it is happening is not a question (at least beyond any reasonable doubt). The denial of many conservatives is a sign they reject facts. >>>> The fact he lies continually and contradicts himself and denies his own >>>> claims would make him a HORRIBLE leader. >>> >>> He doesn't. Is this snit I'm talking to? Or is it your other cia buddy >>> that has the same play book? >> >> I show, above, where he flip flops on minimum wage. How about his view of >> Obama as an American? How about his view on the Iraq war? Banning Muslims? >> The height and expense of his wall that will never be made anyway? > > Again, these are things taken out of the left-wing play book. All > twisted lies. LOL! So quoting him -- showing direct facts -- is a part of the "left-wing play book." Sure. Liberals tend to look at facts. Conservatives tend to call those facts "twisted lies" -- as you do, above. >> Maybe we can turn this around: what policy position has he NOT made major >> flip flops on? > > He hasn't. Just that the left-wing plus the bankers twist things around > to make it appear he is flip-flopping. A lie is still a lie. You did not name a topic. What policy position has he NOT made major flip flops on? There may be some but you cannot think of any. >>>> He has a strong presence... other than that he has few if any qualities to >>>> make him a leader at all. The only way to back him is to focus on emotion >>>> over logic. >>> >>> LOL!!! Trump is a leader, else he wouldn't have come this far. >> >> He is able to get emotion-based people to get excited. OK. > > Guffaw!!! As I've stated before, people are just sick and tired of the > same old garbage day after day. > All people are emotional, so using the excuse that he is emotional is a > rather goofy left-wing playbook nonsense, just like politically correct > speech. Do you want a Robot for president then? None of that is even relevant to what I said. >>>>>> He is an emotional child. >>>>> >>>>> So you think. >>>> >>>> The evidence backs this. >>> >>> What evidence? >>> You are now running in circles here. >> >> I already showed you where he speaks at the level of a 4th grader... and >> where he has no real substance. What else do you need? > > The hard facts, which you haven't given me yet. LOL! Keep in mind you deem direct quotes and video -- and NOT of some one-off comment or mis-statement -- as liberal lies. When you insist facts are lies we are not even starting from the same place to try to have a discussion. Maybe we can try again: will you accept direct proof as something other than lies? If so then we can move forward... if not I think there is little value to these rather lengthy posts we share. > Of course you'll talk this point over and over again. > >> >>>>>>> He wants to protect americans from our >>>>>>> corrupt government and banking system. >>>>> >>>>> So you'd rather get screwed continously by our gov. and banking system? >>>> >>>> I never said any such thing. >>> >>> But it is evident that you do want this. >>> I don't. >> >> Please do not try to speak for me. Thanks! >> > > Your words speak what you evidently want. > Now log this into the turn-over log so that your other CIA buddy can get > synched up this time. > LOL!!! > > Keep in mind I am speaking of proved facts: direct quotes and videos... and NOT of one-off comments or misstatements (everyone makes those). You deem those as something other than what they are. At that point you are simply insisting on denying reality. OK: so my views are based on reality and yours on a fantasy world where facts do not matter. Not sure what else needs to be said. -- * 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>
Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-26 22:09 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-09-27 09:01 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-09-27 12:08 -0500
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-27 10:17 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-09-27 12:13 -0600
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-27 11:23 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-09-27 15:07 -0600
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-27 14:13 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-09-27 16:51 -0600
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-09-28 01:16 +0200
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-09-27 18:28 -0600
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-09-28 09:49 +0200
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-09-28 08:04 -0500
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-09-28 15:42 +0200
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-09-28 09:16 -0600
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-09-28 09:14 -0600
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-27 17:28 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-09-28 07:02 -0500
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-27 17:17 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-09-27 18:30 -0600
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-27 18:07 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-09-28 09:22 -0600
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-28 08:52 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-09-28 11:15 -0600
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-28 11:13 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-09-28 14:11 -0600
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-28 13:45 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-09-29 10:40 -0600
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-29 10:21 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-09-29 21:45 -0600
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-09-30 03:55 +0000
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-29 21:08 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-09-30 08:31 -0400
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-30 08:23 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-09-30 14:35 -0600
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-30 15:38 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-10-01 01:05 +0200
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-30 17:04 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-29 21:04 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-09-28 07:55 -0400
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-09-28 09:32 -0600
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-09-28 12:22 -0400
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-09-28 11:23 -0600
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-28 10:35 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-09-28 14:21 -0600
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-28 13:48 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-09-29 10:46 -0600
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-29 10:24 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-09-29 11:17 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-09-29 21:55 -0600
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-29 21:26 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-09-30 08:31 -0400
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-30 08:22 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-09-28 15:12 -0400
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-28 12:24 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-09-28 14:24 -0600
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-28 13:49 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-09-29 10:47 -0600
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-29 10:25 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-09-29 21:56 -0600
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-29 21:31 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-09-28 17:53 -0400
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-28 15:07 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-28 20:50 -0400
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-28 18:02 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-09-28 19:35 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-09-28 19:52 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-09-29 12:25 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-09-29 13:41 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-09-29 10:53 -0600
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-09-29 10:51 -0600
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-09-29 13:03 -0400
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-29 10:50 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-09-29 21:59 -0600
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-29 21:05 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-29 11:02 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-09-29 22:00 -0600
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-29 21:06 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-09-28 19:30 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-09-28 19:58 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-28 10:30 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-28 08:56 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-09-28 11:18 -0600
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-28 10:32 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-09-28 14:19 -0600
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-28 13:47 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-09-29 10:43 -0600
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-29 11:01 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-09-29 21:52 -0600
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-29 21:30 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-09-29 12:54 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-09-29 13:38 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-09-28 15:07 -0400
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-28 12:27 -0700
Re: Today's Presidential Debate. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-28 08:45 -0700
Re: You can't fix dead. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-09-27 15:24 -0700
Re: You can't fix dead. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-09-27 16:54 -0600
Re: You can't fix dead. Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-09-28 01:15 +0200
Re: You can't fix dead. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-09-27 18:32 -0600
Re: You can't fix dead. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-27 18:04 -0700
Re: You can't fix dead. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-09-28 09:35 -0600
Re: You can't fix dead. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-28 16:49 -0400
Re: You can't fix dead. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-28 14:01 -0700
Re: You can't fix dead. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-09-29 10:57 -0600
Re: You can't fix dead. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-09-29 11:01 -0700
Re: You can't fix dead. Apollyon <adravirgo@gmail.com> - 2016-09-29 11:05 -0700
Re: You can't fix dead. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-09-29 11:45 -0700
Re: You can't fix dead. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-29 11:16 -0700
Re: You can't fix dead. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-09-29 11:55 -0700
Re: You can't fix dead. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-29 11:59 -0700
Re: You can't fix dead. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-09-29 17:22 -0700
Re: You can't fix dead. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-29 17:28 -0700
Re: You can't fix dead. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-09-29 18:38 -0700
Re: You can't fix dead. Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-09-30 01:47 +0000
Re: You can't fix dead. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-09-29 19:33 -0700
Re: You can't fix dead. Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-09-30 03:52 +0000
Re: You can't fix dead. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-29 21:07 -0700
Re: You can't fix dead. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-29 20:00 -0700
Re: You can't fix dead. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-09-29 21:52 -0700
Re: You can't fix dead. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-29 21:56 -0700
Re: You can't fix dead. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-29 19:04 -0700
Re: You can't fix dead. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-09-29 22:16 -0600
Re: You can't fix dead. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-29 21:31 -0700
Re: You can't fix dead. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-09-30 14:38 -0600
Re: You can't fix dead. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-30 15:39 -0700
Re: You can't fix dead. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-09-29 19:03 -0700
Re: You can't fix dead. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-09-30 06:43 -0500
Re: You can't fix dead. GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-09-29 22:13 -0600
Re: You can't fix dead. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-09-29 21:35 -0700
Re: Too much money makes you lazy, depressed. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-28 17:09 -0400
Re: Ben Jacoby posts via Windows 10. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-28 20:39 -0400
Re: You can't fix dead. "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-09-28 18:51 -0700
Re: You can't fix dead. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-09-28 19:03 -0700
slower, still noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-10-02 20:37 -0700
Re: slower, still Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-10-03 11:48 +0200
Re: slower, still noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-10-05 10:17 -0700
Re: You can't fix dead. Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-09-28 07:50 -0400
csiph-web