Hachoo The Stupid
in [Toyota]
|
Prev: Keeping my insurance rates low.. Thank you taxpayers..?
Next: please help me! i have a huge problem!
From: Hachiroku ハチロク on 14 Jun 2010 21:36 On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 18:07:25 -0700, Aratzio wrote: > On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 23:23:35 -0500, in the land of alt.aratzio, > "CharlesGrozny" <n5hsr(a)hotmail.com> got double secret probation for > writing: > >>aRATzero kicked your butt > > See, even that grozny thing thinks so. Speaking of snipping...
From: Aratzio on 14 Jun 2010 21:37 On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 21:42:02 -0700, in the land of alt.aratzio, Aratzio <a6ahlyv02(a)sneakemail.com> got double secret probation for writing: >>The problem here isn't how stupid *I* look, Chowderhead. > >Well, did you figure out that 1.1 Trillion is a good number? >Did you figure out that commercial health care fraud is 10 times that >of Medicare? > >Funny how you don't know anything. > >So why is closing foreign military bases "dumb". > >You still cant answer that one. *DING*
From: Aratzio on 14 Jun 2010 21:38 On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 21:42:02 -0700, in the land of alt.aratzio, Aratzio <a6ahlyv02(a)sneakemail.com> got double secret probation for writing: ><Hachoo proving once more his reading never makes sense> >>See above. YOU gave the figure of $8B over 10 years. > >"idea and will save 8billion a year." Ah, damn, you were wrong as usual.
From: JoeSpareBedroom on 14 Jun 2010 21:40 "Hachiroku ????" <Trueno(a)e86.GTS> wrote in message news:CLARn.44819$rU6.18008(a)newsfe10.iad... > On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 21:26:07 -0400, JoeSpareBedroom wrote: > >> "pandora" <pandora(a)peak.org> wrote in message >> news:UMmdnQtYrarMS4vRnZ2dnUVZ_oKdnZ2d(a)scnresearch.com... >>> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 20:40:54 -0400, JoeSpareBedroom wrote: >>> >>>> "Hachiroku ????" <Trueno(a)e86.GTS> wrote in message >>>> news:2VzRn.14001$3y2.8187(a)newsfe11.iad... >>>>> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:38:47 -0400, JoeSpareBedroom wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> "Hachiroku ????" <Trueno(a)e86.GTS> wrote in message >>>>>> news:Q_yRn.30820$yx.25938(a)newsfe13.iad... >>>>>>> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 18:25:34 -0500, pandora wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 14:55:48 -0600, ���hw?�f wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ah wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 6/13/2010 10:51 AM, ���hw?�f wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> JoeSpareBedroom wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> "Hachiroku ????" <Trueno(a)e86.GTS> wrote in message >>>>>>>>>>>> news:7eVQn.76345$HG1.11538(a)newsfe21.iad... >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 18:10:25 -0400, JoeSpareBedroom wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Hachiroku ????" <Trueno(a)e86.GTS> wrote in message >>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:zvTQn.57409$h57.40776(a)newsfe22.iad... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 12 Jun 2010 16:44:54 -0500, pandora wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 22:08:24 -0700, Aratzio wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is so nice when the facts are ALWAYS on my side. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We can save 8 billion a year just by reducing and closing >>>>>>>>>>>> foreign >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bases >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A sizeable chunk of change to be sure! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We're talking a President who wastes $80B a year. Big deal. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.comw.org/pda/fulltext/1006SDTFreport.pdf Reduce >>>>>>>>>>>> troops in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Europe and Asia, cut end strength by 50,000 $80 b. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Interesting reading. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Who is the last president you thought was terrific? >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> You have to ask? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Yes. Who is the last president you thought was terrific? Type >>>>>>>>>>>> the name. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> James Earl Carter. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Word. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Heathen! Apostate! >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> He told the people what they *needed* to hear, not what they >>>>>>>>> wanted to hear. People will do any number of things to delude >>>>>>>>> themselves and Reagan offered up a nostalgic veiw of a once >>>>>>>>> prosperous Uhmurikuh and the sheeple went for it. The fact that he >>>>>>>>> couldnt deliver on it was less important than his ability to play >>>>>>>>> to their beliefs. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Indeed you are correct, sir. The reality of the times was far >>>>>>>> different than what Reagan tried to convince us it was. I always >>>>>>>> thought of him as the wizard in Oz, all smoke and mirrors. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Word. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> See answer above. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Reagan was your favorite president, even though he fed you (and the >>>>>> country) bland cream of wheat diluted with way too much water. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I did quite well during the 80's. A lot of factors, but Reagan freeing >>>>> up business to do business had a lot to do with it. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> How do YOU think he "freed up business to do business"? You said it, >>>> so you should be able to support the comment with a one or two sentence >>>> explanation. >>> >>> Good luck with that! >> >> >> I know. It's sort of minor hobby, trying to get him to put things in his >> own words. I already know his response. "If you don't know, why should I >> explain it to you?" Translated, that means "I heard someone else say >> Reagan freed up business, but I have no clue what they meant." > > If you could think your way out of a wet sock, it's be different. > When someone asks you to back up your OPINION, it's YOUR job to think and speak. Maybe you should stop parroting things you heard from other sources, unless you're capable of explaining why you repeat these things.
From: Aratzio on 14 Jun 2010 21:40
On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 21:42:02 -0700, in the land of alt.aratzio, Aratzio <a6ahlyv02(a)sneakemail.com> got double secret probation for writing: >>You brought it up. You explain how it does. > >I did, at least twice, you didn't get it then do you imagine having it >explained to you a third time will be the charm and you will grasp the >utterly and implicitly simple concept of not spending US taxpayer >money to subsidize foreign countries defense budgets? > >So, whil you are here, you going to explain why you think closing >bases in Europe is "dumb". You can support that, right? You know the >facts of the situation and why those bases are there, right? > >What do you suppose those bases in Europe protect? Still got nothing, do ya. *DING* |