Tom Tancredo
in [Golf]
|
From: William Clark on 16 Feb 2010 08:16 In article <73e3c061-d98d-4798-941e-62f2b9698a57(a)k41g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>, Dinosaur_Sr <frostback2002(a)att.net> wrote: > On Feb 13, 12:28�pm, William Clark <wcla...(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> > wrote: > > In article > > <b19f4efa-7bb1-4b8f-a32b-cda057bc9...(a)g28g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>, > > > > > > > > �Dinosaur_Sr <frostback2...(a)att.net> wrote: > > > On Feb 13, 10:39�am, William Clark <wcla...(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> > > > wrote: > > > > In article > > > > <5e353fb8-3c85-4195-9a10-94a54f990...(a)u9g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>, > > > > > > �Dinosaur_Sr <frostback2...(a)att.net> wrote: > > > > > On Feb 12, 11:32�am, William Clark <cl...(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio- > > > > > state.edu> wrote: > > > > > > In article > > > > > > <3cebfbd0-3631-4c3a-a13d-daa58a9cd...(a)q27g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>, > > > > > > > > �Dinosaur_Sr <frostback2...(a)att.net> wrote: > > > > > > > On Feb 12, 11:12�am, assimil...(a)borg.org wrote: > > > > > > > > On 12-Feb-2010, William Clark > > > > > > > > <cl...(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio-state.edu> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > >Oh, bullshit, Jack. We've been over that again and again - > > > > > > > > > > >he's as > > > > > > > > > > >dumb > > > > > > > > > > > > >as paint. > > > > > > > > > > > > I can't wait to see your Yale degree or your Harvard > > > > > > > > > > degree. > > > > > > > > > > > Actually, it's from Oxford. Game, set, and match. > > > > > > > > > > it is a piece of paper & will not substitute for wisdom or > > > > > > > > character. > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > bill-o > > > > > > > > > Oxford is no big deal anyways. 3 years to get a Ph.D. You go to a > > > > > > > lecture now and then and write some sort of paper at the end of > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > year and if the good ole boys like it, you advance. Totally lame, > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > outdated, at least in science. An Ohio State Ph.D. in science > > > > > > > prepares > > > > > > > you 1000X better than does Oxford. > > > > > > > > Of course. Except that Oxford doesn't give Ph. Ds, it gives D. > > > > > > Phils. > > > > > > Can't expect you to know that, though, just like your "materials > > > > > > science" journal publications. You are a self proclaimed expert on > > > > > > everything, and master of nothing. > > > > > > > �I suppose you need BS like that to fall back on when all else has > > > > > been lost! No doubt they don't give B.Sc's either, they give "Science > > > > > Baccalaureates"! > > > > > > Dino, this is simply pathetic - even for you. > > > > > Really? Again, if that sort of BS is all you got to fall back on, you > > > are the one who is pathetic. I'm not claiming anything other than > > > Oxford is, and has been no big deal in science for quite some time, > > > which is a fact to me. > > > > Well, that might warrant a rebuttal if it came from a scientist, but > > from someone with no funded research and only eight "publications", it > > is like having a gnat land on your neck. Swatted away in a second. Sad > > again. > > You don't have to be a scientist in any sense to see the tremendous > decline in Oxford...you, for example..... Cite? Proof? Oh, I see, the little green-eyed monster again . . .
From: William Clark on 16 Feb 2010 08:15 In article <7tubdtF1ekU1(a)mid.individual.net>, "MNMikeW" <MNMiikkew(a)aol.com> wrote: > "William Clark" <wclark2(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> wrote in message > news:wclark2-0A8EC3.19242415022010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu... > > In article <7tte2tFus6U1(a)mid.individual.net>, > > "MNMikeW" <MNMiikkew(a)aol.com> wrote: > > > >> "William Clark" <wclark2(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> wrote in message > >> news:wclark2-B3D61E.12232213022010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu... > >> > In article > >> > <b33ef4c0-206d-44a8-a5b2-84e3e97ccad8(a)h2g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>, > >> > Dinosaur_Sr <frostback2002(a)att.net> wrote: > >> > > >> >> On Feb 13, 10:39 am, William Clark <wcla...(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> > >> >> wrote: > >> >> > In article > >> >> > <6ea6aa0b-dd0f-4933-bfd0-2b763861e...(a)b2g2000yqi.googlegroups.com>, > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > Dinosaur_Sr <frostback2...(a)att.net> wrote: > >> >> > > On Feb 12, 2:01 pm, William Clark <cl...(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio- > >> >> > > state.edu> wrote: > >> >> > > > In article <7tljlbFg5...(a)mid.individual.net>, > >> >> > > >> >> > > > "dene" <d...(a)remove.ipns.com> wrote: > >> >> > > > > "William Clark" <cl...(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio-state.edu> wrote > >> >> > > > > in > >> >> > > > > message > >> >> > > > >news:clark-13ED1E.09503912022010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu. > >> >> > > > >.. > >> >> > > > > > In article <hl3k94$33...(a)speranza.aioe.org>, > >> >> > > > > > "Moderate" <no_spam_(a)no_mail.com> wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> > > > > > > "dene" <d...(a)remove.ipns.com> wrote in message > >> >> > > > > > >news:7tjvqjFuvU1(a)mid.individual.net... > >> >> > > >> >> > > > > > > > "William Clark" <wcla...(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> wrote in > >> >> > > > > > > > message > >> >> > > > > > > >news:wclark2-C14662.20553411022010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-st > >> >> > > > > > > >ate > >> >> > > > > > > >.ed > >> >> > > > > > > >u... > >> >> > > >> >> > > > > > > >> Oh, bullshit, Jack. We've been over that again and > >> >> > > > > > > >> again - > >> >> > > > > > > >> he's as > >> >> > > > > dumb > >> >> > > > > > > >> as paint. > >> >> > > >> >> > > > > > > > Hmmm....what does that say about the intelligence of > >> >> > > > > > > > Gore, > >> >> > > > > > > > Kerry, or > >> >> > > > > the > >> >> > > > > > > > American electorate who elected this dummy. > >> >> > > >> >> > > > > > > I always enjoy watching idiots like Clark talk about other > >> >> > > > > > > people's > >> >> > > > > > > intelligence. What a boob. > >> >> > > >> >> > > > > > Yu and Intelligence don;t belong in the same sentence. Go > >> >> > > > > > find > >> >> > > > > > some. > >> >> > > >> >> > > > > I'm waiting for an intelligent answer to my question, Clark. > >> >> > > >> >> > > > > -Greg > >> >> > > >> >> > > > Well, Bush is the one they elected (supposedly), so it is a > >> >> > > > frightening > >> >> > > > indictment of the Americn electorate. > >> >> > > >> >> > > Hardly in the same league as electing any Labour Party candidate > >> >> > > in > >> >> > > any context! > >> >> > > >> >> > Get back on your meds - quickly. > >> >> > >> >> So you agree with me that electing Labour party candidates is a > >> >> frightening indictment of the British electorate. > >> > > >> > No, I agree that you need to start taking your medication again. You > >> > are > >> > becoming delusionally schizophrenic. > >> > >> Classic Clark denial. > > > > Have you learnt the difference between Barbara Boxer and Diane Feinstein > > yet? > > There really is not much difference at all. Certainly not in what passes for your mind, anyway.
From: William Clark on 16 Feb 2010 08:19 In article <7tualgFttbU1(a)mid.individual.net>, "MNMikeW" <MNMiikkew(a)aol.com> wrote: > "Carbon" <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message > news:4b79e07b$0$4847$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com... > > On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 11:40:01 -0600, MNMikeW wrote: > >> "William Clark" <wclark2(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> wrote in message > >> news:wclark2-56C41F.21534213022010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu... > >>> In article <MPG.25e0f00f67ae0047989bb6(a)news.giganews.com>, BAR > >>> <screw(a)you.com> wrote: > >>>> In article <wclark2-9805B4.14134813022010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio- > >>>> state.edu>, wclark2(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com says... > >>>> > In article <MPG.25e0b2f129e9b2f4989bb5(a)news.giganews.com>, BAR > >>>> > <screw(a)you.com> wrote: > >>>> > > In article <wclark2-3D25E9.12292413022010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio- > >>>> > > state.edu>, wclark2(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com says... > >>>> > > > In article <de2e5548-0783-4608-a88a- > >>>> > > > d906c877ba54(a)36g2000yqu.googlegroups.com>, Dinosaur_Sr > >>>> > > > <frostback2002(a)att.net> wrote: > >>>> > > > > On Feb 13, 11:05 am, Carbon <nob...(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> > >>>> > > > > wrote: > >>>> > > > > > On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 07:18:11 -0600, Moderate wrote: > >>>> > > > > > > "Carbon" <nob...(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in > >>>> > > > > > > message > >>>> > > > > > >news:4b7497cf$0$5110$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com... > >>>> > > > > > >> On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 15:19:44 -0800, dene wrote: > >>>> > > > > > >>> <bkni...(a)conramp.net> wrote in message > >>>> > > > > > >>>news:heu8n5t5m6bopoc55sburstujj9897ii1t(a)4ax.com... > >>>> > > > > > >>>> On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 13:31:23 -0800 (PST), Dinosaur_Sr > >>>> > > > > > >>>> <frostback2...(a)att.net> wrote: > >>>> > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> You're kidding. Biden wasted Palin in debate, and > >>>> > > > > > >>>> he's a lightweight. She's a joke that is riding a > >>>> > > > > > >>>> wave of simple minds. > >>>> > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> In your dreams. Palin did just fine with Blabben. > >>>> > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >> She was drilled night and day going into the debate and > >>>> > > > > > >> managed to repeat a bunch of memorized sound bites, > >>>> > > > > > >> mostly without embarrassing herself. It's not like she > >>>> > > > > > >> did well. > >>>> > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > Well I guess that qualifies her to be President. Obama > >>>> > > > > > > is nothing more than a talking head. He is the Commander > >>>> > > > > > > in Chief, yet he doesn't know what a Corpsman is. > >>>> > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > Watch the recent live unscripted debate between Obama and > >>>> > > > > > the GOP. > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > Debate? A debate has a form, that was one person asking a > >>>> > > > > question, another replying and then moving on to some other > >>>> > > > > question. Hardly a debate. In that form there is no > >>>> > > > > viewpoint expressed other than that of the person answering > >>>> > > > > the questions. A joke maybe, but no debate. > >>>> > > > > >>>> > > > Then how come SarahQuitter couldn't manage even a scripted Q&A > >>>> > > > without scrawling notes on her palm like some 3rd grader? > >>>> > > > >>>> > > Why not ask Barbara Boxer? > >>>> > > >>>> > Because I am asking you. > >>>> > >>>> Again, missing the point Billy. If writing on your hand is good > >>>> enough for Barbara Boxer it should be good enough for everyone? > >>> > >>> So you do agree about SarahQuitter, then? Good. > >> > >> Clark agrees that Barbara Boxer is a 3rd grader. > > > > You know the picture of her with writing on her hand is from like 1990, > > correct? > > Of course that makes it all better. Better that your ability to get the facts right, apparently.
From: William Clark on 16 Feb 2010 08:17 In article <4b79e8e2$0$4893$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com>, Carbon <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote: > On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 19:31:40 -0500, BAR wrote: > > In article <4b79dfb3$0$4851$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com>, > > nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com says... > >> On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 08:23:24 -0500, BAR wrote: > >>> In article <4b7893f6$0$5103$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com>, > >>> nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com says... > >>> > >>>> You haven't commented on Obama's performance in the recent live > >>>> televised debate. Why is that? Could it be that you're so desperate > >>>> to believe Obama is helpless without a teleprompter that you block > >>>> out all evidence to the contrary? Perhaps your obvious bias is > >>>> influencing your predictions about Obama's favorability ratings. > >>> > >>> Ok, I'll play. It was not a debate. It was a ask a quesiton and > >>> receive an answer session. > >> > >> Correct. It was actually tougher than a debate. They were lined up > >> with carefully prepared question after carefully prepared question, > >> and they still got nowhere. I am quite certain that the GOP will > >> never invite Obama to a live, unscripted television debate of this > >> type again. > > > > Here we go again. What is your definition of a debate? > > Another definition request. You're like one of those kids at the > national spelling bee who can't spell the word. > > > What Obama did was not debating. Obama was asked a question, Obama's > > response was whatever he wanted to talk about. The questioner did not > > get the oppourtunity to ask a follow-up question. Hell, even a press > > conference has more in commone with a debate than Obama not directly > > responding to the questions asked by the Republicans. > > On the other hand he didn't get to ask them questions, so the ball was > always in his court. The went after him with carefully prepared > questions for over an hour and got nowhere. Not a teleprompter in sight, > which ought to put an end to that particular fantasy. Nor anything written on his palm, either.
From: William Clark on 16 Feb 2010 08:18
In article <alangbaker-D7BDF6.23294115022010(a)news.shawcable.com>, Alan Baker <alangbaker(a)telus.net> wrote: > In article > <wclark2-6A0626.09040209022010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>, > William Clark <wclark2(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> wrote: > > > In article <alangbaker-09E570.11121808022010(a)news.shawcable.com>, > > Alan Baker <alangbaker(a)telus.net> wrote: > > > > > In article > > > <clark-F7529F.08023708022010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>, > > > William Clark <clark(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio-state.edu> wrote: > > > > > > > In article <alangbaker-EA28F9.19091307022010(a)news.shawcable.com>, > > > > Alan Baker <alangbaker(a)telus.net> wrote: > > > > > > > > > In article > > > > > <clark-D65648.22083507022010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>, > > > > > William Clark <clark(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio-state.edu> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > In article <tTHbn.75092$JE2.71270(a)newsfe09.iad>, > > > > > > assimilate(a)borg.org > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 7-Feb-2010, William Clark > > > > > > > <clark(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio-state.edu> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But if one guy with money will vote to evict ten poor people, > > > > > > > > we > > > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > call that "democracy"? I don't think so. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > eviction is a result of not meeting one's contractual obligations > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > some vote taken. > > > > > > > > > > > > No, it can also be the result of someone buying out and tearing up > > > > > > a > > > > > > valid contract of a fully paid up tenant. > > > > > > > > > > > > You need to get out more. > > > > > > > > > > Give a concrete example. > > > > > > > > Alan, grow up a little - you only have to read your local papers to see > > > > incidents like this. You are starting to sound like Bertie. > > > > > > Come on William: > > > > > > Give a concrete example of how you can "buy out" a valid contract except > > > with the other party to it... > > > > Number one, you give people a contract with a loophole in. If you are > > poor, you don't read/understand the fine print, and you can't afford a > > lawyer. Or. in the case of a legal agreement, you simply harass the > > renter, and convince them that they do not have legal rights that they > > actually do. That is a very common tactic, since in many cases the > > renters do not have access to the kind of legal advice they need. > > Which has precisely nothing to do with your claim that by "buying out" a > contract the new contract holder can tear it up. > > Try again. > > > > > A few typical examples from New Jersey: > > > > http://tiny.cc/8LLDQ > > > > > > > > > > > > > And then deal with the fact that you've assumed that those tenants > > > > > will > > > > > have no vote... > > > > > > > > No, I am assuming they are effectively disenfranchised because someone > > > > has multiple votes and cancels them out and then has additional votes > > > > that count. > > > > > > Sorry, but no. No one has discussed the scale at which additional votes > > > would be alloted, so you don't know that one person's vote can > > > "effectively disenfranchise" ten. > > > > Well, honestly this whole discussion is a waste of bandwidth, since as > > you say, no one is actually coming clean about what they intend, and it > > is pie in the sky anyway. I'd rather talk golf. > > Fine. > > Just don't pretend that you've done any honest discussion to this point. Day late and a dollar short again, Alan. |