When Rush Limbaugh announced he was completely leaving New York, putting his Fifth Avenue condo on the market. Gov. David Paterson joked after a speech on Thursday that "If I knew that would be the result, I would’ve thought about the taxes earlier." Over at Radio Equalizer, blogger Brian Maloney reports that Limbaugh is much more popular than Paterson at this point:
Rush Limbaugh now ranks number one in New York City among all listeners 12 and older. According to Arbitron, he has an average of 693,000 Big Apple listeners, with the number expected to grow as a result of his recent showdown with the White House....
Contrast that with Governor Paterson, who according to a recent Siena poll, has seen his popularity plunge. Just 19% of voters now approve of his performance. Only 14% would like to see him elected to a full term, according to the Daily News:
ALBANY - Gov. Paterson's job performance ratings have crashed thorough the floor, with less than one in five New Yorkers saying he's doing well, a new poll shows.
Just 19% of those polled gave him a positive rating, while 78% turned thumbs down, the Siena College poll found. That's down from 51% positive and 45% negative in the same poll just two months ago.
Maloney reported that Limbaugh responded this way: "Well, it has happened again, folks. I've always said if you place a bag of manure in front of a Democrat they will certainly step in it, and New York Governor David Paterson certainly has."
—Tim Graham is Director of Media Analysis at the Media Research Center.




















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
This brought a great
April 3, 2009 - 15:03 ET by bigtimerThis brought a great big smile to my face Tim...what a great way to report this news!
My tag-line fits Patterson along with the rest of his ilk to a TEE!
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
Whoa!
April 3, 2009 - 15:03 ET by BlondePatterson is obviously as astute as he looks!
I hope he fails, too.
J, I was going to praise the picture poster, somewhere lmao...
April 3, 2009 - 15:28 ET by upcountrywaterP.R.I.N.T. Money 30 sec YT
I know, K.
April 3, 2009 - 15:35 ET by BlondeIt was a cheap shot, but I couldn't help myself, LOL.
I hope he fails, too.
You want a cheap shot?
April 3, 2009 - 18:12 ET by jdlybrandIt was announced today that New York Governor Patterson and music legend Stevie Wonder will play a benefit tennis match at the site of the US Open to benefit oppressed minorities.
The title will be "Endless Love".
Hey, Paterson
April 3, 2009 - 15:06 ET by Jman449See if Rush cares.
stopping the motor of the world
April 3, 2009 - 15:07 ET by katainkentthey have no idea what they are doing.
k, it's all down hill from here, coasting on forefathers wealth
April 3, 2009 - 19:02 ET by upcountrywaterReturning to the good ol days of slavery
blood sweat and tears.
P.R.I.N.T. Money 30 sec YT
CT Property Owner
April 3, 2009 - 15:16 ET by sawing battaDear Governor,
Thank you for alienating those evil "rich" people in NYState and NYC. Plenty of them are now beginning to look for property outside of NY and, in turn, boosting the real estate values here in CT!
~That picture
April 3, 2009 - 15:30 ET by choselife3xIs just too much.
That high-pitched scream you hear is the troll under my heel.
when are libs going to
April 3, 2009 - 15:35 ET by kangaroowhen are libs going to learn, you have to pick your fights, more advertising for rush, crikeys they don't get it, Newsflash............. walgreens is pulling the obama chia,it is being pulled from the shelves and is no longer for sale in all 6000 stores across the country saying they have had complaints that the obama chia is racist,
kangaroo... Now that is
April 3, 2009 - 15:47 ET by bigtimerkangaroo...
Now that is hair-splitting hilarious!
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
it's true, they just had the
April 3, 2009 - 15:53 ET by kangarooit's true, they just had the head honcho of walgreens on schnitt, they broke the story, they had liseners (cant spell that) call in saying the register said no, we can't sell that Oh the first bit was funny 2
My only problem with what
April 3, 2009 - 15:37 ET by mattmMy only problem with what Rush said is: if you put a bag of manure in front of a Democrat, how can you tell which is which?
rush didn't say that! he
April 3, 2009 - 15:39 ET by kangaroorush didn't say that! he said if you put a bag of manure in front of a dem they will surely step in it, and I got a good laugh out of that
Hellooooo! I know what he
April 3, 2009 - 16:05 ET by mattmHellooooo! I know what he said... I was listening when he said it....
I'm just wondering how anyone can tell the difference between the two...
I was listening as well,
April 3, 2009 - 16:14 ET by kangarooI was listening as well, maybe he said both, cause I had powerline static at the time
No, he did not say both.
April 3, 2009 - 16:20 ET by mattmNo, he did not say both. And I did not say he said anything else. I was just trying to be funny.... along the lines of the old classic: "the only difference between a Democrat and a bag of manure is the bag."
Have a nice weekend.....
okee dokey, have a good
April 3, 2009 - 16:29 ET by kangaroookee dokey, have a good weekend
The difference is...
April 3, 2009 - 18:16 ET by jdlybrand...the bag.
Hehehe
April 3, 2009 - 16:11 ET by avenarI guess we'd just have to see whichever that would do the 'stepping'. :D
doesn't matter what way you
April 3, 2009 - 16:19 ET by kangaroodoesn't matter what way you look at it, or what was said, they are both true,
Beggars should not be choosy
April 3, 2009 - 16:02 ET by Franklins_LockePatterson better watch who says he doesn’t want taxes from. With only 40.000 of over 7 million who live in NYC that pay taxes, he is going to need every taxed citizen he can get, especially since they have vilified the ones who do pay taxes, the wealthy.
http://franklinslocke.blogspot.com/
Yes, if only the five top
April 3, 2009 - 17:12 ET by BDYes, if only the five top tax payers were to leave and promise to stay away for ten years, NYC would never recover.
CONVOY..........
April 3, 2009 - 16:14 ET by DanoThe convoy of people leaving NY to escape the coming insane tax increase has already started.
The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.
– Thomas Jefferson
same with californee, well
April 3, 2009 - 16:22 ET by kangaroosame with californee, well granma they are thinking about taxing our weed we are outta here, the sun is to bright were is me sunnies
Gov. Paterson and Rush
April 3, 2009 - 16:30 ET by Darwin AkbarIt was instructive to read the comments to the NYT story on this...80% were, of course, open in their hatred of Rush and their glee that another elected official would use his bully pulpit to attack a private citizen that dared criticize him. There were plenty of cheap cracks about his weight and drug problem etc. (although I suspect the same Rush-haters would welcome convicted child-molester Roman Polanski with open arms).
There were about 20% who pointed out that "rich" people like Rush were the ones who ate in the fancy restaurants, tipped the doormen, etc....and driving them out of town is economic suicide (anyone seen the theater district lately, with its shuttered theaters and closed restaurants?).
Here is what I posted:
The only things Paterson ever did that were fiscally responsible were (A) to have his extra-marital relations at the NYC Days' Inn (instead of the Mayflower); and (B) to only put one of his mistresses on the State payroll (the other is on the NYC payroll, last time I looked). Jon Stewart, David Paterson and the majority of those who posted here can sneer at Rush all you want. You're the ones who will now pony up for Paterson's new tax hikes. So who has the last laugh? Like in California, New York and New Jersey will soon empty out, as those with any ambition and a college education will flee your rotting infrastructure and oppressive taxation, only to be replaced by people who have neither of those. Have fun, chumps.... and will the last Republican leaving NY please turn of f the lights?
They don't need to turn off
April 3, 2009 - 19:10 ET by Ryan Mc.They don't need to turn off the lights, liberal environmental policies will take care of that.
That should make Algore & his greenies happy!
April 3, 2009 - 20:12 ET by Cape ConservativeIt is no dishonor to be in a minority in the cause of liberty and virtue. ~ Sam Adams
Yeah, well...
April 3, 2009 - 17:54 ET byIf popularity equalled quality, french fries would be health food.
Braille AS
April 3, 2009 - 18:00 ET by slickwillie2001Heard today on the blogs re Paterson -I guess there's no braille version of Atlas Shrugged.
When the last productive person leaves New York....
April 3, 2009 - 18:28 ET by R D Helm...to flee what we all know are going to be even more confiscatory taxes, I say we give what is left of that state to Canada.
I wonder how many wealthy libs in that state have been audited 12 years in a row, as has Rush.
-Dave
This coup has gone on long enough. The time to put it down is NOW.
NYC to RD Helm: DROP DEAD!
April 3, 2009 - 20:00 ET byhttp://en.wikipedia....
The city has a strong imbalance of payments with the federal and
state governments. New York City receives 83 cents in services for
every $1 it sends to Washington in taxes (or annually sends $13.1
billion more to Washington than it receives back). The city also sends
an additional $11.1 billion more each year to the state of New York
than it receives back.[3] The city's total tax burden is among the highest in the United States.[4]
...
April 3, 2009 - 20:06 ET by katainkent....
What's your point?
April 3, 2009 - 20:06 ET by RESTLESS 1If I were a citizen of NYC, I'd move too.
(I know, I know, they'd be glad to get rid of me.)
"This
liberal would be all about socialize -- uh, uh, would be about
basically taking over and the government running all of your companies."-Maxine Waters 2008
INDEED
April 3, 2009 - 23:05 ET byOne more apartment available for the real new yorkers
doofuses
April 3, 2009 - 18:37 ET by owlpelletsIf any of these doofuses were cast into the private sector to survive they would die in days. Rush is a class example of what anyone with desire, ambition, and guts used to be able to do in America. The people with Ivy education absolutely fear and resent anyone succesful from outside their "smart people" persona.
Don't blame me....I voted for Palin...
California
April 3, 2009 - 18:51 ET by owlpelletsWe have many people escaping from California to Idaho. They have know knowlege of how to drive in snow, no common sense, and every conversation tout "how they did it in California." Hopefully, the economy will tank enough under O that the illegals will move South and the Californians will go back home giving us unenlightened hicks our state back. The only blue county houses Sun Valley where the likes of Kerry, Shriver, and Hollywood spend their idle moments. Local businesses are saddled with funding state of the art bike paths etc. It is where Kerry's "family owns its "SUV's."
Don't blame me....I voted for Palin...
Sorry for the typos but I'm
April 3, 2009 - 18:53 ET by owlpelletsSorry for the typos but I'm handling a bird dog pup while typing.
Don't blame me....I voted for Palin...
Hey owl...fellow
April 3, 2009 - 19:21 ET by bigtimerHey owl...fellow neighbor...I know about Idaho, it's been the same here in Montana, let alone all over the NW...look what they have done with Wa., Ore., recently Co., they are working on Utah...it's the plan Stan and has been for decades.
Bird dog pup eh?
Makes me smile...
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
bt
April 3, 2009 - 19:42 ET by owlpelletsFlatcoat pup. Doing it right this time. Good trainer. He is doing live pigeons and it makes my heart soar. I had a horrible paragliding injury in 2003. Spent 2 years in a chair and started to get some return to my legs. Went with the trainer yesterday and walked almost 2 miles. I may get to hunt upland birds by fall without the gun knocking me down. I am very blessed as to what return has come to my legs No stem cells but my own.
Don't blame me....I voted for Palin...
Wow owl...I so moved
April 3, 2009 - 19:54 ET by bigtimerWow owl...
I'm so moved by your story here ...bless you and yours and may your success continue to be with you my friend.
Big hug to your faithful friend the pup to-boot!
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
This shows the stupidity and naivete of some liberals
April 3, 2009 - 18:52 ET by c5thenIt's not just Rush who is leaving the City. It will be a steady stream of those who can afford to, and have the option of, living elsewhere. In short, it will be the bulk of your tax base that relocates.
Hey, I got the wrong "CHANGE"!
www.loyaltoliberty.com
Yeah, I wouldn't count on that...
April 3, 2009 - 18:59 ET byNYC can't build housing fast enough to accommodate all the people who want to move IN.
Too bad none are
April 3, 2009 - 19:00 ET by owlpelletsToo bad none are producers.
Don't blame me....I voted for Palin...
"Producers"?
April 3, 2009 - 19:24 ET byYou mean, like, they don't manufacture anything?
Yup
April 3, 2009 - 19:35 ET by owlpelletsJobs....someone needs to produce to create the tax capital to fund the public sector.
Don't blame me....I voted for Palin...
pi, owlpellets is referring to productive members of society...
April 3, 2009 - 19:38 ET by R D Helm...not the useless and worthless among us, say, like third-generation welfare brood mares and the like, who have figured out a way to use the government to confiscate at gunpoint ever inreasing chunks of the incomes of the productive, just so that they can sit around on their fat asses doing nothing and living off the efforts of others.
-Dave
This coup has gone on long enough. The time to put it down is NOW.
Oh yeah?!?! Suck on DIS!
April 3, 2009 - 19:44 ET byhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_of_New_York_City
The city has a strong imbalance of payments with the federal and
state governments. New York City receives 83 cents in services for
every $1 it sends to Washington in taxes (or annually sends $13.1
billion more to Washington than it receives back). The city also sends
an additional $11.1 billion more each year to the state of New York
than it receives back.[3] The city's total tax burden is among the highest in the United States.[4]
ooooh pi can LINK, Yes taxes are paid in NYC duh,
April 3, 2009 - 20:07 ET by upcountrywater40,000 tax payers, cover the other 8 million!
BLOOMBERG:
One percent of the people that live in the city, the households that
file in the city pay something like 50% of the taxes. In a city that's
about 40,000 people so, you know, a handful left, any raise would make
it revenue neutral. The question is, "What's fair?" If one percent are
paying 50% of the taxes, you want to make it even more? A little over
half the people, half the households who file tax returns don't pay any
taxes. And about 30% of the households that file get a credit from the
government. The government sends them a check. That's the Earned Income
Tax Credit.
Forty thousand people in New York City are paying 50% of the taxes.
Forty thousand people, and he's worried that this state tax increase
will force some of them to leave -- and if they do, it will wipe out
whatever new revenue is generated by a tax increase. Amazing!
P.R.I.N.T. Money 30 sec YT
Sorry...
April 3, 2009 - 20:14 ET bybut Rush Limp-Balls is not a valid source. Show me the stats...
...and it still won't change the fact that NYC WAY outproduces most of the rest of the nation.
Suck on DAT
pi that funny while you post wikipedia...
April 3, 2009 - 20:46 ET by upcountrywaterBlumb said it, RUSH PLAYED A CLIP OF HIM SAYING THAT.
Bloomberg:
Charging that it’s “easy to rile against the rich,” Mayor Bloomberg warned yesterday that the income-tax increases being considered for the wealthiest New Yorkers would drive them from the city.
“One percent of the households that file in this city pay
something like 50 percent of the taxes. In the city, that’s something
like 40,000 people. If a handful left, any raise would make it revenue
neutral,” the billionaire mayor said on his weekly radio show.
“The question is what’s fair. If 1 percent are paying 50
percent of the taxes, you want to make it even more? Anybody below that
1 percent, no taxes?”
geez pi, yes taxes are being paid...by one per cent of the top earners. hello.. is that fair?
P.R.I.N.T. Money 30 sec YT
Have you looked
April 3, 2009 - 22:54 ET by...comparatively, at the amount of money being made by that top percent vs the rest of the city? F*#K YEAH it's fair!
Just checking pi
April 3, 2009 - 23:50 ET by upcountrywaterSO HOW MUCH DO YOU GET FROM THE WEALTHY ?
IN THE FORM OF DLA ?
P.R.I.N.T. Money 30 sec YT
Wow
April 4, 2009 - 11:23 ET byFunny. Ha Ha.
I have a slightly different viewpoint
April 4, 2009 - 01:55 ET by katainkentIn the intrest of disclosure - We have 3 children and own a home. We pay effectively 2.5% of our income into federal taxes. I don't think it is the job/duty of the wealthy to pay the lion's share of the taxes. Do I want to pay more taxes? No. Anymore than I would give money to a wastrel relative. We use what little discretionary time & income we have to give to local charities of our choosing. What I want is for the Government to stop spending money and lower the taxes. The rich do not get money because I do not. They do not get it by stealing from me. Their money is not mine to have.
That is my viewpoint. Since you took the time to share yours.
Pssst... where do you
April 3, 2009 - 20:12 ET by NL207Pssst... where do you suppose you get enough fresh water and electricity from to power, shower and flush that stink hole down at the mouth of the Hudson?
How much of this provender do you think that stink hole actually pays for?
Ummm...
April 3, 2009 - 20:17 ET byWe get it from the New York Reservoir. Where do you THINK we get it?!?!
And where do you get yours?
And where is that filled
April 3, 2009 - 20:29 ET by NL207And where is that filled from? Rain barrels in Central Park?
Let me help you. NYC steals most of its water from Upstate New York using its political clout in Albany.
We get our water from our own backyard. I'd like to see NYC get theirs the same way. It would give those liberal nincompoops some appreciation of what they have been taking from others by force for years.
As for its electricity, NYC gets a good chunk of that the same way it gets the water: at the point of the tax collector's gun.
LOL
April 3, 2009 - 20:33 ET byToo funny.
We're discussing what NYC contributes to the national economy, and you revert to 18th century water rights?!?!
HA! HAHAhahhahaHA!@!!#
WE BUILT THE RESERVOIR!@! It's OUR WATER!!!
Oh GAWD, PLEASE!@!#
Those water rights were,
April 3, 2009 - 20:59 ET by NL207Those water rights were, and still are, taken by political force. Their theft represents an unaccounted dint in that balance of payments you were talking about. If that and the other resoucre NYC takes at less than fair market prices from the surrounding region were fairly accounted, the 'balance of payments' between NYC and the rest of the country would look quite different.
The real value of that water far exceeds the cost of the plumbing used to steal it, and NYC does not pay a farthing for the water, beyond the cost of maintaining the aqueduct. Your talk is no different than any other looters and pillagers of the past. You have zero appreciation for the value of the resource you so blythely loot.
Where do yo live?
April 3, 2009 - 22:56 ET byI live in NJ actually, used to live in Manhatttan but I have a family and wanted more space.
But do you realize that almost ALL the money used for public services in upstate NY comes from NYC?
So just who is robbing whom?
First of all, almost all
April 4, 2009 - 09:31 ET by NL207First of all, almost all the public money spent updstate does NOT come from NYC. Only an arrogant ignoramus would make an assertion like that.
Second, most of the public money spent upstate is MANDATED by the state government, which is controlled by the delegates from NYC. There are upstate counties where over 90% of the county budget is spent on state mandates. Most of that money is raised by a hefty sales tax combined with the most onerous property taxes in the US.
Has it ever occurred to the arrogant twits like you who live in NYC that a great many current and former upstaters would gladly do without ANY political association with NYC? They would like to draw a new state line at the Rockland-Westchester County line. The next thing they would do after that is put a water meter those aqueducts we were discussing earlier. The next thing they would do after the water meter is put a power meter on the transmission lines that connect NYC to the hydro plants in Niagara Falls and Massena and the various Nuclear reactors upstate that NYC will neither permit to be built nor operated near the city. to. wit. Shoreham, which was closed at STATE expense without ever generating a single commercial kilowatt.
I will tell you who is stealing from whom. NYC, with its taxes, regulations and mandates is stealing the very prosperity from upstate. It is a tyranny you should be proud of since you have personally contributed to this villainy.
First of all...
April 4, 2009 - 11:15 ET byI don't live in NYC, I live in Jersey... said that above.
Second of all:
http://en.wikipedia....
The city also sends
an additional $11.1 billion more each year to the state of New York
than it receives back.[3] The city's total tax burden is among the highest in the United States.[4]
Did you ever vote
April 4, 2009 - 21:45 ET by NL207Did you ever vote Democratic when you lived in New York City? I think yes. That makes you part of the tyrannization of Upstate by NYC Democrats. You are being disingenuous when you say otherwise. I didn't have much respect for you prior to this denial. Now I have even less. Man up, whiner. Admit you voted for these results.
The Wikipedia!! A non-authoritative font of misinformation, lies and half truths. No wonder you're such a neanderthal.
The only thing NYC intentionally "sends" upstate are its criminals:
"Mr. Wagner estimated that while 66 percent of state prisoners come from New York City, 91 percent of them are imprisoned upstate"
YES!!!
April 4, 2009 - 21:51 ET byI voted Democratic! The last time I lived in NY! WHICH WAS IN FREAKIN' 1985!@@!@#
But if I lived in NY now I would have, so... GUILTY!!! Why do you think I've been defending them??
And Wikipedia is referenced. If you don't believe the entry, follow the reference and you'll find the source of the reference.
Or if you're REALLY freakin lazy, you can just say "Wikipedia!! A non-authoritative font of misinformation, lies and half truths." ...and dismiss it regardless of its truth.
You have tacitly conceded
April 5, 2009 - 02:24 ET by NL207You have tacitly conceded most of my points. We can safely conclude that NYC does not pay anything for the water it steals from upstate. We can also conclude that NYC pays less than market rates for electricity stolen from Upstate hydropower projects and sites a significant portion of its electrical generation capacity outside the city. We can also take as fact that NYC warehouses its criminals in prisons upstate.
NYC also imposes other burdens on upstate through its control of the state assembly. These include the myriad unfunded mandates the state government places on school districts and local government.
Last, the city also poisons the political atmosphere upstate. Numerous upstate Democratic office seekers have received and continue to receive large financial contributions from labor unions based in NYC who have little or no memberships upstate. This includes at least two of the upstate Congressional delegation: Louise Slaughter and Maurice Hichey, but corrupt and hypocritical to the core.
1985 you say? This crap has been going on since at least the 1960's when I used to live there. You voted for it. Its part of the 'unitended' consequences of your vote. You own it.
What HOO HAH!!!!
April 5, 2009 - 13:37 ET byThe city iof New York sends $11.1 BILLION more to the state of NY every year than it gets back. ELEVEN FREAKIN' BILLION!
I love the way you guys argue lol. Declare "You have tacitly conceded most of my points" and claim victory.
It's a hoot!
"We"?
April 3, 2009 - 21:27 ET by UpNorthYou helped build it? Really? And what does NYC contribute now? And how many of those who you think contribute to what NYC does, actually live in the city and how many are commuters?
Dude
April 3, 2009 - 22:58 ET byI still have blisters on my hands from the shovel work!
Seriously -- what does NYC contribute now? NYC pays for MOST of the public services used by upstate NY. Without NYC, upstate NY would be West freakin Virginia.
And the majority of that
April 4, 2009 - 08:09 ET by BDAnd the majority of that money is taken from a handful of people who gain virtually NOTHING from its theft by force.
THe dirty little secret is that in America today we have created a paradigm where the supposed poor have no ownership of their postion of society. THerefore they could care less as long as the check arrives at the start of each month so they can go to the sizzler.
Nope
April 4, 2009 - 11:16 ET byhttp://en.wikipedia....
The city also sends
an additional $11.1 billion more each year to the state of New York
than it receives back.[3] The city's total tax burden is among the highest in the United States.[4]
Does a person who
April 4, 2009 - 11:38 ET by BDDoes a person who contributes NOTHING to the public coffers, but receives money from them in the form of transfer payments own a position in society? Are they truly a citizen in full?
Your own words please, no links to others work.
"Truly a citizen in full"?!?!
April 4, 2009 - 12:08 ET byOf course they are! Fortunately citizenship in this great nation is not conferred by income. Now if you want to say that they are not true participants in society, you could make a valid argument.
legally Are they citizens
April 4, 2009 - 13:14 ET by BDlegally Are they citizens in full? Perhaps... But thank God legality is not what the citizenry is determined by but rather morality.
According to Thomas Paine they would not be citizens in full due to their lack of responsibility. (THe summer soldier.... etc)
Morally they are NOT citizens in full any more than those who refuse to serve the crisis.
THose who exist at the public expense are not true citizens.
Can't argue with a moral judgement
April 4, 2009 - 14:55 ET byThough I would disagree. I mean, they're just as subject to the draft if we have one, they have to serve on juries, that sort of thing.
Legally there's no doubt, though.
I was wondering
April 4, 2009 - 16:16 ET by katainkenton what issues you were liberal. Since you are against abortion and own a gun.
You are for big government and aggressive taxation? Especially concerning the 'rich'?
Kata...
April 4, 2009 - 16:37 ET byI'll address this one on my own thread. No sense in hashing it out here.
1.) THey are NOT subject
April 4, 2009 - 19:40 ET by BD1.) THey are NOT subject to conscription. And actually if you do the mathematics you will note that the New Yorkers you are fond of serve at a lower rate than the rest of the general population. So are persons from what are generally considered liberal (blue) states. Therefore, are they citizens? Not really.
2.) THey serve on juries? Virtually never. I have actually attempted to serve on a jury for a criminal case and was hung up by one question "Are you a member or an officer of the armed forces?" Was excused when I answered affirmatively. I have querried lawyers since why I was peremptorialy challenged and was informed that Defense lawyers nearly always exclude officers and most enlisted men since we beleive we can sit in judgement on an accused person. THey would prefer slackers who feel they cannot.
Morally no doubt. Legally - quentionable seeing as nearly all legal questions are open to review and definate uncertainty.
After all--- we now have judicial opinions stating farcical positions that are "LEGAL".
S'cuse me?!?!?!
April 4, 2009 - 21:21 ET byThey're not subject to conscription? Well of course, right now we don't have conscription...but if we did, they would be just as subject as anyone.
They "virtually never serve on juries"?!?! Again...
Care to back up your claims??? I mean, that's what you guys say to me, even if I say "the sky is blue"!
So BACK 'EM UP!!!
THey are not subject to
April 5, 2009 - 05:56 ET by BDTHey are not subject to conscription since it ended in the Nixon era. I will also remind you that historically the draft calls up non-citizens as well.
What is the percentage of homeless persons who served on an NYC jury last year?
How about welfare moms with 4 kids?
Usually when I look at the jury pools here in Arizona I find mostly retired persons rather than the average 18 year old or business executive or owner sitting there.
I used the term rarely and it fits.
Noooo...
April 5, 2009 - 13:13 ET byYou said they weren't subject to conscription and jury duty. I acknowledged that we have no draft now, but when we do -- and if we do again -- they will certainly be subject to it.
Yes, but so are
April 5, 2009 - 16:41 ET by BDYes, but so are NON-CITIZENS. Ergo they own as much as non-citizens?
*SHACK!!!!!!!*
WHAT IS YOUR POINT?!?!
April 5, 2009 - 17:53 ET byWe agree that they are LEGALLY Americans. You say that, morally, they are not. I can't argue with your opinion. I think you're wrong, but it's just an opinion. And you know what they say about opinions.
THe gist of my point would
April 5, 2009 - 17:59 ET by BDTHe gist of my point would be that these persons we both refer to do not "OWN" the role of being a citizen.
Ok, but...
April 5, 2009 - 18:02 ET by...that's a moral/ethical judgement, and you're free to make it, but it has nothing to do with their legal standing.
I never said it
April 5, 2009 - 18:13 ET by BDI never said it did.
But I find it telling that the liberal in the group jumped to the conclusion that legality was the applicable standard in this discussion.
The city's total tax burden
April 3, 2009 - 20:14 ET by R D HelmThe city's total tax burden is among the highest in the United States
And its about to go even higher, hence the mass exodus.
Its already happening in California.
-Dave
This coup has gone on long enough. The time to put it down is NOW.
Yeah right lol
April 3, 2009 - 20:18 ET byGet back to me when you have some actual figures on this "mass exodus" LMAO
It will not need to be so
April 4, 2009 - 08:13 ET by BDIt will not need to be so massive on a per person basis as long as it is the top five tax payers in the NY Society. THey could simply rehabilitate a building across the river in New Jersey and move into swanky new quarters - and they city would effectively be DONE.
Or if they sought true value for their contribution they could move to a ten acre ranchlette in Southlake Texas and then the east coast would be in peril.
Let's see, by your own
April 4, 2009 - 22:10 ET by NL207Let's see, by your own admission, you are a former New Yorker.
In 1930, NY had 47 electoral votes. Today, NY has 31 electoral votes. After the 2010 census, New York is projected to have 29 electoral votes.
According to the census, NY's population has been essentially flat since 1970, when the state had 18,241,391. NY has grown to 18,976,457 as of 2000, while the nation as a whole grew 38%. This 'growth' was so anemic as to not even match the state fertility rate, implying more people who were born there left than new residents moved in.
People have been voting with their feet, especially in Upstate.
Ummmm...
April 5, 2009 - 00:15 ET byS'cuse me, but we're talking about New York CITY. There have NEVER been 18 million people in New York City. Get your stats straight.
Second, are you actually saying that, because other cities are growing faster than NYC, that means -- statistically -- that NYC is LOSING people?!?!
Do you have ANY FREAKIN IDEA how to read statistics??!
LOLOL
Good morning pi
April 5, 2009 - 01:51 ET by cocodrieThis is about New York state.
Unless of course Paterson is governor of New York City and New York City has 31 electorial votes.
Jesus Loves You so much He died for you
Nope
April 5, 2009 - 13:15 ET byRead back. The discussion we were having was about NYC.
NYC did not grow
April 5, 2009 - 02:33 ET by NL207NYC did not grow appreciably over that interval either. Upstate lost people. All significant growth in NY took place in a handful of counties: Albany, Rockland, Westchester, Nassau and Suffolk. NYC had about 8 million in 1970. If it had grown apace with the country, it ought to have about 11.2 millions in 2000, but that did not happen.
People voted with their feet. I think they will continue to vote with their feet.
GAH!!!
April 5, 2009 - 13:16 ET byYou're still saying that having more people in NYC now than before means people left! What kind of math is that?!?!
Yeah...and I just betcha'
April 3, 2009 - 19:10 ET by bigtimerYeah...and I just betcha' they are all legal citizens too...
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
LMAO
April 3, 2009 - 19:26 ET byThis is New York Freakin' City. Most of the ilegals find work somewhere between Mexico and here.
Sadly, like Boston, your
April 4, 2009 - 08:15 ET by BDSadly, like Boston, your illegals tend to come from other places. In Bostons case it is the Irish.
where do you get these
April 3, 2009 - 19:11 ET by katainkentwhere do you get these figures?
Actually...
April 3, 2009 - 19:28 ET byI didn't quote any figures.
My point was simply that we have many more people moving to NYC every year than we have moving away.
I live here, I read the papers. It's not a big secret. The city isn't anywhere close to emptying out lol.
*sigh*
April 3, 2009 - 19:34 ET by katainkentYou said :
NYC can't build housing fast enough to accommodate all the people who want to move IN.
I look at things like this and wonder how you come to that conclusion
not this conclusion : The city isn't anywhere close to emptying out.
HUH?!?!
April 3, 2009 - 19:37 ET byYou're assuming that because prices have dropped -- as they have everywhere -- that that reflects a trend toward leaving NYC?
HA! HAHAHAhahahahhAHAHHAHAHhahaH!@!@#@!
no.
April 3, 2009 - 19:39 ET by katainkentI see by the figure that 14K houses remain on the market that they are apparently keeping up on demand for building.
oh lord you are difficult.
Please...
April 3, 2009 - 19:53 ET by14,000 is like 1/10th of 1% of the housing in NYC.
Ya know, sometimes -- no, too often -- you guys get so caught up in trying to trip me up on some detail, some minor point, some bit of hyperbole I may have used... that the actual point of the discussion gets totally lost.
My point was, there is no great exodus from NYC. We still have tens of thousands of people moving into the city each year than we have moving out. Can we house them? Depends on the year! But the influx does not change.
how about
April 3, 2009 - 19:59 ET by katainkentstarting out not speaking in such hyperbole. How about starting out with your point.
We can agree : There is no great exodus from NYC. Populations flux.
However that was not what this article was suggesting. Its not even the subject of it. But there is something to consider that is related to this article.
"One percent of the households that file in this city pay something like 50% of the taxes," explained the Mayor. "In the city, that's something like 40,000 people. If a handful left, any raise would make it revenue neutral."
Ok, but I wasn't addressing the article
April 3, 2009 - 20:05 ET byI was addressing a comment from c5then:
It's not just Rush who is leaving the City. It will be a steady stream
of those who can afford to, and have the option of, living elsewhere.
In short, it will be the bulk of your tax base that relocates.
And yeah, I probably should use less hyperbole, especially here. I'll admit, I'm just not used to people expecting me to back up every little thing I say, no matter how much of it was obviously exhaggerated for effect. Most of the people I talk to understand the use of hyperbole, and are aware when it's being used.
if you addressed the point at hand
April 3, 2009 - 20:11 ET by katainkentperhaps. c5then speaks of the tax base. Those 40K in NYC that pay 50% of the taxes. Not the entire city.
If you recall I told you a week or two ago that if you come armed with facts to an argument you'll do much better.
What difference does that make?!?!
April 3, 2009 - 20:16 ET byEven if his figures ARE correct -- which I doubt -- the city of New Yor STILL sends much more money to the feds than we take back.
What's your point??
my point
April 3, 2009 - 20:23 ET by katainkentwas initially to call you on your hyperbole, which I have done.
additional information for your perusal still remains here :
"One percent of the households that file in this city pay something like 50% of the taxes," explained the Mayor. "In the city, that's something like 40,000 people. If a handful left, any raise would make it revenue neutral."
You already provided links to NYC's tax burden.
Yes!
April 3, 2009 - 20:39 ET byI admit to using hyperbole. Usually, the people I'm communicating with accept it as hyperbole.
None of which negates the basic truth of my argument: That people are not flocking from NYC, not even close!
to which
April 3, 2009 - 20:59 ET by katainkentwe have already agreed. After revealing your point. I confess, whenever I ask you to explain yourself I am just trying to get you to think a little more about what you're saying. Is that not why you come here?
if it bothers you that much I will conversate elsewhere.
Noooooo!@!
April 3, 2009 - 23:00 ET byGeesh, you're one of the few on here who doesn't assume I'm a moron.
you seem out of sorts
April 4, 2009 - 01:57 ET by katainkentmaybe you should get some sleep.
Most moving in are public
April 3, 2009 - 20:03 ET by owlpelletsMost moving in are public sector folk. Any company with brains avoids you like battery acid. Maybe you can fix some pool to keep paying one another with 0 growth. Anyone creating wealth is going to run like a scalded dog from you leeches. Keep demonizing producers. It helps as they will migrate to friendlier a environment, South and West.Your base loss will be our gain.
Don't blame me....I voted for Palin...
"Most moving in are public sector folk"
April 3, 2009 - 20:06 ET byAnd I'm sure you can back that up...
Waiting... Waiting...
Maybe Toyota will build a
April 3, 2009 - 20:27 ET by owlpelletsMaybe Toyota will build a plant if you keep waiting....
Don't blame me....I voted for Palin...
sorry
April 3, 2009 - 20:32 ET by owlpelletsSorry,
I forgot that the mafia reqires I have a union card before inseting "New York" into a post....won't happen again....promise!!!
Don't blame me....I voted for Palin...
HAhahahahahha
April 3, 2009 - 20:35 ET byWow. That's comedy. He's here all week, folks. Don't forget to tip your waitress.
Here is a nugget to chew
April 4, 2009 - 06:40 ET by Roger the ShrubberHere is a nugget to chew on. The population of NYC has risen in the first half of this decade, like our leftist comrade said. However, people are fleeing the city at a rate of 150,000 a year, and those numbers only reflect up to 2005. I am sure the numbers have improved with all those swell new taxes, eh?
So, let's sum it up: poor immigrants in, more well-to-do citizens out. More people are leaving NYC than coming to NYC.
And watch the seismic shift
April 4, 2009 - 11:53 ET by BDAnd watch the seismic shift in revenues to expenditures as well as the expected surge in violent crime.
Rich moving out causes revenue to drop. Poor moving in cuases expenditures to rise.
THey are screwed.
Hi BD!
April 4, 2009 - 16:04 ET by Roger the ShrubberYep. And those who remain in the city and have the Wall Street jobs now see their earning dramatically decrease, meaning less tax revenues, less charitable contributions, more poverty, and like you said, more crime, etc...
Gee sounds pretty much like any other city in the country run by Democrats...
Oddly, our leftist comrade cannot seem to find the testicular fortitude to respond to these facts. Quite puzzling...
HUH?!?!
April 4, 2009 - 17:57 ET byRespond to what? I didn't see anything that seems to require my response. SURE tax revenues are down, due to YOUR PRESIDENT'S RECESSION. Probably more here than in many cities. All that does is make housing prices even lower, which gives even more people the encouragement to move here.
Is there something I missed that I should have responded to?
Sigh...
April 5, 2009 - 08:18 ET by Roger the ShrubberJust a few posts above you asked for numbers to back-up what others said about poor people moving into NYC.
I supplied such numbers. I assumed that, you being eager for logical discourse, and not trolling around like a simpleton, you might have digested what I offered, instead of merely repeating previous comments.
I gave proof that, sadly (for you), you are incorrect in your factless assumption that low housing prices = more people moving in. If that was a fact, Detroit would be flooded with new residents. I would hope that, now that you are armed with facts instead of assumptions, you would shift your thought pattern a bit, updating your attitude with the knowledge placed at your feet.
So let's sum this up: housing market tanking, jobs bleeding out, especially the Wall Street jobs, Wall-Street bonuses being cut, more people are leaving than are moving into NYC. All of this runs contrary to your previous boasts, er, statements.
Wait a minute, maybe I answered my own question. you didn't respond because you did not have any ammunition.
You may go now.
You STILL make no sense
April 5, 2009 - 13:24 ET byIn that very post you say:
The population of NYC has risen in the first half of this decade, like our leftist comrade said.
And then conclude that "more people are leaving the city than coming to the city". WHAAAAT?!?!?!
And the Detroit example is ridiculous. Nobody want to live in Detroit no matter what the housing market is like.
Wow. Are you honestly this
April 5, 2009 - 20:11 ET by Roger the ShrubberWow. Are you honestly this stupid?
If you actually went to the website I linked to originally, then, perhaps, we could only hope, you might have spared yourself this humiliation of appearing marginally-retarded.
People immigrating and emigrating to a city are not the only two factors in population rising and falling, genius.
I will try this one last time. If you still do not understand, you are on your own.
2000 NYC population: 8,008,278
2000 NYC population: 8,143,197
That is a net GAIN of about 135,000, hence the first point you could not comprehend is proven correct.
Domestic migration in that span: -808,552
International migration in that span: 511,018
Stay with me, I thought I saw you staring off into the distance. Focus on me.
A negative number for migration means people LEFT THE CITY.
Replaced by a smaller amount of immigrants, who surely are all college-educated Wall Street bankers, right?
Hence the second point you could not comprehend is proven correct.
As for your Detroit comment, nice non-answer. As if you actually COULD muster up a rebuttal. Thanks for not proving me wrong when I said you are incorrect in your factless assumption that low housing prices = more people moving in. If that was a fact, Detroit would be flooded with new residents.
Three douchebaggeriffic responses easily debunked in one post. Wow, Sparky, thanks for setting me up for the hat-trick!
I DID go to the website
April 5, 2009 - 22:55 ET byAnd I saw no references, but I saw a lot of articles that show whomever writes the website has a right-wing ulterior motive.
Show me the smae stats froma government source and I'll cede.
And this...
2000 NYC population: 8,008,278
2000 NYC population: 8,143,197
That is a net GAIN of about 135,000, hence the first point you could not comprehend is proven correct.
Ehhh?!?!? Two different populations for the same year?!?! And you say I'M confused?!?!?
I guess when you have no
April 6, 2009 - 09:35 ET by Roger the ShrubberI guess when you have no ammunition left to spend (and I am being gracious, since you really had no ammunition to begin with), you can only question the source of the data, and then criticize a poster for writing "2000" instead of "2005".
Shockingly, that is all you have to offer. You have been given ample opportunity to prove me wrong, yet you cannot. You have been weighed, you have been measured, and you have been found wanting. You may go now, douchie.
Blondie, troll cleanup on aisle 5. We got a twitcher here.
Guess you missed this part...
April 6, 2009 - 12:24 ET byShow me the same stats from a government source and I'll cede.
YOU got nuthin'
You are quite the (not so)
April 6, 2009 - 12:51 ET by Roger the ShrubberYou are quite the (not so) nimble debater, aren't you, Sparky? Your heaviest weapons in that vast intellectual arsenal of yours are spitwads like "I do not accept your facts" and "you cannot spell".
Impressive strategy, not wasting time on actually proving your own point to be correct with silly things like evidence. Why do that with you are so heavily-armed with a brain like yours!
This is getting rather boring, Pumpkin, but, if you want to hang around, I will gladly play big stick to your pinata of an ego all day long. Keep on posting and continue providing this community a constant source of laughter, or take your ball home to mommy and come back when you grow a pair, ok?
OOOOhhhh!!
April 6, 2009 - 13:19 ET byYou're quite the tuffy aren't you.
Wanna fight? C'mon, hit me! I DARE YA!
Why you I oughta..
Whew. For a moment there,
April 6, 2009 - 13:43 ET by Roger the ShrubberWhew. For a moment there, you had us all thinking you were a simple-minded, Lefty troll.
I guess this is just your special way of saying goodybe.
Not a chance...
April 6, 2009 - 14:27 ET byI'm way too busy over on my own thread.
And since you refuse to back up your claims with anything but some questionable stats from a right wing website, I will say goodbye to you.
Yawn.
April 6, 2009 - 16:14 ET by Roger the ShrubberYour own thread? Wow, sounds very (not) intriguing.
See you around, crybaby.
And you, sleepy baby
April 6, 2009 - 17:04 ET by:-)
Rog
April 6, 2009 - 13:10 ET by RESTLESS 1He criticizes you for typing 2000 instead of 2005 in the exact same post that he spelled same "smae".
This guy wishes to move UP to troll status.
"This
liberal would be all about socialize -- uh, uh, would be about
basically taking over and the government running all of your companies."-Maxine Waters 2008
Hahaaha... I am
April 6, 2009 - 13:47 ET by Roger the ShrubberHahaaha...
I am half-expecting to be called a Nazi next.
It does seem pretty clear that we're not dealing with the sharpest knife in the drawer...
Lower housing prices gives
April 5, 2009 - 11:24 ET by BDLower housing prices gives poorer people access to housing, and while this might be good for them it is not exactly without consequenses.
Poorer people provide less revenue to the city and state and bill those same governments at a higher rate.
Thus, smart communities tend to reward the wealthy for moving in, rather than regard the arrival of the poor with joy.
But liberals see it just bass-ackwards since they can purchase votes more cheaply with welfare transfers etc.
New York City is SOOO SCREWED! Move over Detroit!
Yup
April 5, 2009 - 13:27 ET byLower housing prices gives poorer people access to housing, and while
this might be good for them it is not exactly without consequenses.
Poorer people provide less revenue to the city and state and bill those same governments at a higher rate.
Thus, smart communities tend to reward the wealthy for moving in, rather than regard the arrival of the poor with joy.
All true!
But liberals see it just bass-ackwards since they can purchase votes more cheaply with welfare transfers etc.
Typical right-wing paranoia. If the right ever did anything for the poor, they'd vote for you.
Glad you concur with my
April 5, 2009 - 16:49 ET by BDGlad you concur with my position.
Regarding the "Right wing ever doing anything for the poor..."
A couple of observations:
The conservative position that getting the government out of peoples economic lives has immeasurably helped the poor of our nation significantly for than any transfer payment.
Maintaining property rights has helped and will help far more than any "Stimulous."
Reductions in non-defense spending and reduction of other outlays would improve the economy to a roaring late 80's level that will help the poor far more than all the government cheese handouts ever considered.
TAANSTAFL baby!!!!!!
"Glad you concur with my position" ???
April 5, 2009 - 17:57 ET byWhat you stated are simple facts. That's not a "position", that's just a recitation.
As for the rest of your "observations", they're just your opinion, with no factual back-up.
Facts are stubborn
April 5, 2009 - 18:32 ET by BDFacts are stubborn things.
How would you like me to back up my observation regarding self reliance? Should I provide a logical position based on comparison? Okay, here goes....
Which community follows conservative principles regarding self reliance - Hint it is in the north.
Which community follows liberal social policies and liberal fiscal policies regarding transfer payments and does not trumpet self reliance? Hint, it holds wild parties in the spring.
Welfare kills!
That's not "Back-Up"
April 5, 2009 - 18:53 ET byThat's simply more of your opinion.
I see, you can spout off on
April 5, 2009 - 19:07 ET by BDI see, you can spout off on your positions regarding New York City and claim anything you say is factual and thus a proof of logic.
But I sum up the situation between two locations I know very well, and somehow this is just my opinion and thus not a proof of logic.
Sadly, this is typically liberal behavior. Think emotionally, or legally, but NEVER logically.
so
April 5, 2009 - 16:52 ET by katainkentyou're saying the poor, in general, vote for handouts?
It is quite obvious the poor
April 5, 2009 - 17:18 ET by BDIt is quite obvious the poor vote for handouts. THey donot desire self sufficiency or especially self-reliance. It is anathema to the way of life instilled upon them by the liberal left int he world today.
Please...
April 5, 2009 - 18:00 ET byThe fact is, overwhelmingly the poor don't vote.
Depends on your definition
April 5, 2009 - 18:40 ET by BDDepends on your definition of poor.
Those who fall below the poverty line overwhelming trend Democrat and usually vote for the most liberal of democrats.
Why do they do this? Because they are voting for what they perceive to be their self interest.
I was fascinated by the people in the Obama crowds who were saying that they needed greater social programs to solve their own personal ills. The crying woman who needed a government handout for a new kitchen was most memorable.
Wrong
April 5, 2009 - 18:56 ET byThey vote Democratic because they know the Republican party -- as a party -- cares only about the fat cats, and not about those who are struggling.
And trust me, I could find plenty of statements just as stupid from people explaining why there were voting for W. If you don't hold me responsible for all the ignorant things said by Democrats, I won't hold YOU responsible for all the ignorant things said by Republicans.
They vote Democratic
April 5, 2009 - 19:20 ET by BDThey vote Democratic because they know the Republican party -- as a party -- cares only about the fat cats, and not about those who are struggling.
And trust me, I could find plenty of statements just as stupid from people explaining why there were voting for W.
If you don't hold me responsible for all the ignorant things said by Democrats, I won't hold YOU responsible for all the ignorant things said by Republicans.
you sure
April 5, 2009 - 18:40 ET by katainkentyou want to stand by that premise?
If you have evidence to the contrary...
April 5, 2009 - 18:59 ET by...I'll concede. I'm betting they vote at a much lower percentage than middle class, educated Americans.
if you have evidence to the contrary..
April 5, 2009 - 19:07 ET by botgi'll concede that there is no leprechaun in my house, otherwise you accept my assertion?
no Pi, --- you made a claim YOU back it up
"Outside of a dog a book is man's best friend,------------inside a dog it's too dark to read" ---Groucho
you're doing it again
April 5, 2009 - 19:15 ET by katainkentquit sliding your 'point'.
I expressed an opinion
April 5, 2009 - 20:08 ET byOr perhaps more accurately, I expressed an impression.
>.<
April 5, 2009 - 20:23 ET by katainkentThe fact is, overwhelmingly the poor don't vote.
What? WHAT?!?!
April 5, 2009 - 22:57 ET byOk, MY IMPRESSION is, the poor don't vote. Why do you think we dems have all those "get out the vote" buses every election?!?!
BTW, left you a LONG post on the other thread.
so you can buy votes
April 5, 2009 - 23:02 ET by botgwith beers?
"Outside of a dog a book is man's best friend,------------inside a dog it's too dark to read" ---Groucho
because you want
April 5, 2009 - 23:05 ET by botgpolitical illiterates to vote?
"Outside of a dog a book is man's best friend,------------inside a dog it's too dark to read" ---Groucho
because you
April 5, 2009 - 23:07 ET by botgdon't care about fair elections?
"Outside of a dog a book is man's best friend,------------inside a dog it's too dark to read" ---Groucho
LMFAO
April 5, 2009 - 23:29 ET byDude, where do you come up with this shit?!?! LOLOLOL
Huh??
April 5, 2009 - 17:59 ET byWhere do you get that from that post??
right here
April 5, 2009 - 18:02 ET by katainkent"If the right ever did anything for the poor, they'd vote for you"
clarify what a politician can do for the poor that would make them vote for them.
Plenty!
April 5, 2009 - 18:06 ET byIncrease access to education, end the stupid Rockefeller drug laws as they just did in New York, instigate programs that help unwed mothers make something of their lives rather than just repeat the same cycle of poverty, like child care...
There are many things. You may see them as "handouts", but the fact is they benefit ALL of society
and
April 5, 2009 - 18:11 ET by katainkentnumerous charities help with these things. Things funded by people like myself.
With the exception of revising drug legislation - why would a government official need to put a hand into any of these things?
Because
April 5, 2009 - 18:14 ET byThere is a "social contract" that goes along with living in a Democratic Republic"
oh?
April 5, 2009 - 18:21 ET by katainkentplease elaborate.
Ok...
April 5, 2009 - 18:27 ET byBut it's another long one. I'll take it up on my own thread, along with your other LONG-ANSWER-DEMANDING POST!@@#
pi - You're a very bitter
April 5, 2009 - 18:30 ET by bretzysdudepi - You're a very bitter man, aren't you, butthead?
No, actually...
April 5, 2009 - 19:00 ET byI'm a pretty happy guy. Especially when I'm making asses out of right-wingers!!! :-)
lol, when does that
April 5, 2009 - 19:09 ET by botglol, when does that happen?
"Outside of a dog a book is man's best friend,------------inside a dog it's too dark to read" ---Groucho
Indeed, if he can tell me
April 5, 2009 - 19:36 ET by BDIndeed, if he can tell me when it will happen I will stay up late to watch.
you havent read it?
April 5, 2009 - 18:30 ET by katainkentI asked one two-part question. The rest was personal information. And for gosh sake don't shout.
Yeah..
April 5, 2009 - 19:02 ET byBut it requires a long answer.
And I'M SORRY! I DIDN'T MEAN TO SHOUT!!
WHAT??
WHAT?? DID YOU SAY SOMETHING?!?!?
OH! SORRRY!!! :-)
kata, i'll give pi
April 5, 2009 - 18:28 ET by botga resource----->
pi, please highlight the applicable clause
"Outside of a dog a book is man's best friend,------------inside a dog it's too dark to read" ---Groucho
Sorry...
April 5, 2009 - 19:04 ET byAll I get is a page that says "A Founders Constitution". No other content. What am I supposed to highlight?
Increase access to
April 5, 2009 - 19:33 ET by BDIncrease access to education
instigate programs that help unwed mothers make something of their lives rather than just repeat the same cycle of poverty
There are many things. You may see them as "handouts", but the fact is they benefit ALL of society
Patterson
April 3, 2009 - 19:46 ET by jackie3Patterson is just another idiot dictator in the world today. His first and only term. He won't be re-elected. He's don'e nothing but PO the 'subjects."
Alexander Hamilton: "We are a Republican government. Real liberty is
never found in the despotism or in the extremes of a Democracy."
Just like President Clinton set such a GOOD?
April 3, 2009 - 20:34 ET by Cape Conservativeexample for our country by being a public out-and-out LIAR, so has our current president set an outrageous example by attacking a PRIVATE CITIZEN! Before Barack Obama's statement, Harry Reid did the same thing!
And we wonder why so many of our young people have no moral values. This reminds me of the old childhood chant...Monkey see, Monkey do - Look at me, I'm a monkey, too!
How to go, Governor Paterson - you get an A+ for VERY unstatesman-like behavior!! Let's see which large-earner/taxpayer you can entice to leave next ;-)
It is no dishonor to be in a minority in the cause of liberty and virtue. ~ Sam Adams
Rush is a private citizen?!?!
April 3, 2009 - 23:06 ET byHA! HAHAahhahhaahHAHHAHahhahhahA!@!@!@#
Yes. Private. Idiot
April 4, 2009 - 08:18 ET by JWFprivate:
2a (1): not holding public office or employment. <a private citizen>
We are not here to educate you, you idiot. Stop wasting our time.
Pick up a dictionary.
He may be a private CITIZEN
April 4, 2009 - 11:19 ET byBut he is a public figure of his own choice. He wasn't thrust into the spotlight, he elbows his way into it. So he is subject to the scrutiny that any public figure should expect.
That is not what you were laughing at idiot.
April 4, 2009 - 11:44 ET by JWFYou were laughing at the term private citizen. The definition of which is clearly established.
A private citizen is one that DOES NOT work for the government.
You are an idiot. And now you are a tiny littel scummy snail for trying to wiggle out of looking like the fool you are.
Apologise to the original poster now.
HAHA!
April 4, 2009 - 12:12 ET byI was laughing at the word "PRIVATE". God you people are so effing funny. Every little dig, every little bobble -- "WE CAUGHT YOU! YOU WERE TRYING TO LIE!! YOU'RE A LITTLE SCUMMY SNAIL!! WE CAUGHT YOU!! CONFESS!@!#!
Yes. Private. Idiot.
April 4, 2009 - 12:31 ET by JWFprivate: 2a (1): not holding public office or employment.
NOT HOLDING PUBLIC OFFICE.
This is not 2 buddies joking around. You are only as good as your word and you can't even admit you made a mistake because of your lack of education.
You were laughing at a word you clearly did not understand.
Nope, not gonna play that game
April 4, 2009 - 13:21 ET byThe clear implication of the post was that Obama's commenting on Rush was somehow an invasion of or assault on his privacy. My response was that Rush has no right to expect such privacy. He has put himself out the as, if not the titular head of the Republican party, at least its ersatz head. Whatever 5th-tier meaning you want to claim for the use of the word "private" really is not germane to this argument.
And when I say "5th-tier" I mean this:
pri·vate adj
1. concerning matters that are not for other people to see or know about
2. sufficiently secluded for it to be possible to be alone and not watched, heard, or disturbed by others
3. belonging to, restricted to, or intended for an individual
4. not open to the public
5. not holding an official position in government, or not relating to the official role of a government person
I'll go with any one of the first 4. If you insist you really meant the 5th, then run with that. But I ain't playin'.
You sit there and lie.
April 4, 2009 - 13:32 ET by JWFHe capitalized the term private citizen. Now you try to claim it was something other that was said IN CLEAR ENGLISH.
You had a stronger argument claiming I was nitpicking.
You are doubling down and proving yourself beyond idiot and ON TO LIAR.
current president set an outrageous example by attacking a PRIVATE CITIZEN!
The meaning is CLEAR. A public official attacked a private citizen.
You are here to teach, learn, or harrass. Looks like you picked the harrass part.
So piss off liar, I am through with you.
Yay!
April 4, 2009 - 13:33 ET byOne less idiot I have to deal with on these threads!
Once again, you fail to understand english as it is written.
April 4, 2009 - 13:38 ET by JWFI am through ever trying to have a rational conversation with an idiot and a LIAR.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWMjggG5Xm4
When you have a "rational" argument to make...
April 4, 2009 - 13:41 ET by...c'mon back. We'll talk.
Till then, work on finding some new insults besides "idiot". You've used that one, what, like five times in the last four posts?
Liar.
April 4, 2009 - 13:43 ET by JWFhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dHbStWgKw-A
And you've used "liar" even more
April 4, 2009 - 13:46 ET byGeesh, go buy a thesaurus or something.
BTW, thanks for the link-- pretty funny!
(A link, BTW, which you've used TWICE now -- you really don't have much imagination, do you...)
Loser
April 4, 2009 - 14:01 ET by JWFhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qtAhlPcdh9c
~Jeez, you guys
April 4, 2009 - 14:11 ET by choselife3xStop eating all my Pie!
That high-pitched scream you hear is the troll under my heel.
Chose
April 4, 2009 - 14:44 ET by Free StinkerChose,
You have to leave some Trolls alive for the others to hunt. ;-)
"Gov. Palin has been subjected to one of the most massive and dishonest pile-on smear attacks in the history of liberal media." -- Lowell Ponte
~Free
April 4, 2009 - 14:47 ET by choselife3xThe Floating Turd/Flying Dutchman is on the Obama captionfest thread. I've blown a hole in his hull already, but you can be part of the boarding party.
That high-pitched scream you hear is the troll under my heel.
Thank you chose
April 4, 2009 - 14:50 ET by Free StinkerThank you chose, but I didn't necessarily mean that for me! ;-)
Reminding PT about some of the choice quotes from Libertarian V.P. candidate Wayne Allyn Root is usually enough Troll bashing fun for me.
~That's fine
April 4, 2009 - 14:55 ET by choselife3xI always wanted to be a pirate Queen. I'll take you for a sail later and you can drink rum while I make the troll walk the plank.
That high-pitched scream you hear is the troll under my heel.
lol
April 4, 2009 - 14:55 ET by:-)
Hey Pi
April 4, 2009 - 14:16 ET by Cool ArrowSpeaking of authoritative semantic research references, could you please give us a dictionary definition of "Geesh"?
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
Sorry guys, I let an idiot get to me.
April 4, 2009 - 14:28 ET by JWFI am ok now.
I just watched Krauthammer's most excellent analysis of Obama's statement “In America, there’s a failure to appreciate Europe’s leading role in the world,”
Gawd, it was brilliant.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ccjuz8bNpi4
It reminds me this troll is nothing but an insignificant little speck on a fly turd in the grand scheme of things.
Sincerely,
a Veteran of a 1000 psychic wars.
"Idiot"
April 4, 2009 - 14:58 ET by...and still counting
Yes. Idiot. He obviously has problems with the English language
April 4, 2009 - 16:17 ET by JWFAs evidenced by his constant verbal twitch of echoing back the same phrases over and over again.
2. Psychology. a person of the lowest order in a former classification of mental retardation, having a mental age of less than three years old and an intelligence quotient under 25
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/556100/idiot/
His website - http://www.iamanidiot.com/
Where he puts his car - http://www.iparklikeanidiot.com/
His other website - http://www.idiot.net/
What makes him happy - http://www.idiotsdelight.net/
Where he lives - http://eastvillageidiot.com/
His favorite game - http://www.idiotstare.com/
His progeny - http://www.thelittleidiot.com/
Pictures of his vacation - http://www.idiot-copenhagen.com/
His club - http://internationalidiotsclub.com/
His greasy brother's website - http://www.slickidiot.com/
His friends - http://www.someidiots.com/
The Borg rejects of which he is one - http://www.idiotscollective.com/
His spouse's homepage - http://www.bigstupididiot.com/
He won! It's official! - http://www.biggestidiotontheinternet.com/
How to get his attention - http://www.heyidiot.com/
Where he finds his skidmarks - http://www.idiotboxers.com/
How he learned to post here - http://www.idiotsguidetoblogging.com/
His company "boxin' up teh stupid" - http://idiotinc.com/
His birthday gift, a box with a button on top that does nothing, he spent 4 weeks pushing the button over and over - http://www.idiotmachine.com/
Capice?
Gosh...
April 4, 2009 - 16:24 ET byI'm so flattered. And here I thought you were through with me!
FOCUS!
April 4, 2009 - 16:31 ET by JWFQuit pushing the button on the box and focus.
Once again, you fail to understand english as it is written.
April 4, 2009 - 14:38 ET by JWF
I am through ever trying to have a rational conversation with an idiot and a LIAR.
RAH-SHU-NAL KON-VER-SAY-SHUN.
Speaky Inglis?
aHEMMMMM!!!!@@#
April 4, 2009 - 16:40 ET byYou sit there and lie.
April 4, 2009 - 14:32 ET by JWF
He capitalized the term private citizen. Now you try to claim it was something other that was said IN CLEAR ENGLISH.
You had a stronger argument claiming I was nitpicking.
You are doubling down and proving yourself beyond idiot and ON TO LIAR.
current president set an outrageous example by attacking a PRIVATE CITIZEN!
The meaning is CLEAR. A public official attacked a private citizen.
You are here to teach, learn, or harrass. Looks like you picked the harrass part.
So piss off liar, I am through with you.
Do YOU "Speaky Inglis?"?!?!?!
HA! HAHAhahAHHAhaHAHh!@!@#!
Looks like I changed my mind now dint I, huh?
April 4, 2009 - 17:13 ET by JWFI am still correct in that you cannot understand english as posted in every dictionary in the planet.
It does not matter how many times you repost my own words.
I can stand by them.
YOU cannot stand by your words and admit you did not understand the very simple term PRIVATE CITIZEN.
So repost my words a few more times like a good little idiot that has problems with the mouse buttons.
You confused private citizen with public figure and when called on it, tried to waffle, wiggle, & parse with your 5th tier nonsense.
And you have been nothing but argumentative ever since.
Sincerely,
a Veteran of a 1000 psychic wars.
"Looks like I changed my mind now dint I, huh?"
April 4, 2009 - 17:36 ET byHey... it's a girl's perogative.
Yes, and you continue.
April 4, 2009 - 18:04 ET by JWFYou think you are smart and smarmy with your only schtick, constant needling and fake interwebs laughs.
But smart and smarmy only works when you are RIGHT.
You misunderstood the common english term, PRIVATE CITIZEN, and then tried to turn into a smartass quip, with your trademark fake intertubes guffaw.
When called on it, what do you do? Needle. Fake laugh. Needle. Waffle with 5 tiers. Fake laugh and needle needle needle.
Fake laughs and fallacious arguments are a weak cover for a utter lack of intelligence.
I got your number - The needler - The nemesis of batman that never made it to the comic books. Because Batman hit him once and he ran away crying like a little girl.
Alright needler - come on back. Don't forget your fake weblaugh.
Needling:
Sincerely,
a Veteran of a 1000 psychic wars.
Hey, look...
April 4, 2009 - 18:33 ET byI'm not the one who forgot what he wrote and then denied having written it.
And as for ad hominum: Idiot Idiot Idiot Idiot Idiot Idiot Idiot Idiot Idiot Idiot Idiot Idiot Idiot Idiot Idiot Idiot Idiot Idiot Idiot Idiot Idiot Idiot Idiot Idiot Idiot Idiot Idiot Idiot Idiot Idiot Idiot Idiot
What -- that's not ad hominum?
And the needler gets in the last word.
April 5, 2009 - 07:35 ET by JWFBut that is the nature of a needler. Toss out one last insult as the other person leaves the room, elicit an emotional response, and keep your needling game going.
good grief
April 4, 2009 - 18:52 ET by BO STINKShow embarassing for my sex thata this, this 'person' is a member - albeit not a very good one.
The great Socio/Economic Experiments of the 20th cent. (communism, socialism, fascism) only killed a few hundred million. Let's give 'em another try! - me
I know, I know...
April 4, 2009 - 19:00 ET byJWF is a sad piece of work, isn't he...
pi wins todays thread award, for his comment..
April 4, 2009 - 12:13 ET by upcountrywaterthread thrasher award
P.R.I.N.T. Money 30 sec YT
ucw,
April 4, 2009 - 12:17 ET by R D HelmROFL! That's perfect!
-Dave
This coup has gone on long enough. The time to put it down is NOW.
Thank you sir.
April 4, 2009 - 12:35 ET by JWFYou made dealing with these idiots a little easier.
Sincerely,
a Veteran of a 1000 psychic wars.
A blind second fiddle to an adulterer
April 3, 2009 - 22:04 ET by Lord ErondYeah that will look great on the old resume. What dumbass
"To sin by silence when we should protest, makes cowards of men" -Ella Wheeler Wilcox
Spitzer
April 3, 2009 - 22:09 ET by RukusSpitzer, an adulterer? Paterson swears he didn't see a thing! : )
Gary
"Things can only bother you if you let them bother you" -My Dad
Ruk... ...LMAO! Doubling
April 3, 2009 - 22:23 ET by bigtimerRuk...
...LMAO!
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
Awww yeah...
April 3, 2009 - 23:07 ET byLeave it to the right wing to take the high ground.
Ask Bristol Palin
April 4, 2009 - 00:38 ET by owlpelletsAsk Bristol Palin pal...
Don't blame me....I voted for Palin...
Dumbacrats
April 3, 2009 - 22:30 ET by VinncyGAren't they funny, a dumbacrat can't even claim to be cracking a joke without mentioning taxes.
Just blind in so many ways.
April 3, 2009 - 23:38 ET by caiobabeThe man is GONE... by next election. His best chance at a legacy is to bash what will be removing him from office, and one of those things is Rush Limbaugh's listeners.
Ha Ha Ha Ha. Governor Paterson is so funny. Hee Hee Hee
April 4, 2009 - 02:01 ET by JWFIt is always funny when taxpayers leave your state. Comedy goldmine there.
Sincerely,
a Veteran of a 1000 psychic wars.
........
April 4, 2009 - 18:55 ET by BO STINKS................
The great Socio/Economic Experiments of the 20th cent. (communism, socialism, fascism) only killed a few hundred million. Let's give 'em another try! - me
Well, ya know...
April 4, 2009 - 21:55 ET bycan't argue with the content of your argument...
since it's blank
Hannah at Radio Equalizer noted that Rush Limbaugh draws
April 5, 2009 - 01:04 ET by Rush Fanmore listeners in liberal New York City (est. 693,000) than Keith Olbermann draws in the entire U.S.A. TVNewser
-------------------------------------------------------
“They have plunged to such depths of incompetence and unprofessionalism and ignorance, it's actually hard for me to come up with accurate words to describe what has happened to them,…” ~ Rush Limbaugh on the media
Schmuck
April 5, 2009 - 10:54 ET by Long Island PeteI guess The Gov. wont miss all those taxes he collects when Rush and his crew work in NY.