|
|
 Up |
|
|
  |
Author: Bret CahillBret Cahill Date: Nov 30, 2007 10:30
>> The pollution and CO2 coming from China is a threat, not only to the
>> rest of the world, but to the Chinese themselves.
> Yeah, the "threat" of China becoming an economic powerhouse rivaling
> the West.
Most wealth creation comes from IP nowdays. They'll need to start
thinking outside the wok if they want to compete against HP.
> Or of the Chinese pulling themselves out of the poverty which has been
> their plight over the milennia.
>
> And mostly of course the threat of capitalism having achieved it for
> them, providing yet more evidence of its superiority over socialism.
The Chinese are COMMIES!
> Yes, Brat, be afraid, be very afraid of this threat.
> Btw, Brat, did you ever raise similar objections when Mao was
> murdering millions of Chinese?
I was against the "cultural revolution."
|
| Show full article (1.33Kb) |
|
| | 24 Comments |
|
|
Author: Fred WeissFred Weiss Date: Nov 30, 2007 11:34
On Nov 30, 1:30 pm, Bret Cahill aol.com> wrote:>>> The pollution and CO2 coming from China is a threat, not only to the
>>> rest of the world, but to the Chinese themselves.
>> Yeah, the "threat" of China becoming an economic powerhouse rivaling
>> the West.
>
> Most wealth creation comes from IP nowdays. They'll need to start
> thinking outside the wok if they want to compete against HP.
Maybe, but you can't go from filleting fish to IP overnight. Remember
the Japanese started by making cheap trinkets. And, gee, look at what
a "threat" they became (he says while scanning his room and noticing
the Panasonic TV, the Yamaha DVD player, the Pioneer CD player, and
the Subaru in the driveway).
|
| Show full article (2.84Kb) |
|
| | 1 Comment |
|
|
Author: Fred WeissFred Weiss Date: Dec 1, 2007 08:17
On Nov 30, 3:14 pm, Bret Cahill aol.com> wrote:
> 1. I do love the Chinese, and,
>
> 2. I'm not a commie.
Yeah, suddenly all the left-ards stopped being commies - right about
the time that the truth about was going on "behind the Iron Curtain"
came flooding out and they were unable to lie about it anymore. And of
course when communism imploded, collapsing (ironically, cf. Marx) from
its own internal contradictions.
>>> Only multimillionaires trying to greewash themselves worry about AGW.
>> Well, the "workers" you left-ards are always claiming to worry about
>> sure don't.
>
> They cannot afford to with GOP tax cuts for the rich.
They cannot afford to *without* tax cuts for the rich because it is
only tax cuts for the rich which produces *higher* tax revenues making
possible the funding of socialist schemes (whether Republican or
Democrat).
|
| Show full article (3.61Kb) |
| 1 Comment |
|
|
Author: Bret CahillBret Cahill Date: Dec 1, 2007 10:33
Disreputable cut/snipping reinserted for context:
~~~~~~
>>>> And mostly of course the threat of capitalism having achieved it for
>>>> them, providing yet more evidence of its superiority over socialism.
>>> The Chinese are COMMIES!
>> Then why don't YOU LOVE THEM ANYMORE,
>Two begged questions:
~~~~~~~
>> 1. �I do love the Chinese, and,
>> 2. �I'm not a commie.
>
> Yeah, suddenly all the left-ards stopped being commies
I can't speak for others but my views have changed very little in 5
decades. Just as Athena sprang from the head of Zeus I came from the
head of James Madison.
. . .
>>>> Only multimillionaires trying to greewash themselves worry about AGW.
>>> Well, the "workers" you left-ards are always claiming to worry about
>>> sure don't.
|
| Show full article (8.22Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Bret CahillBret Cahill Date: Dec 1, 2007 19:46
>>>> Hillary will only hike taxes on the rich, not the majority of voters.
>>> The majority of voters soon learn what that really means.
>> They already know. �That's why everyone knows she;ll win.
> Everyone only in your own mind,
You already conceded Repugs had an "uphill battle."
Which is it?
You cannot even make up your mind.
Bret Cahill
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Fred WeissFred Weiss Date: Dec 1, 2007 23:50
On Dec 1, 10:46 pm, Bret Cahill aol.com> wrote:>>>>> Hillary will only hike taxes on the rich, not the majority of voters.
>>>> The majority of voters soon learn what that really means.
>>> They already know. �That's why everyone knows she;ll win.
>> Everyone only in your own mind,
>
> You already conceded Repugs had an "uphill battle."
Of course - and the polls show that, too.
Just not against Hillary. Apparently.
You don't have a spin yet on the Zogby poll? I'm surprised but I'm
sure your little brain is working furiously to come up with one.
Fred Weiss
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Bret CahillBret Cahill Date: Dec 2, 2007 08:10
>>>>>> Hillary will only hike taxes on the rich, not the majority of voters.
>>>>> The majority of voters soon learn what that really means.
>>>> They already know. �That's why everyone knows she;ll win.
>>> Everyone only in your own mind,
>> You already conceded Repugs had an "uphill battle."
> Of course
Then we agree that you were correct when you conceded the White house
in 2008 because Bush was "a moron."
Or are you now claiming that Obama or Edwards will surge past Hillary
and become president?
I personally think Obama's time will come but it just isn't now.
Anyway, tell us how your cross dressing abortionist gay marriage 9/11
gush hyping candidate will do in South Carolina.
Bret Cahill
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Bret CahillBret Cahill Date: Dec 2, 2007 08:22
On Dec 1, 8:17�am, Fred Weiss papertig.com> wrote:
. . .
> I concede 2008. Bush is a moron and he has made a Republican victory a
> major uphill battle. But whichever Democrat takes the presidency
Enough discussion of winner Democrats.
Loser Republicons are far more interesting.
The dynamic is between the tax hike fundy Huckabee wing and the cross
dressing abortionist gay marriage 9/11 Ghouliani wing.
Who do you think will get the GOP nomination?
(Assuming there is even anything left to the Party of Gipper in 2008.)
Bret Cahill
"We need to think big, BIG!"
-- Rove
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Fred WeissFred Weiss Date: Dec 2, 2007 09:00
On Dec 2, 11:10 am, Bret Cahill aol.com> wrote:
> Then we agree that you were correct when you conceded the White house
> in 2008 because Bush was "a moron."
Not just Bush. Most Republicans. They deserve to lose the White House,
just as they deserved to have their heads handed to them in the 2006
Congressional election. Anyway, I'm of the view that the Republicans
are much better in opposition. Democrats are such an easy target, even
the Republicans can handle them.
> Or are you now claiming that Obama or Edwards will surge past Hillary
> and become president?
I have no idea and really don't care. I'm not following it very
closely. I can't imagine why anyone would be interested. This loser
wins, that loser wins. What difference does it make?
But whoever wins, the Republicans will take back Congress in a
landslide in 2010 and very likely the White House in 2012. I notice
you haven't taken me up on the offer of a bet.
> Anyway, tell us how your cross dressing abortionist gay marriage 9/11
> gush hyping candidate will do in South Carolina.
I'm much more interested in what happens in Venezuela today.
|
| Show full article (1.15Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
|
Author: PerfectlyAblePerfectlyAble Date: Dec 2, 2007 09:03
On Dec 3, 5:22 am, Bret Cahill aol.com> wrote:> On Dec 1, 8:17�am, Fred Weiss papertig.com> wrote:
>
> . . .
>>> I concede 2008. Bush is a moron and he has made a Republican victory a
>> major uphill battle. But whichever Democrat takes the presidency
>
> Enough discussion of winner Democrats.
>
> Loser Republicons are far more interesting.
>
> The dynamic is between the tax hike fundy Huckabee wing and the cross
> dressing abortionist gay marriage 9/11 Ghouliani wing.
>
> Who do you think will get the GOP nomination?
Obviously if they are going to lose, a moderate. If
they think they can win they would back a fundamentalist.
|
| Show full article (0.81Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
