Look, up in the sky...

Morgoth wrote in message . ..
On 16 Oct 2003 02:50:29 -0700, (Doogie Hoosier)
inscribed in blood upon a parchment:

Morgoth wrote in message . ..
No, *you* made the claim. *You* provide the exact backup.

Like I said, it's a matter of public record. I am not responsible for
your education, and I don't care if you want to maintain your
ignorance. I DID tell you to check the State of the Union address,
can't you even find that one by yourself?

So this makes you...what? A loser that knows he is wrong and the only
way he thinks he can can pull his ass out of a corner is throw a
tantrum and say, "I don't wanna look, and you can't make me!"

Believe me, if a gave a **** about what you think/know/understand, I
would provide for you. But I don't. Apparently, neither do you. We
are living in an age where it takes more effort to remain ignorant
than to know certain things. Keep up the good work.

Evasion noted.

You made the claim, you provide the evidence.

As it stands, you appear to be nothing but a serial bull****ter.


Now than doesn't make sense. If I am ****ting bull, wy are you not
eating it up, just like a good dittohead. My bull not Rush-flavored?

But you can check for yourself, starting with the State of the Union
Address, and the numerous links I provided.

Unless you are determined to remain in the dark. I do not lie. (At
least, not at the moment.)

Most sincerely,
Doog

No, you make the claim, you provide the back up for your claim. You
tell us *how* Bush lied. Exact words and meanings please.

I did. I showed you how. Do you know how to "click on a link"?

Except that you won't. You just another ****wit leftist who is full of
****.

"Leftist"...ME?

Enjoy the Bush victory of 2004!

It will be his first, won't it? BTW, Bush was a coward. He got his
daddy to pull strings to get him into the National Guard, going over a
long waiting list, to keep his cowardly ass out of Vietnam. I'm sure
I don't need to tell you what I think about boys like that.

On 17 Oct 2003 12:35:18 -0700, (Doogie Hoosier)
inscribed in blood upon a parchment:

Morgoth wrote in message . ..
On 16 Oct 2003 02:50:29 -0700, (Doogie Hoosier)
inscribed in blood upon a parchment:

Morgoth wrote in message . ..
No, *you* made the claim. *You* provide the exact backup.

Like I said, it's a matter of public record. I am not responsible for
your education, and I don't care if you want to maintain your
ignorance. I DID tell you to check the State of the Union address,
can't you even find that one by yourself?

So this makes you...what? A loser that knows he is wrong and the only
way he thinks he can can pull his ass out of a corner is throw a
tantrum and say, "I don't wanna look, and you can't make me!"

Believe me, if a gave a **** about what you think/know/understand, I
would provide for you. But I don't. Apparently, neither do you. We
are living in an age where it takes more effort to remain ignorant
than to know certain things. Keep up the good work.

Evasion noted.

You made the claim, you provide the evidence.

As it stands, you appear to be nothing but a serial bull****ter.


Now than doesn't make sense. If I am ****ting bull, wy are you not
eating it up, just like a good dittohead. My bull not Rush-flavored?

But you can check for yourself, starting with the State of the Union
Address, and the numerous links I provided.

Unless you are determined to remain in the dark. I do not lie. (At
least, not at the moment.)

Most sincerely,
Doog

No, you make the claim, you provide the back up for your claim. You
tell us *how* Bush lied. Exact words and meanings please.

I did. I showed you how. Do you know how to "click on a link"?

Except that you won't. You just another ****wit leftist who is full of
****.

"Leftist"...ME?

Enjoy the Bush victory of 2004!

It will be his first, won't it? BTW, Bush was a coward. He got his
daddy to pull strings to get him into the National Guard, going over a
long waiting list, to keep his cowardly ass out of Vietnam. I'm sure
I don't need to tell you what I think about boys like that.

Your repeated evasion and failure to back up your Bush-lie claim is
noted. It appears you are nothing but yet another lying-sack-of-****.




Author of the TalkOrigins Supernovae and Supernova Remnants FAQ
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/supernova/
Visions of Light, Visions of Darkness - Photography of Wessex
http://www.valinor.freeserve.co.uk/visions.html
Conception 2004 - the South Coast Gaming Convention
http://www.wessexgaming.org
Musings from Thangorodrim - A livejournal
http://www.livejournal.com/users/mrmorgoth

There was once a time when people talked about astronomy here.

On Sat, 18 Oct 2003 11:23:19 -0400, "Michael A. Covington" ...reflected:

There was once a time when people talked about astronomy here.

...yet another of Mr. Hosey's "apples of discord."

Alan

I was reading in the bathroom when I ran across an item written by
"Michael A. Covington"
on Sat, 18 Oct 2003 11:23:19 -0400, which said:

There was once a time when people talked about astronomy here.


Ah, the Good Old Days.


-------------
Beady's 11th Law of Social Harmonics: "Your spouse is precisely the kind of person someone like you would choose to marry."

Manic Morgoth wrote in message . ..

Your repeated evasion and failure to back up your Bush-lie claim is
noted. It appears you are nothing but yet another lying-sack-of-****.


Good, my lying buddy George W. can keep me company. Oh, wait, he's a
coward that weasled his way into the Guard...no way I'm gonna buddy up
with him.

Is it your stand that Bush did NOT lie about Saddam's connection to Al
Queda? Or are you claiming that Bush did not ADMIT that there is no
evidence connecting Al Queda and Saddam? Do you believe that Bush did
not lie about WMD's when he, Powell, and Rummy said that then knew not
only that they existed, but WHERE they were? Do you not believe that
Bush repeated the story about Saddam trying to buy uranium from Niger
long after they knew it was false? Or do you not believe that the
Bush team has now admited that it was not true? It seems that the
only one who can answer to your satisfaction is Bush himself. And
apparently you've not been paying attention to what our Great Leader
has been saying.

I gave a list of links, most of those cite their own references. I
told you *exactly* where to find one of W's biggest lies, the State of
the Union Address. Your claim that I did not back up what I said is
in error. It is not my job to spoon-feed you. Besides, like a baby
eating spinach, you would find the Truth not to your liking and you'd
vomit it right back out.

BTW, here's another deception from W.--Remember "No Child Left
Behind"? He was right proud of the Texas plan for keeping school
performance up, often citing the Houston school system's record.
Turns out that the Houston school system had been cooking the books
for years, claiming, for instance, that they had a low dropout rate.
Very low. It seems that what was really happening was that children
who dropped out of school were put into the books as having moved to
another school system, or moved out of the area. Not only that, but
they were using the provision for "at risk" children, and children
whose primary language was not English, to be exempted from testing
records. More than half of the Houston system's children were able to
be exempted under this policy. Of course, any of these "at risk"
children that made high scores were added in. Bush's wonderful plan
for improving the schools was an empty bag, just like your head.
____________________________

NOW, October 17, 2003

Former Houston, Texas school superintendent Rod Paige was tapped by
President
Bush to be Secretary of Education because he had a reputation as an
educator
who could turn things around in public schools. Paige had orchestrated
what some
called the "Houston miracle," a dramatic decline in dropout rates and
an increase in test scores. But critics and whistleblowers contend
that Paige's methods created the climate for falsification of test
scores and drop out rates. And how does that affect the nation's new
"No Child Left Behind" education law which uses Houston schools as a
model? David Brancaccio goes to Houston to examine the scandal in the
city's public schools and looks at what it might mean for the future
of public education in America.

http://www.pbs.org/now/thisweek/
_________________________________

Say, did you go to school in Houston?

"Michael A. Covington" wrote in message ...
There was once a time when people talked about astronomy here.

Tell me Michael, are you without sin? Do you never chime in on
off-topic threads? Or do you make your comments then criticize others
after you've had your say?

And I thought you had said goodbye to this thread, after you made
false claims about me--I said nothing Rush and "hate," yet you
condemned me anyway for accusing Rush of hate. Had you looked closer,
as I suggested, it was somebody else who was doing just that, yet you
jump on me. Had you actually wanted to know the truth, you would have
read where I said, "I had not accused ANYBODY of hate," (In direct
response to you) and I said to Constantinople:

"Michael cautioned that it was wrong to accuse *people* of hate, not
that I said anything about anybody hating anybody--I didn't, and in
response I quoted what some *people* (conservative people) had said.
*Hateful* things. I did not accuse Rush of hate, I only said that
Rush was a phoney. Michael wanted to point out that most
conservatives don't hate anybody, which might lead one to the notion
that Michael thinks Rush is hateful, although he may have been
referring to Davoud's coment about the "hatred and mean spiritedness"
of the conservative movement."

And, in the same answer to Constantinople:

"Again, to point out your error, as I said, I did not accuse Rush of
hating anybody. I don't think he does..."

http://groups.google.com/groups?q=g:...e .com&rnum=8

I think that's pretty clear. So what's your problem with me? I think
I know...I'm not a Christian. I see others making far more offensive
remarks even than those you CLAIM I have made, and YOU don't say a
word. It's all right Michael. It's better than all right, it's what
I've come to expect.

I think you read what Davoud wrote and confused it with my comments.
In the message linked below, I offered to accept your appology.
Forget it. I think I know where you are coming from now.

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...x.co m#link40