KIT, You first Keith. You started with the "you are a little slow" and then the "crack" comment. You know i respond in kind. You play nice and I will, you want to be ugly I'll go there to. Your choice.
You're "too rushed" to respond to Studio's comments concerning Chile (two hours ago) but have time to tell me to "lighten up" because I talked to you in the manner you talked to me? WTF? On Mar 5, 10:26 am, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]> wrote: > Holly, > > Lighten up! > > > > On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 10:06 AM, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > > KIT, > > > Fine, you want to pretend your stupid be my guest. You added the DOT > > and other agencies to the subject. You said they were not needed and > > complained about ineffeciency and, judging from your ranting about > > anything having to do with socialism, the implication was because > > those agencies were socialist and anything socialist was doomed to be > > a failure. > > Now, if those agencies were gone tomorrow who or what would perform > > their duties/functions and why would their doing it NOT be socialism? > > > You know god-damn good and well that I'm a recovering alcoholic/addict > > with 24 plus years clean. I have not yet stooped to person insults to > > you. > > > On Mar 5, 8:20 am, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Holly, > > > > I realize that you are a little slow, as most liberals are. PlainOl' > > was > > > talking about the video, and I was referencing his comments about the > > > video. PlainOl didn't make any comment about the Missouri DOT being > > > socialist!! > > > > No more crack rock for you Holly!!! > > > > On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 8:18 PM, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > KIT,, > > > > > Plain's post 11:05 CT this date: > > > > > "it all boils down to socialism vs capitalism." > > > > > KIT's post 11:06 CT this date: > > > > > "Well said PlainOl" > > > > > What do you call that? > > > > > Sorry, not up to you to decide who is and who is not contributing to > > > > our society. > > > > > On Mar 4, 6:42 pm, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Holly, > > > > > > Again, I never claimed that executive branch agencies were, > > "Socialist"; > > > > > you are confusing my posts with someone elses. > > > > > > I have no problem with what Missouri is doing, as a matter of fact, > > what > > > > > Missouri is doing is none of my business. It might be a wonderful > > > > > organization. > > > > > > I want the Federal DOT dissolved, banished, and all of its current > > > > employees > > > > > given a pink slip, wherein they can join the ranks of productive > > > > Americans, > > > > > by manufacturing, selling, servicing, generating, producing, > > marketing, > > > > or > > > > > somehow contributing to our society. > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 7:05 PM, Hollywood <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > KIT, > > > > > > > Will you be serious? Did you Goggle the DOT and see what their > > duties > > > > > > are or not? > > > > > > Mainly they use the trucks to haul around equipment and materials > > for > > > > > > road repair. That's what the MODOT does, repair and maintain roads > > > > > > within the state.What did you think they used them for? > > > > > > > WHAT SUDDENLY MAKES ANY OF THESE AGENCIES SOCIALIST??? > > > > > > > On Mar 4, 4:54 pm, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Why do we need a federal DOT, when the Misouri DOT is the one > > > > soliciting > > > > > > the > > > > > > > bids, and riding around in the trucks with MODOT?? > > > > > > > > What does the Missouri DOT need with a truck? > > > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 5:14 PM, Hollywood <[email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > KIT, > > > > > > > > > Really? A construction compay owner just looks out his window > > one > > > > day > > > > > > > > and says "what the fuck are we going to do with all this > > fucking > > > > > > > > concrete?" "Hey, I know, let's build an 8 lane highway fron St. > > > > Louis > > > > > > > > to Kansas City". That should be a hoot. > > > > > > > > No agency makes a study concerning the need for such a highway, > > > > when > > > > > > > > it should be built or what route it should take? No one > > solicits > > > > bids > > > > > > > > for the construction of same and sets standards, > > qualifications, > > > > > > > > deadlines, nothing? > > > > > > > > > Those orange trucks in my state with MODOT (Missouri Dept. Of > > > > > > > > transportation) painting on their sides have absolutely > > > > > > > > no connection with the U.S. DOT? > > > > > > > > > What has happened to your statement that ALL these agencies > > were > > > > > > > > socialist? Why, all the sudden, is the focus of your posts are > > on > > > > the > > > > > > > > effeciency of these agencies? I don't believe I was talking > > about > > > > > > > > their particular effeciency. > > > > > > > > > WHAT MAKES THOSE AGENCIES, THAT HAVE BEEN AROUND FOR DECADES, > > > > SUDDENLY > > > > > > > > SOCIALIST???? > > > > > > > > Have you forgotten the subject of the film clip you posted to > > start > > > > > > > > this thread? > > > > > > > > > On Mar 4, 3:37 pm, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Holly, > > > > > > > > > > The DOT has never built a street, a highway, a bridge, much > > less > > > > a > > > > > > > > sidewalk > > > > > > > > > in this Nation, EVER!!! > > > > > > > > > > The Department of Energy has yet to build a power plant, or > > > > design a > > > > > > > > nuclear > > > > > > > > > station.....The purpose of the DOE was to reduce our > > dependency > > > > on > > > > > > > > foreign > > > > > > > > > oil.....How's that working out for us?? > > > > > > > > > > The Department of Education??? HaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHa!!!!! > > > > > > > > > > These agencies are nothing more than "Job Fare" and a drain > > on > > > > the > > > > > > > > American > > > > > > > > > tax payer! They do ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!!! (Except continue > > to > > > > grow, > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > their budgets getting bigger each and every > > year.....Eventually, > > > > each > > > > > > one > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > these agencies wants their own law enforcment division, where > > > > they > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > bully > > > > > > > > > the folks who pay their salaries!) > > > > > > > > > > Wake up and smell the coffee Holly!! > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 4:30 PM, Hollywood < > > [email protected]> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > KIT, > > > > > > > > > > > C'mon KIT you are smart enough to Google those agencies and > > > > find > > > > > > out > > > > > > > > > > what their duties are. Why should I do your work for you? > > If > > > > you > > > > > > don't > > > > > > > > > > know what they do how did you reach the conclusion they do > > it > > > > > > poorly? > > > > > > > > > > > You STLL don't want to discuss how all those agencies > > suddenly > > > > > > became > > > > > > > > > > socialist????? > > > > > > > > > > > Who do you propose build and maintain our highways and > > streets > > > > if > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > the DOT? > > > > > > > > > > Who would regulate the trucking industry? > > > > > > > > > > > Why are you suddenly omitting the ATF? > > > > > > > > > > > On Mar 4, 2:55 pm, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Holly, > > > > > > > > > > > > I never made such a claim, that the Department of > > Education, > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > Department > > > > > > > > > > > of Transportation, or the DOEnergy are socialist. They > > are > > > > > > > > bureaucratic > > > > > > > > > > > quagmires, that do nothing! They are a drain on our > > > > economy, > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > should > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > done away with. > > > > > > > > > > > > What is it that you think the Department of Education > > does? > > > > > > > > > > > > What is it that you think the Department of > > Transportation > > > > does? > > > > > > > > > > > > What is it that you think the Department of Energy does? > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 3:34 PM, Hollywood < > > > > [email protected]> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > KIT, > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pay attention KIT. Where did I suggest having a > > EXCLUSIVELY > > > > > > > > SOCIALIST > > > > > > > > > > > > CONTROLLED government in the United States? > > > > > > > > > > > > > Don't you want to address how the govt. agencies you > > > > > > > > mentioned,which > > > > > > > > > > > > have been in existance for fucking decades, suddenly > > became > > > > > > > > socialist > > > > > > > > > > > > under THIS administration but were not during the > > PREVIOUS > > > > > > > > > > > > administration? > > > > > > > > > > > > > NO? Thought not. > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mar 4, 2:19 pm, Keith In Tampa < > > [email protected]> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Holly, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Show me any socialist Nation-State, or communist > > > > Nation-State > > > > > > > > that is > > > > > > > > > > > > > working successfully. Show me one successful > > socialistic > > > > > > program > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nation that is working well. Just one, pick any one > > that > > > > you > > > > > > > > think > > > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > > > defend. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 1:55 PM, Hollywood < > > > > > > [email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > KIT, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Soooo, you're saying American are stupid? Many > > govt. > > > > have > > > > > > > > active > > > > > > > > > > > > > > socialist parties that are active in govt. You are > > > > rigid > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > unimaginative and insist of simply bleating slogans > > and > > > > > > talking > > > > > > > > > > > > > > points. Almost EVERY govt. has agencies that > > perform > > > > the > > > > > > duties > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > agencies you mention, some with more efficiency > > than > > > > > > others. > > > > > > > > Just > > > > > > > > > > > > > > because those agencies are NOW within the Obama > > > > > > administration > > > > > > > > does > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not suddenly make them "socialist". The same > > agencies > > > > > > existed > > > > > > > > under > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the previous administration, doing the functions as > > > > they do > > > > > > > > now. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You're talking partisan bullshit. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mar 4, 12:27 pm, Keith In Tampa < > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
