On Mon, 21 Oct 2024 07:44:41 -0400, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:

>On 10/20/24 8:32 PM, Governor Swill wrote:
>> On Sun, 20 Oct 2024 09:38:01 -0600, Skeeter <skeeterweed@photonmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Says who? I never said I was poor liar.
>>
>> You said you weren't doing well.
>>
>
>"I couls afford to do stuff."
>Said that in context to your prior
>"I was better off when Trump was in office."
>
>Golly, isn't it amazing how they can't keep their own story straight?
>
>Its almost as if they have ... confirmation bias.

Or more plainly, they are lying.

Republicans can't - CAN'T - win without lying and cheating.

Their policies are unpopular and given the chance, they will always run the
economy into the ground.

--
Reinstate the Fairness Doctrine

Two more reasons to not vote for Trump in 16 days.

55) Trump vowed to protect American jobs, but offshoring
increased, and manufacturing fell.

56) Trump said he would fix America's infrastructure but it
never happened. He announced so many failed "infrastructure weeks",
they became a running joke! White House reporter,
"Since it’s infrastructure week..." (Laughter is the press room)
(To Sarah Huckabee) "*Is* it infrastructure week?"

On Oct 21, 2024 at 4:31:02 PM MST, "Governor Swill" wrote
<muodhjldlpd6q76l2kqralvc4u3ervva68@4ax.com>:

> On Mon, 21 Oct 2024 07:44:41 -0400, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:
>
>> On 10/20/24 8:32 PM, Governor Swill wrote:
>>> On Sun, 20 Oct 2024 09:38:01 -0600, Skeeter <skeeterweed@photonmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Says who? I never said I was poor liar.
>>>
>>> You said you weren't doing well.
>>>
>>
>> "I couls afford to do stuff."
>> Said that in context to your prior
>> "I was better off when Trump was in office."
>>
>> Golly, isn't it amazing how they can't keep their own story straight?
>>
>> Its almost as if they have ... confirmation bias.
>
> Or more plainly, they are lying.
>
> Republicans can't - CAN'T - win without lying and cheating.
>

Both major parties do.... they do it more.

> Their policies are unpopular and given the chance, they will always run the
> economy into the ground.

Yup.

--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

On Oct 21, 2024 at 4:26:10 PM MST, "Governor Swill" wrote
<5nodhjlagmsdlaid0bmvjkcvr5h26mek0d@4ax.com>:

> On 21 Oct 2024 17:28:07 GMT, Snit <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Oct 21, 2024 at 10:13:36?AM MST, "pothead" wrote
> <snip>
>>> Meanwhile Trump has done more for the blacks during his 4 years
>>> as POTUS while the democrats have been mostly lip service.
>>
>> His support for white supremacy is not helping.
>>
>>> Snit just parrots the standard libby talking points.
>>
>> Interesting way to admit you have no counter.
>
> What Trump has done for blacks is a myth.

Not the bad stuff.

--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

In article <6716e9ed$1$3833$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
>
> On Oct 21, 2024 at 4:26:10 PM MST, "Governor Swill" wrote
> <5nodhjlagmsdlaid0bmvjkcvr5h26mek0d@4ax.com>:
>
> > On 21 Oct 2024 17:28:07 GMT, Snit <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Oct 21, 2024 at 10:13:36?AM MST, "pothead" wrote
> > <snip>
> >>> Meanwhile Trump has done more for the blacks during his 4 years
> >>> as POTUS while the democrats have been mostly lip service.
> >>
> >> His support for white supremacy is not helping.
> >>
> >>> Snit just parrots the standard libby talking points.
> >>
> >> Interesting way to admit you have no counter.
> >
> > What Trump has done for blacks is a myth.
>
> Not the bad stuff.

Tell us then.

On 2024-10-21, Skeeter <skeeterweed@photonmail.com> wrote:
> In article <6716c302$1$3620719$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
> brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
>>
>> On Oct 21, 2024 at 12:16:55 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
>> <6716a8a9$1$2873017$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
>>
>> >>>>> In short: you run. Like a coward. You cannot defend Trump... it is his white
>> >>>>> supremacy push you like.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Unlike you I don't let shit like that run my thinking. You do.
>> >>>
>> >>> Meanwhile Trump has done more for the blacks during his 4 years
>> >>> as POTUS while the democrats have been mostly lip service.
>> >>
>> >> His support for white supremacy is not helping.
>> >
>> > Show us how he supports that.
>>
>> You have recently said you pay attention. Thanks for admitting you do not.
>
> I answered you didn't I?
>>
>> Just some things you can look up:
>>
>> Charlottesville where he said there were fine people on both sides, one side
>> being white supremacists. The "defense" of this was he meant a more broad
>> group of people denouncing blacks and not just the direct white supremacists.
>>
>> In a debate where he asked the white supremacist group "Proud Boy" to "stand
>> by".
>>
>> Trump repeatedly was asked about such groups and refused to denounce them
>> (though later did, under pressure).
>>
>> Earned the support of David Duke and never denounced it.
>>
>> Pushed openly racist immigration policies.
>>
>> Ended diversity training.
>>
>> Repeated use of bigoted language such as "China virus" and "Kung Flu"
>>
>> Spoke of protecting "suburban housewives", a clear dog whistle.
>>
>> On and on and on.
>
> Old news. Why were they booing her at her rally?

Snit fancies himself as being educated and intelligent but he demonstrates
almost daily in fact that he is a very low information voter.

I refuse to waste time addressing all of his parroted points but here are a few.

Charlottesville- even left leaning Snopes exposed the fake news on this one.
<https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-very-fine-people/>

China virus?
Where the hell does snit think it came from?
Norway?
Diversity training?
Why are corporations quietly eliminating their DEI departments and requirements?
Hint: because it doesn't work. It's a bad joke. Most people want the most qualified person
for the job and not some diversity hire. Look at the US Secret Service for examples.
An agent who was unable to holster her own gun.
Trump wants legal immigration.
Oh and BTW, Trump was 100% correct when he made the statement that
they are not sending us their best and brightest.
Example: the rise in gang violence taking over cities like NYC and so forth.
etc.

Snit is just parroting NPR, MSNBC and so forth and the sad part is that he
is so ignorant he really believes the shit they spew.
Snit Michael Glasser is truly a village idiot whose village tossed him to the curb
much like his wife Anne recently did.

--
pothead

See Kamala Harris best interview ever.
https://www.foxnews.com/video/6363352689112
She really knocks this one out of the park.
Don't you agree?

On Oct 21, 2024 at 4:22:58 PM MST, "Governor Swill" wrote
<egodhj128p0fg0kbks7t20vsaqt2ec5d3s@4ax.com>:

> On 21 Oct 2024 13:50:11 GMT, Snit <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Oct 21, 2024 at 5:09:43?AM MST, "-hh" wrote <vf5ga7$ufks$1@dont-email.me>:
>>
>>> On 10/20/24 8:31 PM, Governor Swill wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 20 Oct 2024 09:36:11 -0600, Skeeter <skeeterweed@photonmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Damn you're dumb. Do you think your little bubble is the whole country?
>>>>
>>>> Do you think yours is?
>>>
>>> From: <https://x.com/PamKeithFL/status/1848126596663898590>
>>>
>>> [quote]
>>>
>>> I am learning while I knock doors that when people tell me they are
>>> voting for Trump because of the economy, they are really telling me they
>>> are voting for Trump because of white supremacy.
>>
>> Pretty much.
>
> +1
>
>>> I reach that conclusion because one follow up questions leaves them stumped:
>>>
>>> “What Trump policy has actually helped you or your family?”
>>>
>>> When I ask that question I get blank stares, “that’s a good question”
>>> responses. “I don’t know, I just think the economy was better.”
>>>
>>> All of it is bullshit. All of it. They are voting for white supremacy.
>>> Period.
>>
>> I would also say some vote for Trump because those around them do and they do
>> not really look much into politics. Or they buy into the propaganda from Fox
>> and the like.
>
> Peer pressure.

Yup.

--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

On Oct 21, 2024 at 4:21:34 PM MST, "Governor Swill" wrote
<kfodhj5pdvgpnoos3vekk3ijnc13ue7kde@4ax.com>:

> On Mon, 21 Oct 2024 07:33:43 -0600, Skeeter <skeeterweed@photonmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Only your side brings up race.
>
> <laughs and points>

My favorite bit of insanity on this is when people insist that it was the
Democrats who put up the symbols of slavery and racial oppression. Sure, rich
conservative white Democrats... so why not agree to take down these symbols of
slavery and racial oppression? And off they run, screaming "history", as if
one needs to have statues of Hitler in public places of honor to remember
WWII.

--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

On Oct 21, 2024 at 4:03:19 PM MST, "Governor Swill" wrote
<52ndhjdmt3smapo64btptiooeqbrb0ncv7@4ax.com>:

> On 21 Oct 2024 01:05:39 GMT, Snit <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Oct 20, 2024 at 5:17:41?PM MST, "Governor Swill" wrote
>> <d65bhjpm6220b9joe669sugmv9bt0utpdh@4ax.com>:
>>
>>> On 20 Oct 2024 03:31:33 GMT, Snit wrote:
>>>> On Oct 19, 2024 at 7:35:57?PM MST, "Governor Swill" wrote
>>>>> On 19 Oct 2024 18:01:32 GMT, Snit wrote:
>>>>>> On Oct 19, 2024 at 8:18:36?AM MST, "Governor Swill" wrote
>>>>>>> On 18 Oct 2024 21:46:15 GMT, Snit wrote:
>>>>>>>> I wish we had something closer to equal representation. With the Senate and
>>>>>>>> the Electoral College we are FAR from that. Even the House is pretty far from
>>>>>>>> it. I think the US would be MUCH better off if we had one adult citizen = one
>>>>>>>> vote, and each vote counted the same.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Pure democracy? That would be untenable in a nation of more than 300,000,000
>>>>>>> citizens.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Oh, we would still have representatives... but something closer to equal
>>>>>> representation. Not the nonsense now where some people have 20x the
>>>>>> representational power of others.
>>>>>
>>>>> Where does that occur?
>>>>
>>>> Wyoming vs. California. Doing some research now.
>>>>
>>>> That was what I was thinking for the Senate... but it is MUCH worse than that
>>>> there.
>>>>
>>>> In the Senate:
>>>>
>>>> Wyoming: 1 senator represents about 290,000 people.
>>>> California: 1 senator represents about 20 million people.
>>>>
>>>> That means about a 1:69 representational inequality.
>>>>
>>>> In the House:
>>>>
>>>> Wyoming: 1 representative for ~580,000 people
>>>> California: 1 representative for every ~770,000 people
>>>
>>> Then the solution is to send 200,000 Californians to Wyoming?
>>
>> A friend of mine has said he wants to see state lines redrawn every 10 years
>> to keep roughly the same level of population in each state. Not sure I like
>> your idea any better than his. LOL!
>>>
>>>> That means even in the house a about a 1:1.3 representational inequality.
>>>>
>>>> Wyoming has 3 electoral votes for about 580,000 people, or ~193,000 people per
>>>> electoral vote.
>>>> California has 55 electoral votes for nearly 40 million people, or ~727,000
>>>> people per electoral vote.
>>>>
>>>> This means a 1:3.8 representational inequality
>>>
>>> I agree that in modern times the EC is not a good idea. However, the
>>> representational issues you note are due to the fact that every state gets two
>>> senators regardless of population.
>>
>> Right. But that leads to GROSSLY disproportionate representation, 5x worse
>> than what we had at the start of the country.
>
> You're wrong here.
>
> Every state has always had two Senators.

Where did you think I said otherwise? The states were not as disproportionate
in numbers at the time.
>
> This is why we have two legislative Houses. The House is the house of the
> people (representation by population), the Senate is the house of the states
> (each state gets an equal voice).

This is not in contention.
>
> I have no problem with that system. I have no problem with the EC, as such.
> The
> problem I have is with the winner take all system most states employ. Imo,
> electors should be apportioned according to the distribution of votes among the
> candidates. If Joe Schmo gets 60% of the votes, he should get 60% of the
> electors, not all of them.

The system is not going to change, but I see it as a bit issue. It is why the
will of the people is largely ignored on gun control, climate change, health
insurance, abortion, and many more issues.
>
>>>> And yet California citizens give, on average, about $5000 a year to the US
>>>> government, and each Wyoming citizen GETS a bit under $7000.
>>>>
>>>> Those who have the least representation are giving the most. Those with the
>>>> most representation are getting massive support from the Federal government.
>>>
>>> These things are all arguable.
>>>
>>> It would require a fundamental rewriting of the Constitution to change this.
>>
>> Right. I do not expect it to change. It is, though, key to many of the issues
>> we have in this country, IMNSHO.
>
> It does prevent the majority from riding roughshod over the minority, but it
> also sometimes allows the minority to dictate to the majority.

That is the issue: the minority controls the majority, and it leads to those
in CA getting the least say but putting the most into the Federal system. This
is contrary to the idea of no taxation without representation -- those with
the least representing are taxed the most.
>
>>> Do
>>> you really think that in such a divisive, highly partisan political environment
>>> as we have today, that such a rewrite would be a good idea?
>>
>> Good idea or not, it would never pass.
>>>
>>> The problem is that, like most foreigners, you do not understand the "United
>>> STATES of America". The US is not as singular a country as most, but is in
>>> fact, an assemblage of separate countries, aka 'states'.
>>>
>>> The House represents the population of the US, the Senate represents the States
>>> of the US.
>>>
>>> The population votes and each state votes.
>>
>> And this leads to many issues.
>>>
>>> It is the states, not the population, who ultimately select the POTUS.
>>>
>>> I find that a better solution than Britain's of allowing the Parliament
>>> (Congress) to select the Prime Minister (POTUS) any time the PM (POTUS) no
>>> longer has the support of a majority of the members of Parliament (Congress).
>>
>> I *wish* we had something closer to equal representation but I know we are not
>> going to get it. Might lead to the downfall of the country.
>
> Representation in Congress works fine. It's the two party system that's
> bleeding us dry.

Sadly even that is SOMEWHAT cooked into our constitution. If you have more
than two parties it is unlikely any one would get the majority vote for the
president, and then it goes to the House, with each state getting equal votes.
This means the will of the people would largely be ignored.

--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

On Oct 21, 2024 at 4:00:23 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<6716dd08$1$2385534$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:

> In article <6716c302$1$3620719$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
> brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
>>
>> On Oct 21, 2024 at 12:16:55 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
>> <6716a8a9$1$2873017$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
>>
>>>>>>> In short: you run. Like a coward. You cannot defend Trump... it is his white
>>>>>>> supremacy push you like.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Unlike you I don't let shit like that run my thinking. You do.
>>>>>
>>>>> Meanwhile Trump has done more for the blacks during his 4 years
>>>>> as POTUS while the democrats have been mostly lip service.
>>>>
>>>> His support for white supremacy is not helping.
>>>
>>> Show us how he supports that.
>>
>> You have recently said you pay attention. Thanks for admitting you do not.
>
> I answered you didn't I?

You ran... like a coward.
>>
>> Just some things you can look up:
>>
>> Charlottesville where he said there were fine people on both sides, one side
>> being white supremacists. The "defense" of this was he meant a more broad
>> group of people denouncing blacks and not just the direct white supremacists.
>>
>> In a debate where he asked the white supremacist group "Proud Boy" to "stand
>> by".
>>
>> Trump repeatedly was asked about such groups and refused to denounce them
>> (though later did, under pressure).
>>
>> Earned the support of David Duke and never denounced it.
>>
>> Pushed openly racist immigration policies.
>>
>> Ended diversity training.
>>
>> Repeated use of bigoted language such as "China virus" and "Kung Flu"
>>
>> Spoke of protecting "suburban housewives", a clear dog whistle.
>>
>> On and on and on.

And you ran from this.

>
> Old news. Why were they booing her at her rally?

--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

In article <6717009b$0$2873014$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
>
> On Oct 21, 2024 at 4:00:23 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
> <6716dd08$1$2385534$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
>
> > In article <6716c302$1$3620719$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
> > brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
> >>
> >> On Oct 21, 2024 at 12:16:55 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
> >> <6716a8a9$1$2873017$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
> >>
> >>>>>>> In short: you run. Like a coward. You cannot defend Trump... it is his white
> >>>>>>> supremacy push you like.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Unlike you I don't let shit like that run my thinking. You do.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Meanwhile Trump has done more for the blacks during his 4 years
> >>>>> as POTUS while the democrats have been mostly lip service.
> >>>>
> >>>> His support for white supremacy is not helping.
> >>>
> >>> Show us how he supports that.
> >>
> >> You have recently said you pay attention. Thanks for admitting you do not.
> >
> > I answered you didn't I?
>
> You ran... like a coward.

Nope you're lying.
> >>
> >> Just some things you can look up:
> >>
> >> Charlottesville where he said there were fine people on both sides, one side
> >> being white supremacists. The "defense" of this was he meant a more broad
> >> group of people denouncing blacks and not just the direct white supremacists.
> >>
> >> In a debate where he asked the white supremacist group "Proud Boy" to "stand
> >> by".
> >>
> >> Trump repeatedly was asked about such groups and refused to denounce them
> >> (though later did, under pressure).
> >>
> >> Earned the support of David Duke and never denounced it.
> >>
> >> Pushed openly racist immigration policies.
> >>
> >> Ended diversity training.
> >>
> >> Repeated use of bigoted language such as "China virus" and "Kung Flu"
> >>
> >> Spoke of protecting "suburban housewives", a clear dog whistle.
> >>
> >> On and on and on.
>
> And you ran from this.

Bullshit. I don't read AI.
>
> >
> > Old news. Why were they booing her at her rally?

And you ran from this.

On Oct 21, 2024 at 7:59:41 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<671714df$2$1428124$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:

> In article <6717009b$0$2873014$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
> brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
>>
>> On Oct 21, 2024 at 4:00:23 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
>> <6716dd08$1$2385534$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
>>
>>> In article <6716c302$1$3620719$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
>>> brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
>>>>
>>>> On Oct 21, 2024 at 12:16:55 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
>>>> <6716a8a9$1$2873017$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
>>>>
>>>>>>>>> In short: you run. Like a coward. You cannot defend Trump... it is his white
>>>>>>>>> supremacy push you like.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Unlike you I don't let shit like that run my thinking. You do.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Meanwhile Trump has done more for the blacks during his 4 years
>>>>>>> as POTUS while the democrats have been mostly lip service.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> His support for white supremacy is not helping.
>>>>>
>>>>> Show us how he supports that.
>>>>
>>>> You have recently said you pay attention. Thanks for admitting you do not.
>>>
>>> I answered you didn't I?
>>
>> You ran... like a coward.
>
> Nope you're lying.
>>>>
>>>> Just some things you can look up:
>>>>
>>>> Charlottesville where he said there were fine people on both sides, one side
>>>> being white supremacists. The "defense" of this was he meant a more broad
>>>> group of people denouncing blacks and not just the direct white supremacists.
>>>>
>>>> In a debate where he asked the white supremacist group "Proud Boy" to "stand
>>>> by".
>>>>
>>>> Trump repeatedly was asked about such groups and refused to denounce them
>>>> (though later did, under pressure).
>>>>
>>>> Earned the support of David Duke and never denounced it.
>>>>
>>>> Pushed openly racist immigration policies.
>>>>
>>>> Ended diversity training.
>>>>
>>>> Repeated use of bigoted language such as "China virus" and "Kung Flu"
>>>>
>>>> Spoke of protecting "suburban housewives", a clear dog whistle.
>>>>
>>>> On and on and on.
>>
>> And you ran from this.
>
> Bullshit. I don't read AI.

Not everything is AI.
>>
>>>
>>> Old news. Why were they booing her at her rally?
>
> And you ran from this.

--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

In article <67171838$0$3833$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
>
> On Oct 21, 2024 at 7:59:41 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
> <671714df$2$1428124$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
>
> > In article <6717009b$0$2873014$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
> > brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
> >>
> >> On Oct 21, 2024 at 4:00:23 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
> >> <6716dd08$1$2385534$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
> >>
> >>> In article <6716c302$1$3620719$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
> >>> brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
> >>>>
> >>>> On Oct 21, 2024 at 12:16:55 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
> >>>> <6716a8a9$1$2873017$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>>> In short: you run. Like a coward. You cannot defend Trump... it is his white
> >>>>>>>>> supremacy push you like.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Unlike you I don't let shit like that run my thinking. You do.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Meanwhile Trump has done more for the blacks during his 4 years
> >>>>>>> as POTUS while the democrats have been mostly lip service.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> His support for white supremacy is not helping.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Show us how he supports that.
> >>>>
> >>>> You have recently said you pay attention. Thanks for admitting you do not.
> >>>
> >>> I answered you didn't I?
> >>
> >> You ran... like a coward.
> >
> > Nope you're lying.
> >>>>
> >>>> Just some things you can look up:
> >>>>
> >>>> Charlottesville where he said there were fine people on both sides, one side
> >>>> being white supremacists. The "defense" of this was he meant a more broad
> >>>> group of people denouncing blacks and not just the direct white supremacists.
> >>>>
> >>>> In a debate where he asked the white supremacist group "Proud Boy" to "stand
> >>>> by".
> >>>>
> >>>> Trump repeatedly was asked about such groups and refused to denounce them
> >>>> (though later did, under pressure).
> >>>>
> >>>> Earned the support of David Duke and never denounced it.
> >>>>
> >>>> Pushed openly racist immigration policies.
> >>>>
> >>>> Ended diversity training.
> >>>>
> >>>> Repeated use of bigoted language such as "China virus" and "Kung Flu"
> >>>>
> >>>> Spoke of protecting "suburban housewives", a clear dog whistle.
> >>>>
> >>>> On and on and on.
> >>
> >> And you ran from this.
> >
> > Bullshit. I don't read AI.
>
> Not everything is AI.
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Old news. Why were they booing her at her rally?
> >
> > And you ran from this.

But your responses are.

On Oct 21, 2024 at 8:27:51 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<67171bb7$2$2873018$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:

> In article <67171838$0$3833$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
> brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
>>
>> On Oct 21, 2024 at 7:59:41 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
>> <671714df$2$1428124$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
>>
>>> In article <6717009b$0$2873014$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
>>> brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
>>>>
>>>> On Oct 21, 2024 at 4:00:23 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
>>>> <6716dd08$1$2385534$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
>>>>
>>>>> In article <6716c302$1$3620719$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
>>>>> brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Oct 21, 2024 at 12:16:55 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
>>>>>> <6716a8a9$1$2873017$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> In short: you run. Like a coward. You cannot defend Trump... it is his white
>>>>>>>>>>> supremacy push you like.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Unlike you I don't let shit like that run my thinking. You do.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Meanwhile Trump has done more for the blacks during his 4 years
>>>>>>>>> as POTUS while the democrats have been mostly lip service.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> His support for white supremacy is not helping.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Show us how he supports that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You have recently said you pay attention. Thanks for admitting you do not.
>>>>>
>>>>> I answered you didn't I?
>>>>
>>>> You ran... like a coward.
>>>
>>> Nope you're lying.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Just some things you can look up:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Charlottesville where he said there were fine people on both sides, one side
>>>>>> being white supremacists. The "defense" of this was he meant a more broad
>>>>>> group of people denouncing blacks and not just the direct white supremacists.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In a debate where he asked the white supremacist group "Proud Boy" to "stand
>>>>>> by".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Trump repeatedly was asked about such groups and refused to denounce them
>>>>>> (though later did, under pressure).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Earned the support of David Duke and never denounced it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Pushed openly racist immigration policies.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ended diversity training.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Repeated use of bigoted language such as "China virus" and "Kung Flu"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Spoke of protecting "suburban housewives", a clear dog whistle.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On and on and on.
>>>>
>>>> And you ran from this.
>>>
>>> Bullshit. I don't read AI.
>>
>> Not everything is AI.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Old news. Why were they booing her at her rally?
>>>
>>> And you ran from this.
>
> But your responses are.

The following is not AI, but you ran from it anyway. You have no reasoned
response. Trump quite openly backs white supremacy. Simply a fact.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Charlottesville where he said there were fine people on both sides, one side
being white supremacists. The "defense" of this was he meant a more broad
group of people denouncing blacks and not just the direct white supremacists.

In a debate where he asked the white supremacist group "Proud Boy" to "stand
by".

Trump repeatedly was asked about such groups and refused to denounce them
(though later did, under pressure).

Earned the support of David Duke and never denounced it.

Pushed openly racist immigration policies.

Ended diversity training.

Repeated use of bigoted language such as "China virus" and "Kung Flu"

Spoke of protecting "suburban housewives", a clear dog whistle.

On and on and on.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

In article <67172130$0$212419$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
>
> On Oct 21, 2024 at 8:27:51 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
> <67171bb7$2$2873018$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
>
> > In article <67171838$0$3833$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
> > brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
> >>
> >> On Oct 21, 2024 at 7:59:41 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
> >> <671714df$2$1428124$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
> >>
> >>> In article <6717009b$0$2873014$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
> >>> brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
> >>>>
> >>>> On Oct 21, 2024 at 4:00:23 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
> >>>> <6716dd08$1$2385534$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
> >>>>
> >>>>> In article <6716c302$1$3620719$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
> >>>>> brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Oct 21, 2024 at 12:16:55 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
> >>>>>> <6716a8a9$1$2873017$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> In short: you run. Like a coward. You cannot defend Trump... it is his white
> >>>>>>>>>>> supremacy push you like.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Unlike you I don't let shit like that run my thinking. You do.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Meanwhile Trump has done more for the blacks during his 4 years
> >>>>>>>>> as POTUS while the democrats have been mostly lip service.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> His support for white supremacy is not helping.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Show us how he supports that.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> You have recently said you pay attention. Thanks for admitting you do not.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I answered you didn't I?
> >>>>
> >>>> You ran... like a coward.
> >>>
> >>> Nope you're lying.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Just some things you can look up:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Charlottesville where he said there were fine people on both sides, one side
> >>>>>> being white supremacists. The "defense" of this was he meant a more broad
> >>>>>> group of people denouncing blacks and not just the direct white supremacists.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> In a debate where he asked the white supremacist group "Proud Boy" to "stand
> >>>>>> by".
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Trump repeatedly was asked about such groups and refused to denounce them
> >>>>>> (though later did, under pressure).
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Earned the support of David Duke and never denounced it.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Pushed openly racist immigration policies.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Ended diversity training.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Repeated use of bigoted language such as "China virus" and "Kung Flu"
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Spoke of protecting "suburban housewives", a clear dog whistle.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On and on and on.
> >>>>
> >>>> And you ran from this.
> >>>
> >>> Bullshit. I don't read AI.
> >>
> >> Not everything is AI.
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Old news. Why were they booing her at her rally?
> >>>
> >>> And you ran from this.
> >
> > But your responses are.
>
> The following is not AI, but you ran from it anyway. You have no reasoned
> response. Trump quite openly backs white supremacy. Simply a fact.

No he doesn't. That is bullshit. Why are so many blacks supporting him?
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Charlottesville where he said there were fine people on both sides, one side
> being white supremacists. The "defense" of this was he meant a more broad
> group of people denouncing blacks and not just the direct white supremacists.
>
> In a debate where he asked the white supremacist group "Proud Boy" to "stand
> by".
>
> Trump repeatedly was asked about such groups and refused to denounce them
> (though later did, under pressure).
>
> Earned the support of David Duke and never denounced it.
>
> Pushed openly racist immigration policies.
>
> Ended diversity training.
>
> Repeated use of bigoted language such as "China virus" and "Kung Flu"
>
> Spoke of protecting "suburban housewives", a clear dog whistle.
>
> On and on and on.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------

On Oct 22, 2024 at 6:37:19 AM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
<6717aa52$0$1427989$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:

> In article <67172130$0$212419$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
> brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
>>
>> On Oct 21, 2024 at 8:27:51 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
>> <67171bb7$2$2873018$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
>>
>>> In article <67171838$0$3833$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
>>> brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
>>>>
>>>> On Oct 21, 2024 at 7:59:41 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
>>>> <671714df$2$1428124$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
>>>>
>>>>> In article <6717009b$0$2873014$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
>>>>> brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Oct 21, 2024 at 4:00:23 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
>>>>>> <6716dd08$1$2385534$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In article <6716c302$1$3620719$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
>>>>>>> brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Oct 21, 2024 at 12:16:55 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
>>>>>>>> <6716a8a9$1$2873017$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> In short: you run. Like a coward. You cannot defend Trump... it is his white
>>>>>>>>>>>>> supremacy push you like.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Unlike you I don't let shit like that run my thinking. You do.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Meanwhile Trump has done more for the blacks during his 4 years
>>>>>>>>>>> as POTUS while the democrats have been mostly lip service.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> His support for white supremacy is not helping.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Show us how he supports that.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You have recently said you pay attention. Thanks for admitting you do not.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I answered you didn't I?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You ran... like a coward.
>>>>>
>>>>> Nope you're lying.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Just some things you can look up:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Charlottesville where he said there were fine people on both sides, one side
>>>>>>>> being white supremacists. The "defense" of this was he meant a more broad
>>>>>>>> group of people denouncing blacks and not just the direct white supremacists.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In a debate where he asked the white supremacist group "Proud Boy" to "stand
>>>>>>>> by".
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Trump repeatedly was asked about such groups and refused to denounce them
>>>>>>>> (though later did, under pressure).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Earned the support of David Duke and never denounced it.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Pushed openly racist immigration policies.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ended diversity training.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Repeated use of bigoted language such as "China virus" and "Kung Flu"
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Spoke of protecting "suburban housewives", a clear dog whistle.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On and on and on.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And you ran from this.
>>>>>
>>>>> Bullshit. I don't read AI.
>>>>
>>>> Not everything is AI.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Old news. Why were they booing her at her rally?
>>>>>
>>>>> And you ran from this.
>>>
>>> But your responses are.
>>
>> The following is not AI, but you ran from it anyway. You have no reasoned
>> response. Trump quite openly backs white supremacy. Simply a fact.
>
> No he doesn't. That is bullshit. Why are so many blacks supporting him?
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Charlottesville where he said there were fine people on both sides, one side
>> being white supremacists. The "defense" of this was he meant a more broad
>> group of people denouncing blacks and not just the direct white supremacists.
>>
>> In a debate where he asked the white supremacist group "Proud Boy" to "stand
>> by".
>>
>> Trump repeatedly was asked about such groups and refused to denounce them
>> (though later did, under pressure).
>>
>> Earned the support of David Duke and never denounced it.
>>
>> Pushed openly racist immigration policies.
>>
>> Ended diversity training.
>>
>> Repeated use of bigoted language such as "China virus" and "Kung Flu"
>>
>> Spoke of protecting "suburban housewives", a clear dog whistle.
>>
>> On and on and on.
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------

You claim he does not as you ignore examples of him doing so. Boring.

--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

In article <6717ac03$0$3234619$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
>
> On Oct 22, 2024 at 6:37:19 AM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
> <6717aa52$0$1427989$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
>
> > In article <67172130$0$212419$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
> > brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
> >>
> >> On Oct 21, 2024 at 8:27:51 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
> >> <67171bb7$2$2873018$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
> >>
> >>> In article <67171838$0$3833$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
> >>> brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
> >>>>
> >>>> On Oct 21, 2024 at 7:59:41 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
> >>>> <671714df$2$1428124$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
> >>>>
> >>>>> In article <6717009b$0$2873014$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
> >>>>> brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Oct 21, 2024 at 4:00:23 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
> >>>>>> <6716dd08$1$2385534$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> In article <6716c302$1$3620719$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
> >>>>>>> brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Oct 21, 2024 at 12:16:55 PM MST, "Skeeter" wrote
> >>>>>>>> <6716a8a9$1$2873017$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> In short: you run. Like a coward. You cannot defend Trump... it is his white
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> supremacy push you like.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Unlike you I don't let shit like that run my thinking. You do.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Meanwhile Trump has done more for the blacks during his 4 years
> >>>>>>>>>>> as POTUS while the democrats have been mostly lip service.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> His support for white supremacy is not helping.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Show us how he supports that.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> You have recently said you pay attention. Thanks for admitting you do not.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I answered you didn't I?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> You ran... like a coward.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Nope you're lying.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Just some things you can look up:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Charlottesville where he said there were fine people on both sides, one side
> >>>>>>>> being white supremacists. The "defense" of this was he meant a more broad
> >>>>>>>> group of people denouncing blacks and not just the direct white supremacists.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> In a debate where he asked the white supremacist group "Proud Boy" to "stand
> >>>>>>>> by".
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Trump repeatedly was asked about such groups and refused to denounce them
> >>>>>>>> (though later did, under pressure).
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Earned the support of David Duke and never denounced it.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Pushed openly racist immigration policies.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Ended diversity training.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Repeated use of bigoted language such as "China virus" and "Kung Flu"
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Spoke of protecting "suburban housewives", a clear dog whistle.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On and on and on.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> And you ran from this.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Bullshit. I don't read AI.
> >>>>
> >>>> Not everything is AI.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Old news. Why were they booing her at her rally?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> And you ran from this.
> >>>
> >>> But your responses are.
> >>
> >> The following is not AI, but you ran from it anyway. You have no reasoned
> >> response. Trump quite openly backs white supremacy. Simply a fact.
> >
> > No he doesn't. That is bullshit. Why are so many blacks supporting him?
> >>
> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> Charlottesville where he said there were fine people on both sides, one side
> >> being white supremacists. The "defense" of this was he meant a more broad
> >> group of people denouncing blacks and not just the direct white supremacists.
> >>
> >> In a debate where he asked the white supremacist group "Proud Boy" to "stand
> >> by".
> >>
> >> Trump repeatedly was asked about such groups and refused to denounce them
> >> (though later did, under pressure).
> >>
> >> Earned the support of David Duke and never denounced it.
> >>
> >> Pushed openly racist immigration policies.
> >>
> >> Ended diversity training.
> >>
> >> Repeated use of bigoted language such as "China virus" and "Kung Flu"
> >>
> >> Spoke of protecting "suburban housewives", a clear dog whistle.
> >>
> >> On and on and on.
> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> You claim he does not as you ignore examples of him doing so. Boring.

You are falling behind like Harris. Try to keep up.

On 22 Oct 2024 01:31:41 GMT, Snit <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Oct 21, 2024 at 4:03:19?PM MST, "Governor Swill" wrote
><52ndhjdmt3smapo64btptiooeqbrb0ncv7@4ax.com>:
>
>> On 21 Oct 2024 01:05:39 GMT, Snit <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Oct 20, 2024 at 5:17:41?PM MST, "Governor Swill" wrote
>>> <d65bhjpm6220b9joe669sugmv9bt0utpdh@4ax.com>:
>>>
>>>> On 20 Oct 2024 03:31:33 GMT, Snit wrote:
>>>>> On Oct 19, 2024 at 7:35:57?PM MST, "Governor Swill" wrote
>>>>>> On 19 Oct 2024 18:01:32 GMT, Snit wrote:
>>>>>>> On Oct 19, 2024 at 8:18:36?AM MST, "Governor Swill" wrote
>>>>>>>> On 18 Oct 2024 21:46:15 GMT, Snit wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I wish we had something closer to equal representation. With the Senate and
>>>>>>>>> the Electoral College we are FAR from that. Even the House is pretty far from
>>>>>>>>> it. I think the US would be MUCH better off if we had one adult citizen = one
>>>>>>>>> vote, and each vote counted the same.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Pure democracy? That would be untenable in a nation of more than 300,000,000
>>>>>>>> citizens.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Oh, we would still have representatives... but something closer to equal
>>>>>>> representation. Not the nonsense now where some people have 20x the
>>>>>>> representational power of others.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Where does that occur?
>>>>>
>>>>> Wyoming vs. California. Doing some research now.
>>>>>
>>>>> That was what I was thinking for the Senate... but it is MUCH worse than that
>>>>> there.
>>>>>
>>>>> In the Senate:
>>>>>
>>>>> Wyoming: 1 senator represents about 290,000 people.
>>>>> California: 1 senator represents about 20 million people.
>>>>>
>>>>> That means about a 1:69 representational inequality.
>>>>>
>>>>> In the House:
>>>>>
>>>>> Wyoming: 1 representative for ~580,000 people
>>>>> California: 1 representative for every ~770,000 people
>>>>
>>>> Then the solution is to send 200,000 Californians to Wyoming?
>>>
>>> A friend of mine has said he wants to see state lines redrawn every 10 years
>>> to keep roughly the same level of population in each state. Not sure I like
>>> your idea any better than his. LOL!
>>>>
>>>>> That means even in the house a about a 1:1.3 representational inequality.
>>>>>
>>>>> Wyoming has 3 electoral votes for about 580,000 people, or ~193,000 people per
>>>>> electoral vote.
>>>>> California has 55 electoral votes for nearly 40 million people, or ~727,000
>>>>> people per electoral vote.
>>>>>
>>>>> This means a 1:3.8 representational inequality
>>>>
>>>> I agree that in modern times the EC is not a good idea. However, the
>>>> representational issues you note are due to the fact that every state gets two
>>>> senators regardless of population.
>>>
>>> Right. But that leads to GROSSLY disproportionate representation, 5x worse
>>> than what we had at the start of the country.
>>
>> You're wrong here.
>>
>> Every state has always had two Senators.
>
>Where did you think I said otherwise? The states were not as disproportionate
>in numbers at the time.

Either we're at cross purposes or you're missing some things.

Early in the Republic, the south was deliberately over represented by
Constitutional decree. That error has been repaired. As it stands, the average
rep represents about 700k constituents. There are states with less people than
that but they are few and not enough to skew representation.

The Senate has nothing to do with proportionate representation, that's the job
of the House.
>> This is why we have two legislative Houses. The House is the house of the
>> people (representation by population), the Senate is the house of the states
>> (each state gets an equal voice).
>
>This is not in contention.

Then why do you complain above about disproportionate representation?
>
>> I have no problem with that system. I have no problem with the EC, as such.
>> The
>> problem I have is with the winner take all system most states employ. Imo,
>> electors should be apportioned according to the distribution of votes among the
>> candidates. If Joe Schmo gets 60% of the votes, he should get 60% of the
>> electors, not all of them.
>
>The system is not going to change, but I see it as a bit issue. It is why the
>will of the people is largely ignored on gun control, climate change, health
>insurance, abortion, and many more issues.

I disagree, given the structure of the country. The bigger problem is the
winner-takes-all method of selecting electors.
>>>>> And yet California citizens give, on average, about $5000 a year to the US
>>>>> government, and each Wyoming citizen GETS a bit under $7000.
>>>>>
>>>>> Those who have the least representation are giving the most. Those with the
>>>>> most representation are getting massive support from the Federal government.
>>>>
>>>> These things are all arguable.
>>>>
>>>> It would require a fundamental rewriting of the Constitution to change this.
>>>
>>> Right. I do not expect it to change. It is, though, key to many of the issues
>>> we have in this country, IMNSHO.
>>
>> It does prevent the majority from riding roughshod over the minority, but it
>> also sometimes allows the minority to dictate to the majority.
>
>That is the issue: the minority controls the majority, and it leads to those
>in CA getting the least say but putting the most into the Federal system. This
>is contrary to the idea of no taxation without representation -- those with
>the least representing are taxed the most.

Californians have the same House representation as Texans or Iowans.

The Senate is proportionate to the number of States in the Union. The
foundation of the disagreement with the Senate is that this is the United STATES
of America. Technically, each state is sovereign. The Constitution never
created a country called America.
>>>> Do
>>>> you really think that in such a divisive, highly partisan political environment
>>>> as we have today, that such a rewrite would be a good idea?
>>>
>>> Good idea or not, it would never pass.
>>>>
>>>> The problem is that, like most foreigners, you do not understand the "United
>>>> STATES of America". The US is not as singular a country as most, but is in
>>>> fact, an assemblage of separate countries, aka 'states'.
>>>>
>>>> The House represents the population of the US, the Senate represents the States
>>>> of the US.
>>>>
>>>> The population votes and each state votes.
>>>
>>> And this leads to many issues.
>>>>
>>>> It is the states, not the population, who ultimately select the POTUS.
>>>>
>>>> I find that a better solution than Britain's of allowing the Parliament
>>>> (Congress) to select the Prime Minister (POTUS) any time the PM (POTUS) no
>>>> longer has the support of a majority of the members of Parliament (Congress).
>>>
>>> I *wish* we had something closer to equal representation but I know we are not
>>> going to get it. Might lead to the downfall of the country.
>>
>> Representation in Congress works fine. It's the two party system that's
>> bleeding us dry.
>
>Sadly even that is SOMEWHAT cooked into our constitution. If you have more
>than two parties it is unlikely any one would get the majority vote for the
>president, and then it goes to the House, with each state getting equal votes.
>This means the will of the people would largely be ignored.

A part of it is the desire of every voter to vote for the 'winner'. Their
chance of doing that is better if there are only two candidates.

NP: The Who - See Me, Feel Me

--
Reinstate the Fairness Doctrine

On 22 Oct 2024 01:27:03 GMT, Snit <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Oct 21, 2024 at 4:21:34?PM MST, "Governor Swill" wrote
><kfodhj5pdvgpnoos3vekk3ijnc13ue7kde@4ax.com>:
>
>> On Mon, 21 Oct 2024 07:33:43 -0600, Skeeter <skeeterweed@photonmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Only your side brings up race.
>>
>> <laughs and points>
>
>My favorite bit of insanity on this is when people insist that it was the
>Democrats who put up the symbols of slavery and racial oppression. Sure, rich
>conservative white Democrats... so why not agree to take down these symbols of
>slavery and racial oppression? And off they run, screaming "history", as if
>one needs to have statues of Hitler in public places of honor to remember
>WWII.

Never thought about it quite like that, but you're right. They excoriate
Democrats for slavery, states' rights and the civil war, then they complain
about taking down confederate statues, implementing affirmative action, federal
supremacy and then threaten civil war if they don't get their way.

NP: The Who - The Seeker

--
Reinstate the Fairness Doctrine

Two more reasons to not vote for Trump in 13 days.

57) Trump said he would be "the voice" of American workers.
(Trump "I am your voice!") But he filled the National Labor
Relations Board with anti-union flacks who made it harder for
workers to unionize.

58) Trump's Labor Department made it easier for bosses to get
out of paying workers overtime, which cheated 8 million workers of extra pay.

On 21 Oct 2024 23:55:25 GMT, Snit <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Oct 21, 2024 at 4:26:10?PM MST, "Governor Swill" wrote
><5nodhjlagmsdlaid0bmvjkcvr5h26mek0d@4ax.com>:
>
>> On 21 Oct 2024 17:28:07 GMT, Snit <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Oct 21, 2024 at 10:13:36?AM MST, "pothead" wrote
>> <snip>
>>>> Meanwhile Trump has done more for the blacks during his 4 years
>>>> as POTUS while the democrats have been mostly lip service.
>>>
>>> His support for white supremacy is not helping.
>>>
>>>> Snit just parrots the standard libby talking points.
>>>
>>> Interesting way to admit you have no counter.
>>
>> What Trump has done for blacks is a myth.
>
>Not the bad stuff.

"for"

NP: The Who - Summertime Blues

--
Reinstate the Fairness Doctrine

Two more reasons to not vote for Trump in 13 days.

57) Trump said he would be "the voice" of American workers.
(Trump "I am your voice!") But he filled the National Labor
Relations Board with anti-union flacks who made it harder for
workers to unionize.

58) Trump's Labor Department made it easier for bosses to get
out of paying workers overtime, which cheated 8 million workers of extra pay.

On Oct 23, 2024 at 8:22:49 PM MST, "Governor Swill" wrote
<drejhjl617d1j7ij6sf9i2lbpi3f1ikv8o@4ax.com>:

> On 22 Oct 2024 01:31:41 GMT, Snit <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Oct 21, 2024 at 4:03:19?PM MST, "Governor Swill" wrote
>> <52ndhjdmt3smapo64btptiooeqbrb0ncv7@4ax.com>:
>>
>>> On 21 Oct 2024 01:05:39 GMT, Snit <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Oct 20, 2024 at 5:17:41?PM MST, "Governor Swill" wrote
>>>> <d65bhjpm6220b9joe669sugmv9bt0utpdh@4ax.com>:
>>>>
>>>>> On 20 Oct 2024 03:31:33 GMT, Snit wrote:
>>>>>> On Oct 19, 2024 at 7:35:57?PM MST, "Governor Swill" wrote
>>>>>>> On 19 Oct 2024 18:01:32 GMT, Snit wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Oct 19, 2024 at 8:18:36?AM MST, "Governor Swill" wrote
>>>>>>>>> On 18 Oct 2024 21:46:15 GMT, Snit wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> I wish we had something closer to equal representation. With the Senate and
>>>>>>>>>> the Electoral College we are FAR from that. Even the House is pretty far from
>>>>>>>>>> it. I think the US would be MUCH better off if we had one adult citizen = one
>>>>>>>>>> vote, and each vote counted the same.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Pure democracy? That would be untenable in a nation of more than 300,000,000
>>>>>>>>> citizens.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Oh, we would still have representatives... but something closer to equal
>>>>>>>> representation. Not the nonsense now where some people have 20x the
>>>>>>>> representational power of others.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Where does that occur?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Wyoming vs. California. Doing some research now.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That was what I was thinking for the Senate... but it is MUCH worse than that
>>>>>> there.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In the Senate:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Wyoming: 1 senator represents about 290,000 people.
>>>>>> California: 1 senator represents about 20 million people.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That means about a 1:69 representational inequality.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In the House:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Wyoming: 1 representative for ~580,000 people
>>>>>> California: 1 representative for every ~770,000 people
>>>>>
>>>>> Then the solution is to send 200,000 Californians to Wyoming?
>>>>
>>>> A friend of mine has said he wants to see state lines redrawn every 10 years
>>>> to keep roughly the same level of population in each state. Not sure I like
>>>> your idea any better than his. LOL!
>>>>>
>>>>>> That means even in the house a about a 1:1.3 representational inequality.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Wyoming has 3 electoral votes for about 580,000 people, or ~193,000 people per
>>>>>> electoral vote.
>>>>>> California has 55 electoral votes for nearly 40 million people, or ~727,000
>>>>>> people per electoral vote.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This means a 1:3.8 representational inequality
>>>>>
>>>>> I agree that in modern times the EC is not a good idea. However, the
>>>>> representational issues you note are due to the fact that every state gets two
>>>>> senators regardless of population.
>>>>
>>>> Right. But that leads to GROSSLY disproportionate representation, 5x worse
>>>> than what we had at the start of the country.
>>>
>>> You're wrong here.
>>>
>>> Every state has always had two Senators.
>>
>> Where did you think I said otherwise? The states were not as disproportionate
>> in numbers at the time.
>
> Either we're at cross purposes or you're missing some things.

I think there has been some miscommunication along the way.
>
> Early in the Republic, the south was deliberately over represented by
> Constitutional decree. That error has been repaired. As it stands, the average
> rep represents about 700k constituents. There are states with less people than
> that but they are few and not enough to skew representation.
>
> The Senate has nothing to do with proportionate representation, that's the job
> of the House.

Right... and I think it is a flawed system that leads to a lot of issues.
>
>>> This is why we have two legislative Houses. The House is the house of the
>>> people (representation by population), the Senate is the house of the states
>>> (each state gets an equal voice).
>>
>> This is not in contention.
>
> Then why do you complain above about disproportionate representation?

Because I think it causes a lot of problems. As I have said, I know it will
not change -- but to me it is a HUGE weakness of our system. It means some
people have more influence than others. I would prefer equal representation.
>>
>>> I have no problem with that system. I have no problem with the EC, as such.
>>> The
>>> problem I have is with the winner take all system most states employ. Imo,
>>> electors should be apportioned according to the distribution of votes among the
>>> candidates. If Joe Schmo gets 60% of the votes, he should get 60% of the
>>> electors, not all of them.
>>
>> The system is not going to change, but I see it as a bit issue. It is why the
>> will of the people is largely ignored on gun control, climate change, health
>> insurance, abortion, and many more issues.
>
> I disagree, given the structure of the country. The bigger problem is the
> winner-takes-all method of selecting electors.

If you look at national polling, each of those issues has pretty strong
consensus... but little action is done. I wish the will of the people was
better respected.

>
>>>>>> And yet California citizens give, on average, about $5000 a year to the US
>>>>>> government, and each Wyoming citizen GETS a bit under $7000.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Those who have the least representation are giving the most. Those with the
>>>>>> most representation are getting massive support from the Federal government.
>>>>>
>>>>> These things are all arguable.
>>>>>
>>>>> It would require a fundamental rewriting of the Constitution to change this.
>>>>
>>>> Right. I do not expect it to change. It is, though, key to many of the issues
>>>> we have in this country, IMNSHO.
>>>
>>> It does prevent the majority from riding roughshod over the minority, but it
>>> also sometimes allows the minority to dictate to the majority.
>>
>> That is the issue: the minority controls the majority, and it leads to those
>> in CA getting the least say but putting the most into the Federal system. This
>> is contrary to the idea of no taxation without representation -- those with
>> the least representing are taxed the most.
>
> Californians have the same House representation as Texans or Iowans.

Not quite... but pretty close (CA:IA = 763:800).

> The Senate is proportionate to the number of States in the Union. The
> foundation of the disagreement with the Senate is that this is the United
> STATES
> of America. Technically, each state is sovereign. The Constitution never
> created a country called America.
>
>>>>> Do
>>>>> you really think that in such a divisive, highly partisan political environment
>>>>> as we have today, that such a rewrite would be a good idea?
>>>>
>>>> Good idea or not, it would never pass.
>>>>>
>>>>> The problem is that, like most foreigners, you do not understand the "United
>>>>> STATES of America". The US is not as singular a country as most, but is in
>>>>> fact, an assemblage of separate countries, aka 'states'.
>>>>>
>>>>> The House represents the population of the US, the Senate represents the States
>>>>> of the US.
>>>>>
>>>>> The population votes and each state votes.
>>>>
>>>> And this leads to many issues.
>>>>>
>>>>> It is the states, not the population, who ultimately select the POTUS.
>>>>>
>>>>> I find that a better solution than Britain's of allowing the Parliament
>>>>> (Congress) to select the Prime Minister (POTUS) any time the PM (POTUS) no
>>>>> longer has the support of a majority of the members of Parliament (Congress).
>>>>
>>>> I *wish* we had something closer to equal representation but I know we are not
>>>> going to get it. Might lead to the downfall of the country.
>>>
>>> Representation in Congress works fine. It's the two party system that's
>>> bleeding us dry.
>>
>> Sadly even that is SOMEWHAT cooked into our constitution. If you have more
>> than two parties it is unlikely any one would get the majority vote for the
>> president, and then it goes to the House, with each state getting equal votes.
>> This means the will of the people would largely be ignored.
>
> A part of it is the desire of every voter to vote for the 'winner'. Their
> chance of doing that is better if there are only two candidates.

On Oct 23, 2024 at 8:26:05 PM MST, "Governor Swill" wrote
<3efjhjl69cg6j2in96ahquugp50adm3ndn@4ax.com>:

> On 22 Oct 2024 01:27:03 GMT, Snit <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Oct 21, 2024 at 4:21:34?PM MST, "Governor Swill" wrote
>> <kfodhj5pdvgpnoos3vekk3ijnc13ue7kde@4ax.com>:
>>
>>> On Mon, 21 Oct 2024 07:33:43 -0600, Skeeter <skeeterweed@photonmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Only your side brings up race.
>>>
>>> <laughs and points>
>>
>> My favorite bit of insanity on this is when people insist that it was the
>> Democrats who put up the symbols of slavery and racial oppression. Sure, rich
>> conservative white Democrats... so why not agree to take down these symbols of
>> slavery and racial oppression? And off they run, screaming "history", as if
>> one needs to have statues of Hitler in public places of honor to remember
>> WWII.
>
> Never thought about it quite like that, but you're right.

Thank you.

> They excoriate
> Democrats for slavery, states' rights and the civil war, then they complain
> about taking down confederate statues, implementing affirmative action, federal
> supremacy and then threaten civil war if they don't get their way.

Pretty much. It is utterly hypocritical and irrational. And we see it right
here in ACW.
>
> NP: The Who - The Seeker

--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

In article <6719c06b$0$3493322$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>,
brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com says...
>
> On Oct 23, 2024 at 8:22:49 PM MST, "Governor Swill" wrote
> <drejhjl617d1j7ij6sf9i2lbpi3f1ikv8o@4ax.com>:
>
> > On 22 Oct 2024 01:31:41 GMT, Snit <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Oct 21, 2024 at 4:03:19?PM MST, "Governor Swill" wrote
> >> <52ndhjdmt3smapo64btptiooeqbrb0ncv7@4ax.com>:
> >>
> >>> On 21 Oct 2024 01:05:39 GMT, Snit <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On Oct 20, 2024 at 5:17:41?PM MST, "Governor Swill" wrote
> >>>> <d65bhjpm6220b9joe669sugmv9bt0utpdh@4ax.com>:
> >>>>
> >>>>> On 20 Oct 2024 03:31:33 GMT, Snit wrote:
> >>>>>> On Oct 19, 2024 at 7:35:57?PM MST, "Governor Swill" wrote
> >>>>>>> On 19 Oct 2024 18:01:32 GMT, Snit wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On Oct 19, 2024 at 8:18:36?AM MST, "Governor Swill" wrote
> >>>>>>>>> On 18 Oct 2024 21:46:15 GMT, Snit wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> I wish we had something closer to equal representation. With the Senate and
> >>>>>>>>>> the Electoral College we are FAR from that. Even the House is pretty far from
> >>>>>>>>>> it. I think the US would be MUCH better off if we had one adult citizen = one
> >>>>>>>>>> vote, and each vote counted the same.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Pure democracy? That would be untenable in a nation of more than 300,000,000
> >>>>>>>>> citizens.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Oh, we would still have representatives... but something closer to equal
> >>>>>>>> representation. Not the nonsense now where some people have 20x the
> >>>>>>>> representational power of others.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Where does that occur?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Wyoming vs. California. Doing some research now.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> That was what I was thinking for the Senate... but it is MUCH worse than that
> >>>>>> there.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> In the Senate:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Wyoming: 1 senator represents about 290,000 people.
> >>>>>> California: 1 senator represents about 20 million people.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> That means about a 1:69 representational inequality.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> In the House:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Wyoming: 1 representative for ~580,000 people
> >>>>>> California: 1 representative for every ~770,000 people
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Then the solution is to send 200,000 Californians to Wyoming?
> >>>>
> >>>> A friend of mine has said he wants to see state lines redrawn every 10 years
> >>>> to keep roughly the same level of population in each state. Not sure I like
> >>>> your idea any better than his. LOL!
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> That means even in the house a about a 1:1.3 representational inequality.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Wyoming has 3 electoral votes for about 580,000 people, or ~193,000 people per
> >>>>>> electoral vote.
> >>>>>> California has 55 electoral votes for nearly 40 million people, or ~727,000
> >>>>>> people per electoral vote.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> This means a 1:3.8 representational inequality
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I agree that in modern times the EC is not a good idea. However, the
> >>>>> representational issues you note are due to the fact that every state gets two
> >>>>> senators regardless of population.
> >>>>
> >>>> Right. But that leads to GROSSLY disproportionate representation, 5x worse
> >>>> than what we had at the start of the country.
> >>>
> >>> You're wrong here.
> >>>
> >>> Every state has always had two Senators.
> >>
> >> Where did you think I said otherwise? The states were not as disproportionate
> >> in numbers at the time.
> >
> > Either we're at cross purposes or you're missing some things.
>
> I think there has been some miscommunication along the way.
> >
> > Early in the Republic, the south was deliberately over represented by
> > Constitutional decree. That error has been repaired. As it stands, the average
> > rep represents about 700k constituents. There are states with less people than
> > that but they are few and not enough to skew representation.
> >
> > The Senate has nothing to do with proportionate representation, that's the job
> > of the House.
>
> Right... and I think it is a flawed system that leads to a lot of issues.
> >
> >>> This is why we have two legislative Houses. The House is the house of the
> >>> people (representation by population), the Senate is the house of the states
> >>> (each state gets an equal voice).
> >>
> >> This is not in contention.
> >
> > Then why do you complain above about disproportionate representation?
>
> Because I think it causes a lot of problems. As I have said, I know it will
> not change -- but to me it is a HUGE weakness of our system. It means some
> people have more influence than others. I would prefer equal representation.
> >>
> >>> I have no problem with that system. I have no problem with the EC, as such.
> >>> The
> >>> problem I have is with the winner take all system most states employ. Imo,
> >>> electors should be apportioned according to the distribution of votes among the
> >>> candidates. If Joe Schmo gets 60% of the votes, he should get 60% of the
> >>> electors, not all of them.
> >>
> >> The system is not going to change, but I see it as a bit issue. It is why the
> >> will of the people is largely ignored on gun control, climate change, health
> >> insurance, abortion, and many more issues.
> >
> > I disagree, given the structure of the country. The bigger problem is the
> > winner-takes-all method of selecting electors.
>
> If you look at national polling, each of those issues has pretty strong
> consensus... but little action is done. I wish the will of the people was
> better respected.
>
> >
> >>>>>> And yet California citizens give, on average, about $5000 a year to the US
> >>>>>> government, and each Wyoming citizen GETS a bit under $7000.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Those who have the least representation are giving the most. Those with the
> >>>>>> most representation are getting massive support from the Federal government.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> These things are all arguable.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> It would require a fundamental rewriting of the Constitution to change this.
> >>>>
> >>>> Right. I do not expect it to change. It is, though, key to many of the issues
> >>>> we have in this country, IMNSHO.
> >>>
> >>> It does prevent the majority from riding roughshod over the minority, but it
> >>> also sometimes allows the minority to dictate to the majority.
> >>
> >> That is the issue: the minority controls the majority, and it leads to those
> >> in CA getting the least say but putting the most into the Federal system. This
> >> is contrary to the idea of no taxation without representation -- those with
> >> the least representing are taxed the most.
> >
> > Californians have the same House representation as Texans or Iowans.
>
> Not quite... but pretty close (CA:IA = 763:800).
>
> > The Senate is proportionate to the number of States in the Union. The
> > foundation of the disagreement with the Senate is that this is the United
> > STATES
> > of America. Technically, each state is sovereign. The Constitution never
> > created a country called America.
> >
> >>>>> Do
> >>>>> you really think that in such a divisive, highly partisan political environment
> >>>>> as we have today, that such a rewrite would be a good idea?
> >>>>
> >>>> Good idea or not, it would never pass.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The problem is that, like most foreigners, you do not understand the "United
> >>>>> STATES of America". The US is not as singular a country as most, but is in
> >>>>> fact, an assemblage of separate countries, aka 'states'.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The House represents the population of the US, the Senate represents the States
> >>>>> of the US.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The population votes and each state votes.
> >>>>
> >>>> And this leads to many issues.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> It is the states, not the population, who ultimately select the POTUS.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I find that a better solution than Britain's of allowing the Parliament
> >>>>> (Congress) to select the Prime Minister (POTUS) any time the PM (POTUS) no
> >>>>> longer has the support of a majority of the members of Parliament (Congress).
> >>>>
> >>>> I *wish* we had something closer to equal representation but I know we are not
> >>>> going to get it. Might lead to the downfall of the country.
> >>>
> >>> Representation in Congress works fine. It's the two party system that's
> >>> bleeding us dry.
> >>
> >> Sadly even that is SOMEWHAT cooked into our constitution. If you have more
> >> than two parties it is unlikely any one would get the majority vote for the
> >> president, and then it goes to the House, with each state getting equal votes.
> >> This means the will of the people would largely be ignored.
> >
> > A part of it is the desire of every voter to vote for the 'winner'. Their
> > chance of doing that is better if there are only two candidates.
>
> I agree with you that I wish we did not have just two major parties.
> >
> > NP: The Who - See Me, Feel Me

-hh wrote:
> On 10/23/24 5:28 PM, Skeeter wrote:
>> In article <vfbkif$28gib$1@dont-email.me>,
>> recscuba_google@huntzinger.com says...

>>> Or do you not know because you don't care, because you don't want to
>>> actually follow longstanding US Law?
>>
>> I don't want just anyone to enter. Do you support the gangs and raping
>> and killing?
>
> If you don't want anyone to enter, then you're advocating for the death of the
> USA, because we are a Nation of Immigrants,

The United States was never supposed to be.

But keep importing the Turd World subhumans who are incapable of building or
maintaining the things you take for granted.

> and it has been those very same
> immigrants for the basis for why we've been a great nation.

Peak America was before it was overwhelmed by post-1965 immigrants.

On Oct 24, 2024 at 7:54:06 PM MST, "Anonymous" wrote
<vff18e$22hjq$1@news.mixmin.net>:

> -hh wrote:
>> On 10/23/24 5:28 PM, Skeeter wrote:
>>> In article <vfbkif$28gib$1@dont-email.me>,
>>> recscuba_google@huntzinger.com says...
>
>>>> Or do you not know because you don't care, because you don't want to
>>>> actually follow longstanding US Law?
>>>
>>> I don't want just anyone to enter. Do you support the gangs and raping
>>> and killing?
>>
>> If you don't want anyone to enter, then you're advocating for the death of the
>> USA, because we are a Nation of Immigrants,
>
> The United States was never supposed to be.

None of the founders had ancestors from the land.

--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

On 10/24/2024 7:54 PM, Anonymous wrote:
> -hh wrote:
>> On 10/23/24 5:28 PM, Skeeter wrote:
>>> In article <vfbkif$28gib$1@dont-email.me>,
>>> recscuba_google@huntzinger.com says...
>
>>>> Or do you not know because you don't care, because you don't want to
>>>> actually follow longstanding US Law?
>>>
>>> I don't want just anyone to enter. Do you support the gangs and raping
>>> and killing?
>>
>> If you don't want anyone to enter, then you're advocating for the death of the
>> USA, because we are a Nation of Immigrants,
>
> The United States was never supposed to be.
It was. The people who *founded* the United States were immigrants or descended
from immigrants.

We are a nation of immigrants, and always were. Subhuman Nazi filth who think
like you need to be exterminated.