myiW Current Conditions and Forecasts Community Forums Windsurfing Videos Buy and Sell Services
 
Hi guest · myAccount · Log in
 SearchSearch   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   RegisterRegister 
whats a few trillion
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 16, 17, 18  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
swchandler



Joined: 08 Nov 1993
Posts: 5820

PostPosted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 10:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I can definitely understand what you're saying. The idea of this perpetual tennis match can be trying. Nevertheless, you have to realize that isobars depends on you, because he elects to see you and respond to you here. As a result, you carry a deeper responsibility. That means he can taunt you anytime you elect to contribute here. In a sense, those of us that have been "PLONKED" are far less burdened.

Do you think that if no one ever responded to him, that he would simply go away?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
coyotewindsurf



Joined: 03 Apr 2006
Posts: 1269
Location: SF Bay

PostPosted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 10:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

coboardhead wrote:
I appear to be the one feeding this troll right now...I believe I will take a break. Got a couple weeks on the water coming up anyway...later.
Good winds to you CB! I think I'll take my leave too. I'm tired of the continual assaults against women waged by iso and his cronies on this forum.
_________________
mo
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 5223

PostPosted: Wed Mar 28, 2012 12:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I repeat. There is much more wrong with Mikey than narcissism. He reminds me of a member of the American Nazi party I knew at a blue collar job in the early 1970's. Very sick.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
GURGLETROUSERS



Joined: 30 Dec 2009
Posts: 1348

PostPosted: Wed Mar 28, 2012 4:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well said Mac. I didn't feel it my place to say so, but, precisely what I was thinking.

He's turned his twisted rage on C.B. at present after his initial overtures were ignored, but as Chandler, Mo, and others say, he's an embarrassment to many of the people on this forum.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DanWeiss



Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Posts: 1945
Location: Connecticut, USA

PostPosted: Wed Mar 28, 2012 10:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

isobars wrote:
coboardhead wrote:
Ummm...I didn't write that. Now, Don Q is tilting at me for Feuser's comments. Again I am complimented.

You're right. Because you refuse to use the bulletin board's normal QUOTE button but instead cut and paste stuff, the resulting format is confusing. I had to Google the accusation to find its real source ... to whom my post still applies.

Interestingly, in that Google process I saw that
DanWeiss wrote:
isobars wrote:
I wonder how well the liberal media covered the fact that Clinton was impeached for perjury -- for undermining the very foundation of our entire legal system by lying under oath -- rather than for defiling OUR White House.


Another incitement (not incisive) from Mr. Ficktion. I realize you were in the admitted infancy of your political awareness at that time, but even you should know the difference between a charge and a conviction. The Senate acquitted President Clinton based on what everyone knows was a highly politicized investigation


Apparently Dan, a lawyer, does not even understand that impeachment does not imply conviction; the charge itself constitutes impeachment even if the charge is dismissed. I wonder if he knows that the same goes for a military court martial. But what I REALLY wonder is whether he, whose career is our adversarial jurisprudence system, understands that it is based on the presumption that sworn testimony is true unless explicitly disproved, and that president and lawyer Bill Clinton’s perjury -- lying under oath --before a grand jury undermines that system. Thus while politics may have helped initiate his impeachment, his own party, if it had a conscience, shouldn’t have needed the GOP to push the issue.


Wrong. Mike, why don't you go to law school before pontificating on the rules of evidence and trial practice? Oral testimony is presumed to be neither true nor false. The trier of fact (judge or jury) is expressly charged with the obligation to weigh the credibility of the witness who utters factual claims. The trier of fact is free to believe the witness or not.

Holy cow, Mike, you bootstrap your arguments. Clinton was acquitted of perjury, yet you make the case that he perjured himself and it was his perjury that undermined the office. Remember, he was tried on two counts, perjury and obstruction of justice, and acquitted on both.

_________________
Support Your Sport. Join US Windsurfing!
www.USWindsurfing.org

www.konaone.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mrgybe



Joined: 01 Jul 2008
Posts: 2654

PostPosted: Wed Mar 28, 2012 10:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Impeachment is the process, not the outcome. Bill Clinton was impeached.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
boggsman1



Joined: 24 Jun 2002
Posts: 3554
Location: at a computer

PostPosted: Wed Mar 28, 2012 11:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for news flash Mr. Gybe, did you hear that Mexico devalued the peso?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
isobars



Joined: 12 Dec 1999
Posts: 14181

PostPosted: Wed Mar 28, 2012 1:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DanWeiss wrote:
Clinton was tried.


Thus you admit by definition that he was impeached, while loudly denying and obfuscating that fact with diversions. Good lawyer!

I've not been to law school, but my sources included Hanse and Black and I know that impeachment refers to charges and processes, not verdicts. Do you have ANY idea how many times I've defeated single lawyers and even whole teams of lawyers in decisions involving thousands to hundreds of millions of dollars, including blue chip corporation lawyers, a government procurement agency, local ambulance chasers, and federal court? They all put their pants on the same way I do: jump into the air and come down into my wingtips.

The difference so far is that mine were already laced and ready for the fight. I don't enter frays that important as unarmed as Verrilli was in the Supreme Court this week.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
techno900



Joined: 28 Mar 2001
Posts: 1479

PostPosted: Wed Mar 28, 2012 1:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Holy frijoles boggsman.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
boggsman1



Joined: 24 Jun 2002
Posts: 3554
Location: at a computer

PostPosted: Wed Mar 28, 2012 1:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Knew somebody would enjoy that one, which actually took place in 1994.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 16, 17, 18  Next
Page 17 of 18

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

myiW | Weather | Community | Membership | Support | Log in
like us on facebook
© Copyright 1999-2007 WeatherFlow, Inc Contact Us Ad Marketplace

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group