Fundamental reason Govt needs to regulate corporations.

Onceler said:
Well, they did ask.

Do you want 2?
Click to expand...

congrats on your great win!!! perhaps you could actually learn reading comprehension so you can understand they asked for current or those who are saying it now. jarod's claim was people saying it now....

"maybe" you could learn, doubtful, as reading comprehension is extremely difficult for you :cof1:
 
NigelTufnel said:
Dude, I'm not inclined to try to separate the wheat from the chaff in that thing. From even a cursory review you can see it's tax cut/credit and subsidy heavy and extremely light on the regulation.
Click to expand...
So "light" means none.... Right. Thanks. We gotcha.
 
NigelTufnel said:
Dude, I'm not inclined to try to separate the wheat from the chaff in that thing. From even a cursory review you can see it's tax cut/credit and subsidy heavy and extremely light on the regulation.
Click to expand...


In other words, you want someone to do your work for you because you're a lazy a$$, eh?
 
Damocles said:
So "light" means none.... Right. Thanks. We gotcha.
Click to expand...


No. Light means light. It means I'm not going to pore over the document to try to tease them out. Christ, the thing is 27 pages long and Yurt came up with two examples. Good on him for finding them.
 
Yurt said:
congrats on your great win!!! perhaps you could actually learn reading comprehension so you can understand they asked for current or those who are saying it now. jarod's claim was people saying it now....

"maybe" you could learn, doubtful, as reading comprehension is extremely difficult for you :cof1:
Click to expand...

LOL

I love how seriously you took that. Speaks volumes.
 
NigelTufnel said:
No. Light means light. It means I'm not going to pore over the document to try to tease them out. Christ, the thing is 27 pages long and Yurt came up with two examples. Good on him for finding them.
Click to expand...
As I said, you don't have to "pore" over the document. Just know it exists and lists support for different regulation. That it is "light" doesn't make a difference, you asked for some legislation "any whatsoever" that they supported. I provided a link to an entire plan for getting off the oil teat provided by them with regulations and other incentive to get it done.

It is just flat obstinate to continue to say they support "none" because you don't want to "wade through it"...

That's fine, you don't have to. I absolve you of any request to provide any evidence to support your false assertions.
 
Yurt said:
translation:

damn, i screwed up and can't be honest and admit yurt is right, they are looking for current examples
Click to expand...

That's a bad translation.

Danold was a goofball. I wasn't being serious.

So, basically, you look like a fool. Again.
 
Onceler said:
Well, they did ask.

Do you want 2?
Click to expand...

Onceler said:
That's a bad translation.

Danold was a goofball. I wasn't being serious.

So, basically, you look like a fool. Again.
Click to expand...

LOL...what a pathetic little liar

until i informed you they wanted current examples, you were quite serious, so mcuh so you asked if i wanted another one

just admit for once in your life you're wrong, we all know your MO is to never be honest and admit you're wrong, all the while falsely accusing others of not admitting they're wrong....

you're a wuss onceler
 
Damocles said:
As I said, you don't have to "pore" over the document. Just know it exists and lists support for different regulation. That it is "light" doesn't make a difference, you asked for some legislation "any whatsoever" that they supported. I provided a link to an entire plan for getting off the oil teat provided by them with regulations and other incentive to get it done.

It is just flat obstinate to continue to say they support "none" because you don't want to "wade through it"...

That's fine, you don't have to. I absolve you of any request to provide any evidence to support your false assertions.
Click to expand...

:cof1:

Tee-hee-hee! I'd kinda like to see him "pore" over the document, Damo...
 
Yurt said:
LOL...what a pathetic little liar

until i informed you they wanted current examples, you were quite serious, so mcuh so you asked if i wanted another one

just admit for once in your life you're wrong, we all know your MO is to never be honest and admit you're wrong, all the while falsely accusing others of not admitting they're wrong....

you're a wuss onceler
Click to expand...

Batter's a wussie! :palm:
 
Yurt said:
LOL...what a pathetic little liar

until i informed you they wanted current examples, you were quite serious, so mcuh so you asked if i wanted another one

just admit for once in your life you're wrong, we all know your MO is to never be honest and admit you're wrong, all the while falsely accusing others of not admitting they're wrong....

you're a wuss onceler
Click to expand...

Yup. I was extending it w/ you, because I could tell you were taking it seriously, so it was fun to do so.

But hey, if you need the win, have at it. I'll try a little translation: "Waaaaaah! It's been brutal for so long, getting humiliated on one thread after another. I need to win! Something....anything! Onceler MUST have been serious - he just had to have been! I know he was serious about trying to us 'Danold' as an example, even though Danold was a fringe nutter! I just knows it!"

How is that?
 
Onceler said:
Yup. I was extending it w/ you, because I could tell you were taking it seriously, so it was fun to do so.

But hey, if you need the win, have at it. I'll try a little translation: "Waaaaaah! It's been brutal for so long, getting humiliated on one thread after another. I need to win! Something....anything! Onceler MUST have been serious - he just had to have been! I know he was serious about trying to us 'Danold' as an example, even though Danold was a fringe nutter! I just knows it!"

How is that?
Click to expand...

liar
 
Onceler said:
If I remember correctly, "The Danold" was actually against pretty much all gov't regulation, at least fed gov't.

So, there's one.
Click to expand...

Yurt said:
lmao....some poster maybe said something YEARS ago and onceler gets one!!!
Click to expand...

Onceler said:
Well, they did ask.

Do you want 2?
Click to expand...

you weren't joking onceler....its too bad you can't ever be honest, even with yourself....you clearly thought they asked and that your example was valid, you even asked if i wanted another

why you lie in cases like this is truly amazing, i think you have seriousl mental issues
 
post 75 liar....you weren't joking, not even close...you even went so far as to hedge your example by saying...iirc and then you further hedged it by saying "at least the federal government"....if you were joking, there would be no need to hedge your example and there would be no need to say....they asked so i provided, want a nother.

i laugh at your lies, i used to feel sorry for you, but you're so pathetic it is now just plain funny :)
 
Yurt said:
you weren't joking onceler....its too bad you can't ever be honest, even with yourself....you clearly thought they asked and that your example was valid, you even asked if i wanted another

why you lie in cases like this is truly amazing, i think you have seriousl mental issues
Click to expand...

LOL

It's fun to watch your thought process at work; it's pretty deranged.

Honestly - and this is only for any sane people who are reading this - the whole conversation made me think of Danold (who was also deranged), and who thought that there should be almost no federal regulations whatsoever. He was even against child labor laws, as I recall.

So, I brought him up for sheer goofy enjoyment, and added facetiously "so there's one."

Then, you come barreling into the thread with those gotcha guns blazing, take it seriously and try to call me on it, which I thought was hilarious. So I went with it, because it was fun to do so.

But the comedy doesn't really stop with you. It just keeps going.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top