Friday, January 17, 2014

At least you have your guns...

Health care isn't a right.

The same goes for housing

Voting

Or water

You may be aware of the chemical spill that contaminated a river supplying water to hundreds of thousands of people in West Virginia. Officials say there wasn't much regulation at the site where the spill occurred and that little is known about the chemical that leaked.

On the other hand, US House republicans passed a bill that will gut toxic waste clean up regulations in the United States. H.R. 2279, otherwise known as ‘The Reducing Excessive Deadline Obligations Act’ would basically eliminate the power of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to impose clean up deadlines, following toxic spills like the recent WV spill.

That bill passed on the same day the Chemical spill poisoned the water in West Virginia.

But for some reason, guns are no matter how idiotic that proposition is when you really think about it.

You might want to read about how you are being conned into voting against your interests here--but I doubt you will.  It's nicer being conned than realise you've been conned.

I guess it makes it easier to kill yourself when you realise that fact.

64 comments:

  1. For SS who claims he never saw a request for him to comment on what he thinks of Greg's own words.
    Here you go SS. Looking forward to your opinion of Greg's statements. I have given my opinion.


    Greg's statements on ignoring, breaking the law:


    Greg Camp November 4, 2013 at 2:39 AM

    When the law is unjust, it is no law at all. Home invasions are a violation of privacy, and yes, I call these actions invasions, "legal" or not.


    So you decide which laws you will follow, or not? Sounds like breaking the law to me.
    ________________________________________________________

    Greg Camp October 5, 2013 at 5:56 PM

    Mine gets carried concealed. And yes, if I ever have occasion to go to Starbucks, it will be with me.

    This was after Starbucks asked their customers to leave their guns at home. Seems another example that Greg will defy anyone's rules and regulations.
    _________________________________________________________

    Greg Camp October 8, 2013 at 6:31 AM

    I think the United States should invade California and impose regime change on that failed state.

    I'd say that's a promotion for breaking the law.
    _________________________________________________________

    Greg Camp October 5, 2013 at 5:54 PM

    Stupid rules require increasing cleverness to circumvent.


    Seems he's actively looking for ways to break the rule of law.
    ________________________________________________________


    Anonymous September 8, 2013 at 3:52 PM

    Some people would call assaulting a drug dealer civic minded.


    Greg Camp September 8, 2013 at 5:17 PM

    Agreed.


    I would call it a thug assaulting another person. Call the cops.
    _________________________________________________________

    Greg Camp September 9, 2013 at 4:45 PM

    In an ideal world, beating up someone is the wrong action, but we don't live in an ideal world, and I have more feeling for the friend struggling with addiction than I do for the dealer.


    It would be one thing if this happened in front of you, but you said you would go looking for him. Doesn't sound like a law abiding citizen to me.
    _________________________________________________________

    Greg Camp August 30, 2013 at 8:07 AM

    I've said it before: He should be given a lethal injection of boiling lard.


    That's not what the law prescribes. Greg has his own ideas.
    ________________________________________________________

    Greg Camp August 27, 2013 at 8:27 AM

    Revenge is justice. This man is a traitor and a terrorist. He deserves a far more gruesome death than our law allows.


    Going outside the law to get his bloody revenge. Revenge is not justice.
    _________________________________________________________

    Greg Camp August 20, 2013 at 5:53 PM

    When the law makes no sense by banning or restricting something that should not be covered by law, good people don't expect such foolishness or resist the violation. The responsibility lies with the criminal legislators and executives who push these laws in the first place.


    Blame the people. They elected these criminals into office. You change law in a civil society, not ignore, or break it.
    ________________________________________________________

    These kind of statements can only be read as the author having disregard for the law, promoting illegal acts, and clearly stating he would participate in such illegal behavior.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you Steve,

      "Home invasions are a violation of privacy"

      I agree, Home invasions are essentially a form of robbery. Let me share a quote of Col. Cooper ,
      “We continue to be exasperated by the view, apparently gaining momentum in certain circles, that armed robbery is okay as long as nobody gets hurt! The proper solution to armed robbery is a dead robber, on the scene.”

      "And yes, if I ever have occasion to go to Starbucks, it will be with me."

      I've commented on this before. Starbuck needs to man up and pick a side. Their request, at least in Minnesota isn't legally binding.

      "I think the United States should invade California and impose regime change on that failed state."

      Sounds like rhetorical question that is fairly obviously not serious.

      "Stupid rules require increasing cleverness to circumvent."

      Sounds like getting something done without breaking laws. Done by politicians all the time. Why is it wrong when Greg does it?

      "I've said it before: He should be given a lethal injection of boiling lard."

      He wishes to change the substances used in capitol punishment. Mike wishes to change laws about gun rights. If wishes were fishes....

      "Revenge is justice. This man is a traitor and a terrorist. He deserves a far more gruesome death than our law allows."

      Revenge is a component of the justice system. It seems to be ok when the government does it, either on a local or an international level.

      "When the law makes no sense by banning or restricting something that should not be covered by law, good people don't expect such foolishness or resist the violation."

      Lets see, how about people violating the Jim Crow laws passed by southern democrats by supplying African-Americans with guns for self defense against the Klan? Or the federal government deciding not to enforce federal drug laws in states that legalize pot? How about cities or states passing laws declaring that they refuse to enforce laws against illegal immigration?





      Delete
    2. I know you are a criminal thinking coward like Greg. This was just a fun way to prove it. Although you have proved that you are a criminal lying coward over the months and even admitted you lied (make shit up) thanks for that. It's interesting you compare these remarks to Mike, when Mike has nothing to do with what Greg says, but that is just more proof of your cowardly dishonesty. I have never met a soldier so dishonest, cowardly and who lies constantly. Thanks for introducing me to your criminal character. Now I understand why soldiers are kill crazy and love to torture and rape. It makes sense that our government was recruiting felons for the war. Your words show you must be one of those felons. Do your supervisors know you spend night and day on this site? I mean what do you do for the service, that you have so much time to spend spreading your lies night and day on this site? Again, thanks for proving you are a lying criminal coward.

      Delete
    3. "Again, thanks for proving you are a lying criminal coward."

      Steve, if I am, as you said lying, then how can you take what I said above as the truth? Just wondering.....

      Delete
    4. The one who refers to himself as "Greg Camp", makes known his treasonous disloyalty to the supreme authority of the Federal Government (subject only to the authority of the U.N.). Your comments imply that you regard your loyalty to a deviant subculture higher than your duty as an American Citizen, and as a subject of the World.


      The private ownership of arms serves to undermine the power of the collective State, and therefore constitutes disloyalty. Any organisation which seeks to promote the fulfillment of a goal inconsistent with State policy, and whose members are armed (as in the case of the NRA) is therefore a terrorist organization. The possession of arms by civilians which is manifestly implicit of the goal of an insurrection, creates a situation where any politically oriented group not mandated by State policy (such as an intelligence agency or a police force) which fosters the armament of it's civilian members can reasonably be construed as an implicitly violent terrorist organization.

      The mere civilian, with no ties to any law enforcement agency, no employment based armament need, and who conveys no public authority bears no interest in the preservation of domestic tranquility. If the U.S. government continues to allow individual non-State actors to obtain and possess firearms, the United States congress is in gross violation of the peoples right to Civilian Disarmament, as expressed in the preamble of the Constitution of the United States. You have no reasonable claim of any right to possess weapons, however you (and your ilk) have the right to be disarmed. Congress bears the fundamental duty to fulfil this right.


      There will be no "civil war". Terrorist sympathizers such as yourself will tremble and obey their orders. When under threat of imprisonment, capital punishment, and forfeiture of property, those with anarchist tendencies (such as yourself) will submit to the authority of the collective State.

      Delete
    5. Lucy,
      Please make sure to include me on whatever list you're compiling of troublemakers.

      Delete
    6. It's not the truth, when did I say that liar?
      All can read your responses.
      You represented your criminal character well.
      You are a know self admitted liar and those responses confirm the fact that you are a cowardly criminal liar. Thanks for that.

      Delete
    7. Anon,
      I think you're getting confused. I made a comment to Steve and you answered as if I said it to you. Or did I? You forget to switch over to your Steve identity again?

      Delete
    8. No liar. As I said when you guys named me Steve, then I found out why, I stated that from then on I would be anon. Which has given all of you this "I don't know who I'm speaking to" complaint. It was your "name" game which has blown up in your face. As I also stated before, I'm glad others have piggy backed on this and all comment as anon. I'm just laughing, because this is all your fault for simply trying to play a stupid name game. And you are to stupid to figure it out. You guys claim we are all the same person. HA HA HA HA HA HA I can tell you Steve, Steve, Jim, Kevin, anon, anon, and who knows how many more anons are not the same person, but are commenting as anon to fuck with your heads, and it's working because you guys are idiots. I will continue to enjoy the confusion you idiots caused. It proves what idiots you are.
      Now back to your beliefs that beating up people is OK and revenge is justice. HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

      Delete
    9. Lying Anonymous, you could just use your own name.

      Delete
    10. “…then I found out why, I stated that from then on I would be anon.”

      Ah, so the Steve above, isn’t really Steve, because Steve would never call himself Steve. Whoa…

      For the record, I’m not in the least bit confused because I operate under the belief that you’re all the same person. It doesn’t mess with my head, because I am not making any attempt to separate the comments. I have been posting here for four years, and I can tell you that there has never been a rash of anonymous anti-gun commentators. We’re supposed to believe they all jumped in right when the Anon, Kevin, Jim, Steve, Sally thing started and they all use the same tone, language, points, fixations, repetition, typos, punctuation, and mean spirit. Have you ever heard the phrase “perception is more important than reality”? There could be some remote chance that you all aren’t the same person, but if so they are trying to make the comments appear to be from the same writer. And that’s supposed to be a joke on me? I’ll just go on thinking it’s the same commentator- doesn’t bug me.

      E.N. changes names all the time too, and everyone knows it’s E.N. He/she has a very distinct writing style. And so do you. But at least we don’t see Lucy4 saying, “I’m not E.N. You guys are all idiots for thinking I’m E.N. HA HA HA HA HA.”

      Any reader who comes in here is going to know you as the guy who calls everyone a “lying criminal ass hole”, and says, “thanks for proving bla bla bla”, and hates Greg Camp with a passion. If you don’t want people to think these other comments are from you, then maybe you should ask them to stop imitating you.

      Delete
    11. I hate liars, to bad. You continue to believe we are all the same, but if you accuse me of something I did not say, you will be called a liar. WOW how stupid can you be? You started it ass hole, you are to blame. Of course you don't care. Like you don't care about innocent death, the Constitution, or any other form of law Americans have died protecting. Just your law of beating people up. Like Nazis you want people to live under your rule fuck democratic government. A proven criminal traitor.

      Delete
    12. These three gun loons must be the same person, they all say the same thing.

      Delete
    13. You can say we “say the same thing” in a broad sense because we fundamental agree on the right to keep and bear arms, but we use different words, different tones, etc. We’re also all logged in under google accounts (not that it isn’t easy for one person to have multiple accounts, but it would be more of a pain that just typing in “Steve” or “Sally” when you comment). But go on and address us as one person if you like.

      “You started it ass hole, you are to blame.”

      Again, what I am to blame for? I have no problem keeping the status quo. You go right on posting under different names using your exact same insults, and I’ll go right on believe you are one person. I really don’t see a problem here.

      Look, even Mike ratted you out. Below he addressed Sally/Steve/Anonymous as one person. And he would actually know this because he can see IP addresses.

      MikeB (Jan 13, 2014 at 6:50PM): “Dear Sally/Steve/Anonymous, please lighten up. Greg is a pain in the ass with his repetitious tenacity but YOU are just too much. Knock it the fuck off. I'm sick of hearing it, and we're on the same side. You think you can do that?”

      http://mikeb302000.blogspot.com/2014/01/played-for-suckers.html

      Delete
    14. The multiple name thing is a lie. Please show proof.
      YOU started the bogus name game and insisted I name myself Steve. What I did not know (being new here) is Steve is someone you had problems with. To bad. I started the anon thing to fuck you up and it worked. Now you cowards cry foul and have no clue who you are addressing. My aim exactly!Are you having fun making yourself look like an idiot? I'm having fun watching you make an idiot of yourself.
      Next lie.

      Delete
    15. One definitive way to prove that all of you are the same person would be to look at the ISP numbers from the comments, but we don't have access to those. Ask Mikeb.

      However, we can use linguistic techniques:

      1. E.N./Redcap/Chickadee/Lucy4/etc. spouts propaganda out of the North Korean hymnal, spells "were" as "where," refers to human beings as subjects or it or other terms that imply that we're property of the state, says things like "the person who refers to himself as Greg Camp," and claims that individuals have no rights. I believe that group of sockpuppets to belong to Jadegold, based on ISP numbers in comments on my blog.

      2. Anonymous/Kevin/Sally/Jim/Anonymous again/Anonymous one more time/etc. all curse, call people ass holes (two words, not one), refer to us as liars, twist people's words into things that we didn't say, and spell "bye" as "by" and "too" as "to," and adds strings of HA HA HA HA to many comments.

      3. At least one Anonymous inserts excess commas into every sentence.

      On the strength of that analysis, I'm saying that there are two or perhaps three of you all playing a silly game of trolling to disrupt the conversation. Much of the time, I ignore your comments. If you're going to be merely insulting or disruptive, you don't deserve a reply.

      Delete
    16. Greg,

      In the interest of whatever truth I may cling to, I am actually not, nor have never been Jadegold. It would be wrong to take credit for the trolling of others.


      Yours truly,

      Gecko45

      Delete
    17. I must also note that Jadegold expresses markedly bad taste in much of his work, and does not utilize any variant of my writing styles that I use when commenting.

      Delete
    18. "YOU started the bogus name game and insisted I name myself Steve."

      Uh, no. You asked for a name, so I said, "Steve".

      "What I did not know (being new here) is Steve is someone you had problems with."

      What you didn't "read the archives" when you showed up? I get a real kick out of when you change names and pretend to be someone new, and then claim to have "read the archives" so you can reference conversations that occurred before your new name arrived. But no, I never had much if any interaction with Google account Steve (the one with the Australian Shepard avatar), so it would be incorrect to say I had problems with that Steve… unless of course he is also you. You rarely posted with the Google account (though you increased the frequency after I named Anon “Steve”). Again, you tip your hand. I wouldn’t mind playing poker with you sometime.

      Delete
    19. I think we are all trolls at times. The conversation devolves into futility, and noting is achieved (except for increased polarization) because the nature of blogs serves to encourage the user to simply argue against the opposing view (which both sides consider to be ignorant at best and evil at worst) rather than listening to some of the valid points made by either side.

      I simply represent the logical conclusion to either side of the debate, the despotism of force in the hands of the believer.

      Many trolls do also manage to bring up new and otherwise obscure points that would be almost impossible to consider when viewed from a logical and reasonable standpoint. In ways which many of you refuse to consider, some that you may adorn with the label of "troll" (most often you simply disagree with them, but refuse to acknowledge their ideas as legitimate) actually contribute greatly to the often repetitive and counterproductive "debate" that is the Blogosphere.

      I however do not condone the nastiness of Anonymous. You know who you are, and so do we. Bullying Greg achieves nothing. He has his issues, but that is what makes us human. It sickens me that you relentlessly taunt someone simply because they are vulnerable and slightly different from you. You are a disgusting, bigot who, for want of a fulfilling life, is a perennial menace to good, productive and some very intelligent individuals, simply because you can't stand the fact that they choose to live a different life than the one you approve. Go follow the worms back into the solitude of your mother basement.

      Keep it up Greg, we are all cheering for you! We are all (or should be) honoured to be graced with the presence of someone who will find his greatest recognition in the pages of history.

      Delete
    20. There's a good lie.
      You guys wanted me to be something other than anon, and I said you name4 me, and you said fine, I should be Steve.
      More lies, as usual from the criminal lying cowards.

      Delete
    21. What was the reply to Mike? Is he going to stop?

      Delete
    22. Having read more comments I get it now. You guys also claim others who disagree with you are the same person. Lucy 4 is EN and anyone disagreeing with you is a sock puppet of Lacy's. I guess you are trying to say it's not possible so many disagree with you, so they must all be the same person. That is dishonest. It's clear now why you are all called liars.

      Delete
    23. No, just you and E.N. Mike, Laci, Dog gone, Flying Junior, Democommie, et al., don't do that.

      Delete
    24. What does any of this have to do with Greg's obvious criminal thinking statements posted above?
      No one is asking Greg about those statements, but Steve. Reading those quotes, Steve has a good point.

      Delete
    25. Sid, I suspect you're one of the three groups I named, but do you notice how the reported quotations have no link to their original source? Unsourced quotes count for nothing.

      Delete
    26. Greg,
      Are you saying you did not say those words?

      Delete
    27. Sid, I'm saying that Steve has misquoted me at times and has taken comments out of a discussion without offering the context. An honest person would provide a link to what he claims I said, so we all can verify the accuracy of the quotes and see the context.

      Delete
    28. So you did say those things. Sorry, I'll have to go along with those who think those statements are out of line. You are welcome to change my mind by explaining what Steve omitted, or lied about. He is quoting you, correct? I cannot go along with the thinking expressed in those words.

      Delete
    29. Sid, without links to the source, I can't verify the quotations, unless I take the time that I need to spend on other things. Steve is the one making the claims here, and it's on him to provide links. I will neither confirm nor deny anything he quotes without links. Nor will I answer him without links. I don't trust his quoting, especially since he's removing words from their context. It appears to me that he does that to twist their meaning. If not, why does he refuse to send us all to the origin?

      As I've said many times, I'll discuss any comment he wishes to discuss, if he will provide a link to its source. But that is my condition, and I'm not backing down from that.

      Delete
    30. I found the quotes easily from the dates given. They are your words and your claim Steve misquoted you, is not true. Seems this is a game you are playing with Steve. I'll agree with Steve's characterization of those words, but I won't play games with you like Steve. They are your words, it's on you.

      Delete
    31. Sid, I was willing to give you a chance, and you've proved yourself to be just another sockpuppet troll. Most of the time, you lot aren't worth replying to.

      Delete
    32. See how you are.
      I was willing to give you a chance and you responded with the same dishonesty you respond to with the others.
      I read the comments. They are your words.
      You dishonestly refused to even say you wrote those words. Proving you are the one being dishonest, for whatever reason.

      Delete
    33. Sid, read what I wrote. I said that I will neither confirm nor deny these quotations without links. That's a refusal to play Steve's game, not a lie. Any time that he provides links to the sources, I will discuss any comment that he wishes to raise.

      Delete
    34. So you decided to play your games with me, not just Steve. Another reason you are obviously dishonest. Now you want to parse words, also a sign of dishonesty. I said above, you refuse to confirm you said those words, but using the dates to locate those quotes, you did say those words. Now I understand why you are called the site liar. I'm not Steve's keeper. I can't tell Steve what to do. I know you just lied to me.

      Delete
  2. Its always funny when supporters of the Rep party and Dem party try to wholly blame a bills passage on the opposing side when in reality their are usually idiots from both sides who have voted to further destroy our country in some new and disturbing way.

    http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2014/roll010.xml

    "It's nicer being conned than realise you've been conned." yes it is isn't it Laci

    ReplyDelete
  3. Laci, are you aware that I support gun rights, environmental regulation, and universal healthcare?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Greg, glad you see the light on environmental regulation and universal health care; too bad you are consistently wrong on gun rights.

      Delete
    2. To bad you don't support a peaceful society where people can walk the streets without the fear of worrying about gun violence ruining their lives and killing their relatives. Where did you ever get the idea that ability to kill someone is the basis of a free and peaceful society?

      Delete
    3. Greg and DG, two fascists who want to rule and ruin individuality with gawdamn stupid totalitarian scams and schemes.

      orlin sellers

      Delete
    4. Dog Gone, universal healthcare is a good idea, especially if we do something like Canada. And pollution harms innocent people. But guns are more complex. They can be used in legitimate ways, as you know well, since you have had a carry license.

      Delete
    5. People like greg & DG ignore the fact that the US military is the largest polluter on Earth and instead want to go after industries that actually produce things the world needs.

      orlin sellers

      Delete
    6. No response from the criminal lying coward.

      Delete
    7. Why should society bear the burden of providing quality of life.

      The masses are not our problem, so long as they do not engage in activity that does not befit their position, or threaten our rule. They can eat cake.

      Delete
  4. I've decided that due to Anon's/Steve's/whoever's multiple identity issue, I'm going to take a time out from all Anons and Steve. I think I'm going to start with a weekend and see how I feel on Monday.
    His cackling hurts my ears, and I think it was TS that commented that its like talking to a five year old. That made me think because I use the same logic with my teenage son when he argues with his six year old sister. I always ask him what he hopes to accomplish by arguing with a six year old. Thank you TS.
    I want to apologize in advance to the at least one Anon that I know that actually makes adult comments. Maybe we can talk come Monday.
    Mike, sorry if this makes me a poor guest, but its getting old.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sarge, I for one value your opinions, and you're right. The obsession of these Anonymous commenters with calling everything a lie wore out its amusing quality a long time ago.

      Delete
    2. I can't take credit for saying that, and I wouldn't want credit for saying something that ran you out. I very much enjoy your comments while maintaining poise in dealing with Anon-a-Jim-Salleve.

      Delete
    3. No worries TS. While it was interesting to see his true total gun ban colors emerge, it definitely got wierd to experience the whole I'm me and also this other guy, and I made me too, sort of like he was channeling a creepy version of White Goodman from the movie "Dodgeball".
      The conversation had devolved into two five year olds instead of just one.

      Delete
    4. Sorry, saying Jim said something does not show Steve said it, and a rather cowardly dishonest claim. More lies don't make you correct.
      Next lie.

      Delete
    5. So which is it. You claim they are all the same guy, but now admit they are not? I can see where the "lie" accusations come from. You just proved you guys are lying.

      Delete
    6. That's funny given your criminal thinking responses above to serious question of criminality. You are obviously the immature one and a supporter of such criminal thinking. Now you know why I'm laughing because your "name" game has caused you guys to show the paranoia that guides your criminal thinking, Keep blaming others for my comments, it's exactly why I'm laughing.

      Delete
  5. Steve: "Where is the proof you two liars? You say Steve made homosexual slurs, but I've never read one, and you refuse to point out where they are.
    Just more examples of you two being lying cowards."

    I just found this from an older thread. Since you are called me out, I want to be sure that you see how I am backing it up:

    Sorry with the late response. I didn't know this thread was still active. Here are some links to slurs when Steve was on his “Deliverance” kick, under the pen name of “Jim”. You can even see some warnings from Mike that eventually led to moderation going back on. The previous time to this where moderation was turned on was when he was posting under “Kevin”. Note how Jim sounds just like Steve- right down his use of spaces in “ass hole” and “jack ass” and use of “HA HA HA HA HA”?

    http://mikeb302000.blogspot.com/2013/09/missouri-house-staffer-with-concealed.html

    http://mikeb302000.blogspot.com/2013/09/moderation-is-not-censorship.html

    http://mikeb302000.blogspot.com/2013/09/murder-suicide-in-michigan.html



    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jim said that, not Steve.
      Easy to see why you are called a liar.

      Delete
    2. A lot of this could be resolved if people would just post either under their own names or under a unique pseudonym. We've had Cap'n Crunch, Tennessean, Texas Colt Carry, and Fat White Man in my time here, and for the most part, it was obvious who was talking among that group.

      Delete
    3. A lot of this would never come up if you idiots would stop claiming someone is someone else. Sally used her name as a first time visitor and you insulted her. Having seen you do the same to others, I prefer to be anon.

      Delete
  6. Some new person who's not TSJanuary 19, 2014 at 12:20 AM

    Because it is impossible for one person to simply type in a different name?

    But note that TS never said the homosexual slurs were done under the name “Steve”. Rather it was a reference to the two times you got moderation turned back on, the first time under the name “Kevin”, and the second as “Jim”.

    Oh, and even though I am new here, I know all this because I just spent the last 16 straight days reading the archives.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have also read the archives. No proof that Steve is Jim, or Jim is Steve, or any anon is another anon, or all are one person.
      There is evidence and Greg admits to it, that his side thinks many people under different names and anon's, are the same person. No proof of that either.
      The only common thread is these people all disagree with Greg, SS, TS, and others, who are the ones claiming they are all one person.
      Sorry, don't buy that. Just a defense tactic. A poor one used by those whose words cannot stand up to scrutiny.
      None of these people (anon, Steve, Jim, Kevin, etc) are authors of this blog and have no control when moderation is on, or off. Obviously Mike banned them, and then let them back in. Ask Mike.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous, you're lying. I did provide proof. When a great number of comments all make the same types of grammatical errors and all have the same quirks of writing, that supports the conclusion that one person is writing those.

      Delete
    3. I agree with this new person who sounds a lot like me, but is not me 100%!

      Look, solid evidence has been presented. "Lying criminal coward", "next lie", "ass hole", "jack ass", "that's why you earned the moniker....", "HA HA HA HA HA", are all phrases used by you and your doppelgängern, but not used by other real people on your side who agree with you (Mike, laci, dog gone, flying junior). Most damning is that Mike (who does have proof) addressed a group if you as one person.

      So what we have is either no less than seven people all with piss poor deductive reasoning skills to even acknowledge the evidence, or one person who called people the word "liar" 435 times, and therefore not about to admit to being an actual liar.

      Delete
    4. Solid evidence, laughable.
      I call you guys liars, because you have proven to be liars.
      Not sure about anyone else, but they see the same lying criminal statements from you cowards, I do. If you don't want to be called lying criminal cowards, then you should not be lying criminal cowards.

      Delete
    5. Sorry Greg, just because many people use the same negative line does not mean they are the same person. In fact an opposition creates (talking points) that all are expected to use when discussing a certain issue. That's common. It's like saying Obama is destroying America. A line used by most Republicans, it does not mean all saying it are the same person, or that it is true. They claim to be using your own words; if true, then the burden of proof is on you.

      Delete
    6. Anonymous, it's not just the talking points that anonymous commenters use. It's also their linguistic peculiarities that I and TS have pointed out. When several anonymous commenters make the same distinctive errors, that's strong evidence that they are, in fact, the same person.

      Delete
    7. As I explained, it's intended to be the same.

      Delete
    8. "Most damning is that Mike (who does have proof) addressed a group if you as one person."

      I think ss said this too, but the truth is I couldn't care less who the commenters are. I wouldn't waste two seconds checking IP addresses. I addressed them altogether based simply on what you guys were saying, which I figure is probably right.

      Delete