Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#46628 Feb 7, 2013
Black Cracker wrote:
<quoted text> The evidence is in every post you make.
Black Cracker wrote:
<quoted text>
All BS Danny. You cannot debate when you cannot be honest with yourself. You have been caught in so many lies we lost count. When we post the facts, you start name calling or go into hiding only to reappear as another of your ID's. This happens all the time and within minutes.
When you can't talk about anything except to tell lies about Dan the Man ... you might have DTMDS.

LOL!

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#46629 Feb 7, 2013
common sense wrote:
There was just a two hour "Frontline" on the Wall Street thing. The left-leaning producers entire driving point was "why were so many executives prosecuted in the Savings and Loan debacle and not yet one single wall street exec has been indicted under the Obama administration.
It is quite eye-opening. Obama and his administration are in bed with big money in a way this country has never seen. That is a fact. A fact, unfortunately that will go uninvestigated by any of the major news organizations who are so deeply entrenched in Obamamania it makes one sick.
Watch the Frontline program if you get a chance. It is disturbing. Over and over they interview FBI agents and Treasury dept officials and constantly come back to the same simple question: "Why aren't there indictments". The closeups on their faces are very telling as is the repeated factual evidence for an incredible coverup. Executives went to prison by the dozens for the Savings and Loan fiasco. As of yet, not one single exec has even been charged in the Wall Street meltdown. Fact!
It is disgusting and inexcusable that nobody on Wall Street was held accountable for their criminal acts. Obama was wrong to not aggressively pursue criminal charges against all those responsible.

But what is fantastically ironic is that CONSERVATIVES have the balls to bitch about it as if they weren't complicit in the whole debacle or would have pursued charges against Wall Street any differently than Obama did.

When you attack the President for doing exactly what your party would have done - that's called "hypocrisy."

Since: Jul 12

Portland, Oregon

#46631 Feb 7, 2013
Cracker, all you got these days ain't all that. Your a hater who can't except America does not stand with your specific kind of ignorance. That should anger you but what can you do dumb ass cracker? not a dam thing with the exception of yapping over Internet.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#46632 Feb 7, 2013
Black Cracker wrote:
<quoted text> If anyone has DTMDS it's you. You are sooooooo stuck on yourself. LMAO
Just can't stop making the personal attacks, can you? Can't contribute anything resembling a legitimate argument on the issues?

Poor sick child.
common sense

Erie, PA

#46633 Feb 7, 2013
Nerd Rage wrote:
There is not one politician it seems that is not in bed with big money or big labor. I don't know what would stop this kind of association but I do believe that there has to be steps taken to remove these politicians from office because they have betrayed the trust of the American people. There is absolutely no reason that any one politician should be if office for decades. I think we should start with term limits and see if that will help curve their behavior. Don't get me wrong. Politicians should talk to businesses and labor groups but there's a point in time where the common people who they are suppose to represent becomes blurry. They should also have whatever meetings that are taking place open to the public or televised via C-SPAN. I think that would be a good place to start (IMO).
Too true. A lofty, worthy goal but unfortunately, in the words of a great poet "A man's reach should exceed his grasp or what is a heaven for"
GM Man

West Mifflin, PA

#46635 Feb 7, 2013
"Let Detroit go bankrupt" - Mitt Romney

President Obama said that President Bush was responsible for bailing out auto companies in Detroit, writes the Washington Examiner’s Charlie Spiering.

“Keep in mind,” the president said,“That the administration before us, they had been writing some checks to the auto industry asking nothing in return. It was just a bailout, straight — straightforward.”

President Obama said that if it weren’t for his current administration’s policies, the auto industry would have been an expensive failure. That is to say, if it weren’t for President Obama’s guiding hand, the auto industry would have collapsed and taken all that Bush-era bailout money with it.

Obama explained that, unlike his predecessor, he “demanded responsibility” from the auto industry, forcing it to “retool and to restructure,” making it “more efficient.”

Critics argue that the president’s claim that the Bush administration demanded “nothing in return” is false.

As Spiering notes, when the Bush administration authorized the first auto loan of $17.4 billion, in October 2008, some aspects of the loan were contingent upon the companies hitting “Restructuring Targets.” Therefore, no one can say that the Bush administration didn’t at least demand or impose guidelines.

Of course, this isn’t to say that “guidelines” make the idea of a bailout any more desirable, but that President Obama’s allegation simply isn’t accurate.

The president continued:“Over the past two years, that entire industry has added nearly 160,000 jobs, GM is number one in the world again. Ford is investing billions in new American plants. Chrysler is growing faster. So today, the American auto industry is back.”

" Those damn Democrats always bailing out losers"- Sean Hannity
Ted

Johnstown, PA

#46636 Feb 7, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
False. I post under one name and one name only. That's what people with integrity do.
Ted wrote:
<quoted text>
!LOL!
Lil Danny BOY, people of integrity have no need--as you do--to incessantly, publicly proclaim their integrity.
On the other hand, dishonest people--like you Lil Danny--constantly cluck about it.
...
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
People who are constantly, relentlessly attacked with lies occasionally respond with the truth to set the record straight.
That's a perfectly reasonable response in the face of unreasonable attacks.
...Every post that's nothing but a personal attack on me reveals that you're afraid to debate the facts. Every post that's nothing but a personal attack on me confirms your utter defeat on the issues.
Oh, Lil dannny BOY, yours are such predictably dishonest responses.

It's reasonable to attack lies and liars. You are 'honesty-challenged' and find yourself steadily attacked for your dishonesty. It's as simple as that, lil BOY. You're a pathological liar. People on this thread know it.

It's impossible to 'debate' with a liar like you. Your lies BECOME the issue, Lil danny BOY.

Other than Bill Clinton, can you name any public figure who constantly bleats as you do,'I am morally superior, I (and my wife!) NEVER lie, I am a person of integrity.'

No, Lil danny? Of course not. Honest people of high moral and ethical character don't say those things. Dishonest people like you do. Prisons are full of innocent victims. Just ask them.

LOL: "I post under one name and one name only. That's what people with integrity do" is a revealing non sequitur. Only you, Lil danny, fantasizes moral superiority in posting under an alias.~snicker~

Lil danny BOY: racist, plagiarist, pathological liar.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#46638 Feb 7, 2013
Ted wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text><quoted text>
Oh, Lil dannny BOY, yours are such predictably dishonest responses.
It's reasonable to attack lies and liars. You are 'honesty-challenged' and find yourself steadily attacked for your dishonesty. It's as simple as that, lil BOY. You're a pathological liar. People on this thread know it.
It's impossible to 'debate' with a liar like you. Your lies BECOME the issue, Lil danny BOY.
Other than Bill Clinton, can you name any public figure who constantly bleats as you do,'I am morally superior, I (and my wife!) NEVER lie, I am a person of integrity.'
No, Lil danny? Of course not. Honest people of high moral and ethical character don't say those things. Dishonest people like you do. Prisons are full of innocent victims. Just ask them.
LOL: "I post under one name and one name only. That's what people with integrity do" is a revealing non sequitur. Only you, Lil danny, fantasizes moral superiority in posting under an alias.~snicker~
Lil danny BOY: racist, plagiarist, pathological liar.
If I lied, someone would be able to point one out.

But nobody ever has.

Nobody.

Ever.

Whenever I have challenged rightwingers to support their statements with evidence or challenged their false and distorted statements, instead of backing up their statements with facts, they invariably begin making personal attacks against me.

Several rightwingers have repeatedly accused me of lying, but when challenged to support that charge, none have done it. NONE.

This is a common rightwing tactic - hell, Mitt Romney used it during the campaign. Tell lies, then accuse those who are challenging you of being liars. That way people who aren't paying close attention just see mutual accusations and don't spend the time to find out who is actually telling the truth.

That's the reason I occasionally respond - to get the truth on the record. If I just allow people to repeatedly make false allegations against me without responding, it looks like their attacks are legitimate.

Again - neither you or anybody else here has ever - EVER - shown a single lie that I've told. If you have one, post it. I've challenged you to do that countless times before, and you never have.

I wonder why. LOL!
Ted

Johnstown, PA

#46639 Feb 7, 2013
GM Man wrote:
"Let Detroit go bankrupt" - Mitt Romney
President Obama said that President Bush was responsible for bailing out auto companies in Detroit, writes the Washington Examiner’s Charlie Spiering.
“Keep in mind,” the president said,“That the administration before us, they had been writing some checks to the auto industry asking nothing in return. It was just a bailout, straight — straightforward.”
President Obama said that if it weren’t for his current administration’s policies, the auto industry would have been an expensive failure. That is to say, if it weren’t for President Obama’s guiding hand, the auto industry would have collapsed and taken all that Bush-era bailout money with it.
Obama explained that, unlike his predecessor, he “demanded responsibility” from the auto industry, forcing it to “retool and to restructure,” making it “more efficient.”
Critics argue that the president’s claim that the Bush administration demanded “nothing in return” is false.
As Spiering notes, when the Bush administration authorized the first auto loan of $17.4 billion, in October 2008, some aspects of the loan were contingent upon the companies hitting “Restructuring Targets.” Therefore, no one can say that the Bush administration didn’t at least demand or impose guidelines.
Of course, this isn’t to say that “guidelines” make the idea of a bailout any more desirable, but that President Obama’s allegation simply isn’t accurate.
The president continued:“Over the past two years, that entire industry has added nearly 160,000 jobs, GM is number one in the world again. Ford is investing billions in new American plants. Chrysler is growing faster. So today, the American auto industry is back.”
" Those damn Democrats always bailing out losers"- Sean Hannity
!LOL!

West Mifflin, you shouldn't imitate EVERYthing Lil danny BOY does.

You aren't bright enough to have written your post and not honest enough to attribute its source. As you know, it was stolen and plagiarized from this site:
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2012/01/26/ob...

It's surprising to see you are quoting Glenn Beck as a reputable source!
common sense

Erie, PA

#46641 Feb 7, 2013
This is a common right wing tactic you say? Well, I guess that "depends on what the definition of "is" is",-Bill Clinton

LOL, you HAVE to be kidding me?
Ted

Johnstown, PA

#46646 Feb 7, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
If I lied, someone would be able to point one out.
But nobody ever has.
Nobody.
Ever.
Whenever I have challenged rightwingers to support their statements with evidence or challenged their false and distorted statements, instead of backing up their statements with facts, they invariably begin making personal attacks against me.
Several rightwingers have repeatedly accused me of lying, but when challenged to support that charge, none have done it. NONE.
This is a common rightwing tactic - hell, Mitt Romney used it during the campaign. Tell lies, then accuse those who are challenging you of being liars. That way people who aren't paying close attention just see mutual accusations and don't spend the time to find out who is actually telling the truth.
That's the reason I occasionally respond - to get the truth on the record. If I just allow people to repeatedly make false allegations against me without responding, it looks like their attacks are legitimate.
Again - neither you or anybody else here has ever - EVER - shown a single lie that I've told. If you have one, post it. I've challenged you to do that countless times before, and you never have.
I wonder why. LOL!
!LOL!

Honest people don't claim--as YOU do--that they NEVER lie, Lil danny BOY. Such a claim is itself evidence that you are an habitual, shameless liar.

You've accused me of plagiarism but repeated requests for you to prove it--even one example--have gone unanswered. Have you any evidence to back your accusation? No? Then you are a proven liar in accusing me of plagiarism, aren't you Lil danny BOY.

But your repeated claims on this forum that neither you nor your wife has lied--about ANYthing--EVER--is all the evidence any sane person needs to confirm that you ARE a liar, Lil danny.

Case closed, BOY.

Lil danny BOY:'white privilege' racist, frequent plagiarist, pathological liar.
D Cheney

West Mifflin, PA

#46651 Feb 7, 2013
Ted wrote:
<quoted text>
!LOL!
West Mifflin, you shouldn't imitate EVERYthing Lil danny BOY does.
You aren't bright enough to have written your post and not honest enough to attribute its source. As you know, it was stolen and plagiarized from this site:
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2012/01/26/ob...
It's surprising to see you are quoting Glenn Beck as a reputable source!
I actually got it off the Washington Exmainer website,and not the Blaze.... The Blaze is a right wing website dedicated to steal the truth off of other websites and spin it in their favor.

Maybe go look for the real site I used ( go fish )....LOL!
Dumbass!
D Cheney

West Mifflin, PA

#46652 Feb 7, 2013
Donald wrote:
Wireless exec with ties to Obama wins contract to supply poor with smartphones
Obama is in so deep I don't know if he can payoff all these backroom deals.
A cellphone company run by a major Democratic donor and President Obama backer has extended its foray into government contracts, from the so-called “Obama phone” to a project intended to provide high-speed Internet access to low-income families -- amid criticism its product is ill-equipped.
Critics also suggest TracFone Wireless CEO F.J. Pollak used his Obama connections to help his company get one of the 14 contracts.
At issue is a $13.8 million pilot project by the Federal Communications Commission that attempts to find the best ways to increase the broadband access rate among the poor and help improve their digital skills – to eventually help them manage household finances, look for work and do other tasks.
The contracts were awarded late last year, though it's unclear how much went to TracFone.
Pollak and his wife, Abigail, are major Obama bundlers and Democratic donors. The couple hosted a $40,000-a-plate fundraising dinner in June at their Miami Beach home. And Abigail Pollak alone raised at least $632,000 for the Obama re-election effort, a total $1.56 million for him since 2007, according to a financial documents obtained by The New York Times.
In addition, F.J. Pollak has been to the White House at least twice. And he and his wife gave an estimated $270,000 to Democratic candidates in the last election cycle, according to OpenSecrets.org .
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/02/06/wi...
Q: Has the Obama administration started a program to use "taxpayer money" to give free cell phones to welfare recipients?

A: No. Low-income households have been eligible for discounted telephone service for more than a decade. But the program is funded by telecom companies, not by taxes, and the president has nothing to do with it.

The program is called Lifeline, established in 1984,( under President Reagan ) originally created to subsidize landline phone service for low income Americans, funded by government-collected telecommunication fees, paid by consumers.

In 2008, the program was expanded to support cell phones which quickly escalated the cost of the program. In 2008 the program cost $772 million.

Know your facts and dont rely on FOX news to give you false information.

You would think would of learned something from the 2012 elections.
LOL!
D Cheney

West Mifflin, PA

#46653 Feb 7, 2013
Ring Wing Goes Crazy Over 'Obama Phones' Which Are Actually 'Reagan Phones'

Little did they know that the joke was on them.

Romney’s dwindling army of right-wingers had their hunting vests in a bunch over a new viral video posted on the Drudge Report back in 2012. The minute-long video, which has already gotten more than one million views since it was posted on YouTube, shows an African American woman in Cleveland voicing her support for President Obama because he gave her a “free phone.” As for her appearance, suffice it to say that she comes across as the living incarnation of the right wing’s stereotypical welfare citizen--which, according to Romney, is now a full 47 percent of the population.

Naturally, the right went rabid.

The Steve Malzberg show, hosted by the notoriously right-wing radio personality, quickly tweeted the video with the comment,“Obama voter. G-d help us.”

Rush Limbaugh’s comments were even more scathing--sprinkled with accusations that the woman lacked basic education except for one topic: how to game the system.

"So these are the people that don't like Romney because of what he said about the 47%? No, these are the 47%!(laughing) Yeah, I'll play it again. These are the 47%... She knows how to get this free Obama phone. She knows everything about it. She may not know who George Washington is or Abraham Lincoln, but she knows how to get an Obama phone,”

But it’s the right that are going to end up looking like the ignorant fools. What Limbaugh, Malzberg -- and likely the majority of the million people who viewed the video -- didn’t know was that these “Obama Phones” are actually a creation of their beloved Ronald Reagan, who began the program in 1984.

HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!! FOOL!
Ted

Johnstown, PA

#46654 Feb 7, 2013
D Cheney wrote:
<quoted text>I actually got it off the Washington Exmainer website,and not the Blaze.... The Blaze is a right wing website dedicated to steal the truth off of other websites and spin it in their favor.
Maybe go look for the real site I used ( go fish )....LOL!
Dumbass!
!LOL!

You're cluelessly guilty of the very charges you hurl at The Blaze which you say is "dedicated to steal the truth off of other websites and spin it in their favor."

The essential difference is The Blaze--unlike you--credits their source while you are merely a slimy thief.

You can't hide your dishonesty or stupidity.

Dumbass!
Help Me

West Mifflin, PA

#46655 Feb 7, 2013
Watch for this coming soon for people on Medicare ( elderly, sick,and disabled vets included )

You heard it hear first.

Well you all seen those commercials about 'First Alert' and the famous, "Help, I've fallen and cant get up"! commercials and other companies advertising those emergency necklaces that are seen on TV, well starting in 2014 those people who qualify are eligible to receive these necklaces will get them free of charge from Medicare and the Disability Act ,which now these people pay up to $20.00 a month for this service by which a button is pressed to call 911 if that person is in an emergency situation.

Thanks to Obamacare all seniors and disabled vets can apply for one next year.

Wonder if these people will fall under the 47% of moochers in this country?

Damn that Obama giving handouts again!
Reagan Phone

West Mifflin, PA

#46656 Feb 7, 2013
Just the facts with NO Fox news spin,...LOL!

LØØK HERE:
http://mortduroi.blogspot.com/2012/09/turns-o...
Reagan Phone

West Mifflin, PA

#46657 Feb 7, 2013
So, again, this program was started when? Back in 1984. And what should that tell you? Oh—it was started under the Ronald Reagan administration. That's right, under the presidency of the patron saint of conservatism they started handing out free phone service to poor people.

If the lady in the video wants to thank somebody for her free cellphone, she should thank Ronnie Raygun for her Reagan-phone.

Another myth about the phone is that it is free or a handout. In fact, it is an opportunity for the cellphone providers to make more money—of course. Providing a basic plan of monthly minutes, which a busy person with a family could easily exhaust, the cellphone providers for the "free" phone program charge users money to purchase additional minutes. So, yes, the phone is free up to a point, but the idea all users are paying nothing for the service is just dead wrong.

But being dead wrong about the facts, being readily racist about the rage, is the essential Republican political paradigm, or recipe, in 2012. It is a pathological and predatory tactic. Of course, as Lee Atwater well understood, and eventually apologized for, it was also a tactic that works really effectively in politics—especially if it is allowed to metastasize into a cancerous political meme.

HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!! !!!!

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#46658 Feb 7, 2013
common sense wrote:
This is a common right wing tactic you say? Well, I guess that "depends on what the definition of "is" is",-Bill Clinton
LOL, you HAVE to be kidding me?
It seemed to be Mitt Romney's ONLY tactic. LOL!

But it flourishes here as well - multiple times a day some days. Maybe you just need to pay a little closer attention.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#46659 Feb 7, 2013
Black Cracker wrote:
<quoted text> Your lies have been pointed out many times on here. You're funny.
Like when? Show me one.

You just make shit up and expect people to take it at face value. Provide evidence for one of your claims for a change.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

McKeesport Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Ron Beck (Oct '14) 3 hr Rox 60
Poll are smokers being singled out with high taxes? (Mar '09) 3 hr Innocent Lad 18
Entire narcotics unit in McKeesport named in pa... (Apr '12) 3 hr Innocent Lad 205
Evans Ave fire arsonist 19 hr romnie 1
News Act 47 looming for McKeesport? (Jan '11) Mon Hobo Jim 206
who was JOEY BERTONE? (Apr '10) Mon Truth Doctor 259
Circling The Wagons on Collins Street Mon Btr 124
More from around the web

McKeesport People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]