If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Deadbeat dad, singer & Ruben Studdard look-alike Sean Levert died of natural causes; prob. faked his death to avoid paying all that C.S.
"Bob W" wrote in message
... "teachrmama" wrote in message ... "Bob" wrote in message ... "DVD" wrote in message ... I told you that I got the $billion number for unpaid child support from an article in the times, you were too lazy to look it up. Then you or someone else posted the number as being 104 billion in uncollected support. So if I was lying I was lying in favor of your argument. I guess your claim is that I am lying about reading a newspaper article, ridiculous as it seems I guess you need to hang your hat on something when you can't argue a point honestly. Now, back to the Times, tell me again about its liberal bias and how liberals are causing all of these custody problems. I will post the link to that article and a few others after you do. You asked if anyone could prove the NYT was wrong, not if they could prove you were lying. I posted the link to the federal OCSE non-partisan study that quantifies the amount of arrearage CS at $105.4 billion and explained how they come up with that number. There is a big difference between lying and being mistaken. Your recollection of what you read in the NYT was a gross mistake since it understated the government's version of arrearages by $104 billion. But thank you for admitting you might have lied. Now it is time to admit either the NYT was wrong or your recollection of the facts you read about in the NYT was wrong. ======================== Or maybe even just post a link to the article. That might help (not that he can). He's just bluffing and covering up his own foolishness. If none of us can find the article, he can't either. The NYT is so liberal they would never understate a social issue like CS arrearages by $104 billion. If anything they would add a few billion dollars to enhance their social commentary. It is pretty clear he thought no one here would know enough to challenge him on his assertion since he thinks we are all a bunch of whiners talking about experiences. === And trailer-dwelling deadbeat dads. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Deadbeat dad, singer & Ruben Studdard look-alike Sean Levert died of natural causes; prob. faked his death to avoid paying all that C.S.
"Gini" wrote in message news:g6m3k.679$Jj1.275@trndny02... "Bob W" wrote in message ... "teachrmama" wrote in message ... "Bob" wrote in message ... "DVD" wrote in message ... I told you that I got the $billion number for unpaid child support from an article in the times, you were too lazy to look it up. Then you or someone else posted the number as being 104 billion in uncollected support. So if I was lying I was lying in favor of your argument. I guess your claim is that I am lying about reading a newspaper article, ridiculous as it seems I guess you need to hang your hat on something when you can't argue a point honestly. Now, back to the Times, tell me again about its liberal bias and how liberals are causing all of these custody problems. I will post the link to that article and a few others after you do. You asked if anyone could prove the NYT was wrong, not if they could prove you were lying. I posted the link to the federal OCSE non-partisan study that quantifies the amount of arrearage CS at $105.4 billion and explained how they come up with that number. There is a big difference between lying and being mistaken. Your recollection of what you read in the NYT was a gross mistake since it understated the government's version of arrearages by $104 billion. But thank you for admitting you might have lied. Now it is time to admit either the NYT was wrong or your recollection of the facts you read about in the NYT was wrong. ======================== Or maybe even just post a link to the article. That might help (not that he can). He's just bluffing and covering up his own foolishness. If none of us can find the article, he can't either. The NYT is so liberal they would never understate a social issue like CS arrearages by $104 billion. If anything they would add a few billion dollars to enhance their social commentary. It is pretty clear he thought no one here would know enough to challenge him on his assertion since he thinks we are all a bunch of whiners talking about experiences. === And trailer-dwelling deadbeat dads. Or second wives who are ****ed we can't have it all. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Deadbeat dad, singer & Ruben Studdard look-alike Sean Levert died of natural causes; prob. faked his death to avoid paying all that C.S.
"Gini" wrote in message news:g6m3k.679$Jj1.275@trndny02... "Bob W" wrote in message ... "teachrmama" wrote in message ... "Bob" wrote in message ... "DVD" wrote in message ... I told you that I got the $billion number for unpaid child support from an article in the times, you were too lazy to look it up. Then you or someone else posted the number as being 104 billion in uncollected support. So if I was lying I was lying in favor of your argument. I guess your claim is that I am lying about reading a newspaper article, ridiculous as it seems I guess you need to hang your hat on something when you can't argue a point honestly. Now, back to the Times, tell me again about its liberal bias and how liberals are causing all of these custody problems. I will post the link to that article and a few others after you do. You asked if anyone could prove the NYT was wrong, not if they could prove you were lying. I posted the link to the federal OCSE non-partisan study that quantifies the amount of arrearage CS at $105.4 billion and explained how they come up with that number. There is a big difference between lying and being mistaken. Your recollection of what you read in the NYT was a gross mistake since it understated the government's version of arrearages by $104 billion. But thank you for admitting you might have lied. Now it is time to admit either the NYT was wrong or your recollection of the facts you read about in the NYT was wrong. ======================== Or maybe even just post a link to the article. That might help (not that he can). He's just bluffing and covering up his own foolishness. If none of us can find the article, he can't either. The NYT is so liberal they would never understate a social issue like CS arrearages by $104 billion. If anything they would add a few billion dollars to enhance their social commentary. It is pretty clear he thought no one here would know enough to challenge him on his assertion since he thinks we are all a bunch of whiners talking about experiences. === And trailer-dwelling deadbeat dads. In short, he considers himself far superior to any of us, so we can't possibly know what we are talking about. I'm sure he wonders why we haven't caved in to his superior arguments yet. I'm betting that he hopes that lots of other people are following the conversation, oohing and aahing at his wit and wisdom. I must say, he is somewhat entertaining, the way he jumps on issues in posts that he thinks he can challenge successfully (such as Chris's sig line), while totally ignoring questions that he has no answer to. And, when challenged, he posts the NY Times addy. chickle |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Deadbeat dad, singer & Ruben Studdard look-alike Sean Levert died of natural causes; prob. faked his death to avoid paying all that C.S.
"teachrmama" wrote in message ... "Gini" wrote in message news:g6m3k.679$Jj1.275@trndny02... "Bob W" wrote in message ... "teachrmama" wrote in message ... "Bob" wrote in message ... "DVD" wrote in message ... I told you that I got the $billion number for unpaid child support from an article in the times, you were too lazy to look it up. Then you or someone else posted the number as being 104 billion in uncollected support. So if I was lying I was lying in favor of your argument. I guess your claim is that I am lying about reading a newspaper article, ridiculous as it seems I guess you need to hang your hat on something when you can't argue a point honestly. Now, back to the Times, tell me again about its liberal bias and how liberals are causing all of these custody problems. I will post the link to that article and a few others after you do. You asked if anyone could prove the NYT was wrong, not if they could prove you were lying. I posted the link to the federal OCSE non-partisan study that quantifies the amount of arrearage CS at $105.4 billion and explained how they come up with that number. There is a big difference between lying and being mistaken. Your recollection of what you read in the NYT was a gross mistake since it understated the government's version of arrearages by $104 billion. But thank you for admitting you might have lied. Now it is time to admit either the NYT was wrong or your recollection of the facts you read about in the NYT was wrong. ======================== Or maybe even just post a link to the article. That might help (not that he can). He's just bluffing and covering up his own foolishness. If none of us can find the article, he can't either. The NYT is so liberal they would never understate a social issue like CS arrearages by $104 billion. If anything they would add a few billion dollars to enhance their social commentary. It is pretty clear he thought no one here would know enough to challenge him on his assertion since he thinks we are all a bunch of whiners talking about experiences. === And trailer-dwelling deadbeat dads. In short, he considers himself far superior to any of us, so we can't possibly know what we are talking about. I'm sure he wonders why we haven't caved in to his superior arguments yet. I'm betting that he hopes that lots of other people are following the conversation, oohing and aahing at his wit and wisdom. I must say, he is somewhat entertaining, the way he jumps on issues in posts that he thinks he can challenge successfully (such as Chris's sig line), while totally ignoring questions that he has no answer to. And, when challenged, he posts the NY Times addy. chickle Here's the deal. I know from past experience the NYT used to require registration to read their news stories. I signed up with a slight variation on my name and I still get tons of junk mail under that altered spelling. The NYT obviously sells their reader list despite all their privacy policy statements to the contrary. Then the NYT tried to charge a subscription for readers to read their op-ed pages online. I refused to do that. They have since dropped that requirement. I guess a lot of people could care less what Broder and Dowd have to say. Back on topic - I found a NYT story from February 2005 (when DVD showed up) stating the CS arrearage amount nationally was $95 billion in 2003 not the $1 billion currently s/he claimed. Now tonight I can't access the story because the web site has gone back to requiring a username and password. I guess since the Times is now selling off real estate like their Flatiron Building in Times Square to Italian investors, they are out after expanded revenue sources. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Deadbeat dad, singer & Ruben Studdard look-alike Sean Levert died of natural causes; prob. faked his death to avoid paying all that C.S.
"Bob W" wrote in message ... "teachrmama" wrote in message ... "Gini" wrote in message news:g6m3k.679$Jj1.275@trndny02... "Bob W" wrote in message ... "teachrmama" wrote in message ... "Bob" wrote in message ... "DVD" wrote in message ... I told you that I got the $billion number for unpaid child support from an article in the times, you were too lazy to look it up. Then you or someone else posted the number as being 104 billion in uncollected support. So if I was lying I was lying in favor of your argument. I guess your claim is that I am lying about reading a newspaper article, ridiculous as it seems I guess you need to hang your hat on something when you can't argue a point honestly. Now, back to the Times, tell me again about its liberal bias and how liberals are causing all of these custody problems. I will post the link to that article and a few others after you do. You asked if anyone could prove the NYT was wrong, not if they could prove you were lying. I posted the link to the federal OCSE non-partisan study that quantifies the amount of arrearage CS at $105.4 billion and explained how they come up with that number. There is a big difference between lying and being mistaken. Your recollection of what you read in the NYT was a gross mistake since it understated the government's version of arrearages by $104 billion. But thank you for admitting you might have lied. Now it is time to admit either the NYT was wrong or your recollection of the facts you read about in the NYT was wrong. ======================== Or maybe even just post a link to the article. That might help (not that he can). He's just bluffing and covering up his own foolishness. If none of us can find the article, he can't either. The NYT is so liberal they would never understate a social issue like CS arrearages by $104 billion. If anything they would add a few billion dollars to enhance their social commentary. It is pretty clear he thought no one here would know enough to challenge him on his assertion since he thinks we are all a bunch of whiners talking about experiences. === And trailer-dwelling deadbeat dads. In short, he considers himself far superior to any of us, so we can't possibly know what we are talking about. I'm sure he wonders why we haven't caved in to his superior arguments yet. I'm betting that he hopes that lots of other people are following the conversation, oohing and aahing at his wit and wisdom. I must say, he is somewhat entertaining, the way he jumps on issues in posts that he thinks he can challenge successfully (such as Chris's sig line), while totally ignoring questions that he has no answer to. And, when challenged, he posts the NY Times addy. chickle Here's the deal. I know from past experience the NYT used to require registration to read their news stories. I signed up with a slight variation on my name and I still get tons of junk mail under that altered spelling. The NYT obviously sells their reader list despite all their privacy policy statements to the contrary. Then the NYT tried to charge a subscription for readers to read their op-ed pages online. I refused to do that. They have since dropped that requirement. I guess a lot of people could care less what Broder and Dowd have to say. Back on topic - I found a NYT story from February 2005 (when DVD showed up) It looks as if DVD is tired from dodgng all the questions he could not answer, and has slunk away, as predicted. Oh, well... stating the CS arrearage amount nationally was $95 billion in 2003 not the $1 billion currently s/he claimed. Now tonight I can't access the story because the web site has gone back to requiring a username and password. I guess since the Times is now selling off real estate like their Flatiron Building in Times Square to Italian investors, they are out after expanded revenue sources. Maybe they should consider changing some of their policies if they want to keep subscribers. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Deadbeat dad, singer & Ruben Studdard look-alike Sean Levert died of natural causes; prob. faked his death to avoid paying all that C.S.
-- [Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have custody of such child] .. .. "teachrmama" wrote in message ... "Bob W" wrote in message ... "teachrmama" wrote in message ... "Gini" wrote in message news:g6m3k.679$Jj1.275@trndny02... "Bob W" wrote in message ... "teachrmama" wrote in message ... "Bob" wrote in message ... "DVD" wrote in message ... I told you that I got the $billion number for unpaid child support from an article in the times, you were too lazy to look it up. Then you or someone else posted the number as being 104 billion in uncollected support. So if I was lying I was lying in favor of your argument. I guess your claim is that I am lying about reading a newspaper article, ridiculous as it seems I guess you need to hang your hat on something when you can't argue a point honestly. Now, back to the Times, tell me again about its liberal bias and how liberals are causing all of these custody problems. I will post the link to that article and a few others after you do. You asked if anyone could prove the NYT was wrong, not if they could prove you were lying. I posted the link to the federal OCSE non-partisan study that quantifies the amount of arrearage CS at $105.4 billion and explained how they come up with that number. There is a big difference between lying and being mistaken. Your recollection of what you read in the NYT was a gross mistake since it understated the government's version of arrearages by $104 billion. But thank you for admitting you might have lied. Now it is time to admit either the NYT was wrong or your recollection of the facts you read about in the NYT was wrong. ======================== Or maybe even just post a link to the article. That might help (not that he can). He's just bluffing and covering up his own foolishness. If none of us can find the article, he can't either. The NYT is so liberal they would never understate a social issue like CS arrearages by $104 billion. If anything they would add a few billion dollars to enhance their social commentary. It is pretty clear he thought no one here would know enough to challenge him on his assertion since he thinks we are all a bunch of whiners talking about experiences. === And trailer-dwelling deadbeat dads. In short, he considers himself far superior to any of us, so we can't possibly know what we are talking about. I'm sure he wonders why we haven't caved in to his superior arguments yet. I'm betting that he hopes that lots of other people are following the conversation, oohing and aahing at his wit and wisdom. I must say, he is somewhat entertaining, the way he jumps on issues in posts that he thinks he can challenge successfully (such as Chris's sig line), while totally ignoring questions that he has no answer to. And, when challenged, he posts the NY Times addy. chickle Here's the deal. I know from past experience the NYT used to require registration to read their news stories. I signed up with a slight variation on my name and I still get tons of junk mail under that altered spelling. The NYT obviously sells their reader list despite all their privacy policy statements to the contrary. Then the NYT tried to charge a subscription for readers to read their op-ed pages online. I refused to do that. They have since dropped that requirement. I guess a lot of people could care less what Broder and Dowd have to say. Back on topic - I found a NYT story from February 2005 (when DVD showed up) It looks as if DVD is tired from dodgng all the questions he could not answer, and has slunk away, as predicted. Oh, well... I liken it to cancer. Every once in a while it flares up and a lil' chemo is necessary to knock it back down. That is exactly what this type of poster is. They think that somehow they are going to hijack a newsgroup with their false claims and everyone is just going to lay down for them. But when they get enough pounding of truth, eventually they disappear. Some just take longer than others. But nonetheless, such "cancer" never quite goes away. Wonder who the NEXT fool will be...... stating the CS arrearage amount nationally was $95 billion in 2003 not the $1 billion currently s/he claimed. Now tonight I can't access the story because the web site has gone back to requiring a username and password. I guess since the Times is now selling off real estate like their Flatiron Building in Times Square to Italian investors, they are out after expanded revenue sources. Maybe they should consider changing some of their policies if they want to keep subscribers. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Deadbeat dad, singer & Ruben Studdard look-alike Sean Levert died of natural causes; prob. faked his death to avoid paying all that C.S.
"Chris" wrote in message
... [snip] It looks as if DVD is tired from dodgng all the questions he could not answer, and has slunk away, as predicted. Oh, well... I liken it to cancer. Every once in a while it flares up and a lil' chemo is necessary to knock it back down. That is exactly what this type of poster is. They think that somehow they are going to hijack a newsgroup with their false claims and everyone is just going to lay down for them. But when they get enough pounding of truth, eventually they disappear. Some just take longer than others. But nonetheless, such "cancer" never quite goes away. Wonder who the NEXT fool will be...... Hey, where's Moonie..? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Deadbeat dad, singer & Ruben Studdard look-alike Sean Levert died of natural causes; prob. faked his death to avoid paying all that C.S. | teachrmama | Child Support | 3 | June 11th 08 02:14 PM |
Deadbeat dad, singer & Ruben Studdard look-alike Sean Levert died of natural causes; prob. faked his death to avoid paying all that C.S. | Chris | Child Support | 0 | June 7th 08 07:15 AM |
Deadbeat dad, singer & Ruben Studdard look-alike Sean Levert died of natural causes; prob. faked his death to avoid paying all that C.S. | Gini[_2_] | Child Support | 2 | June 2nd 08 06:15 PM |
Deadbeat dad, singer & Ruben Studdard look-alike Sean Levert died of natural causes; prob. faked his death to avoid paying all that C.S. | Dusty | Child Support | 0 | June 2nd 08 05:58 PM |
Deadbeat dad, singer & Ruben Studdard look-alike Sean Levert died of natural causes; prob. faked his death to avoid paying all that C.S. | Gini[_2_] | Child Support | 1 | June 2nd 08 06:08 AM |