Former Clinton Staffers Jump To Mccain

[whottt]

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/09/21/1430406.aspx


From NBC's Cherelle Kantey
Former Hillary Clinton campaign staffers charged Obama with being too inexperienced for the presidency, shifting their support to McCain, on a conference call sponsored by the McCain campaign Friday afternoon.

"Obama really doesn't have the experience,” said Miguel Lausell, senior national political advisor to Hillary Clinton. “We don't know what he's going to be doing. We don't really know where he's coming from, and that's the big difference."

Luchy Secaira, former Sen. Hillary Clinton Delegate-at-Large, said that
stance on women’s issues is all talk and no action. Secaira said that Obama’s rhetoric on the Equal Pay Act is not backed up with hiring practices in his Senate office.

"We need to look no further than Sen. Obama's own senate office, where it's been documented that he pays women less on his staff than males on his staff,” said Secaira. “He talks the talk but doesn't walk the walk."

“The Hispanic community has nothing to fear, because they know John McCain,” Secaira added. “He has fought against his own party on behalf of the Hispanic community and was an integral part in trying to bring forth comprehensive immigration reform.”

Lausell also expressed disappointment that Obama overlooked Clinton as a choice for a vice-presidential running mate, saying this decision was a deal breaker for Hispanic voters who wanted to see her on the ticket.

“He didn't even contemplate Hillary Clinton for vice president,” Lausell said. “I don't really think he's committed to women's future and in terms of Hispanics, … he could have picked Bill Richardson who was fully qualified for the job. But you know, he forgot about him also. So you know, I don't think he takes Hispanics seriously.”

While it's true that Clinton had widespread support from the Hispanic community during the primaries, Obama has held substantial leads over McCain with Hispanics -- greater than even what Kerry had over Bush in 2004 or Gore had in 2000.

Nonetheless, Lausell added that he thought Obama’s candidacy would never measure up to Clinton's because of her proven track record on the issues that affect Hispanic-Americans.

"I think that when you talk about Obama and Hillary Clinton, Hillary Clinton is the sky and Obama is the sea. And the sea will never reach the sky, you know,” Lausell said. “I'm sure he means well, but his word doesn't match his action. "

The former campaign operatives also said they were outraged with Obama’s latest Spanish-language ad, “Dos Caras,” which linked McCain to Rush Limbaugh’s offensive remarks about the Hispanic community. Secaira said this type of ad contrasts Obama’s image of being an agent of change through unification.

"I don't see anything new about put-down politics …This [ad] proves that he's not a uniter; he's a divider. Sen. Obama, along with the Democratic leadership, has divided the party. And this is his tactic. This is his M.O,” said Secaira. “Otro pero con ese hueso."

Translation: “to another dog with that bone."

Of course, political observers will likely see the former Clintons staffers objections as sour grapes -- they're upset because Clinton lost, and they're out of jobs though they're candidate was that close.

[shelshor]

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NmEzMTZmNTk5MDI0NTZmNjUwMjllN2ZlZTc0MWFmYzY=
How Team Obama Pays Women
Pay equity for thee, but not for me.
By Deroy Murdock

‘Now is the time to keep the promise of equal pay for an equal day’s work,” Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama said August 28 in his convention acceptance speech. He told the crowd in Denver: “I want my daughters to have exactly the same opportunities as your sons.”

Obama’s campaign website is even more specific. Under the heading “Fighting for Pay Equity,” the women’s issues page laments that, “Despite decades of progress, women still make only 77 cents for every dollar a man makes. A recent study estimates it will take another 47 years for women to close the wage gap with men at Fortune 500 corporate offices. Barack Obama believes the government needs to take steps to better enforce the Equal Pay Act…”

Obama’s commitment to federally mandated pay equity stretches from the Rockies to Wall Street and beyond. And yet it seems to have eluded his United States Senate office. Compensation figures for his legislative staff reveal that Obama pays women just 83 cents for every dollar his men make.

A watchdog group called LegiStorm posts online the salaries for Capitol Hill staffers. “We have no political affiliations and no political purpose except to make the workings of Congress as transparent as possible,” its website explains. Parsing LegiStorm’s official data, gleaned from the Secretary of the Senate, offers a fascinating glimpse at pay equity in the World’s Greatest Deliberative Body.

The most recent statistics are for the half-year from October 1, 2007 to March 31, 2008. Excluding interns focuses one’s attention on the full-time personnel. For someone who worked only until, say, last February 29, prorating their salary up to six months’ service simplifies the analysis, since we can then double the half-year amounts to figure the annual salary of Senate employees.

Based on these calculations, Obama’s 28 male staffers divided among themselves total payroll expenditures of $1,523,120. Thus, Obama’s average male employee earned $54,397.

Obama’s 30 female employees split $1,354,580 among themselves, or $45,152, on average.

Why this disparity? One reason may be the underrepresentation of women among Obama’s highest-compensated employees. Of Obama’s five best-paid advisors, only one was a woman. Among his top 20, seven were women.

On average, Obama’s female staffers earn just 83 cents for every dollar his male staffers make. This figure certainly exceeds the 77-cent threshold that Obama’s campaign website condemns. However, 83 cents do not equal $1. In spite of this 17-cent gap between Obama’s rhetoric and reality, he chose to chide GOP presidential contender John McCain on this issue.

When Alaska governor Sarah Palin was named the Republican vice-presidential nominee, Obama told voters in Toledo, Ohio, on August 31 that “she’s opposed — like John McCain is — to equal pay for equal work. That doesn’t make much sense to me.”

Obama’s criticism notwithstanding, McCain’s payment patterns are the stuff of feminist dreams.

McCain’s 17 male staffers split $916,914, thus averaging $53,936. His 25 female employees divided $1,396,958 and averaged $55,878.

On average, according to these data, women in John McCain’s office make $1.04 for every dollar a man makes. In fact, ceteris paribus, a typical female staffer could earn 21 cents more per dollar paid to her male counterpart — while adding $10,726 to her annual income — by leaving Barack Obama’s office and going to work for John McCain.

How could this be?

One explanation could be that women compose a majority of McCain’s highest-paid aides. Among his top-five best-compensated staffers, three are women. Of his 20-highest-salaried employees, 13 are women. The Republican presidential nominee relies on women — much more than men — for advice at the highest, and thus, best-paid levels. (For a detailed analysis of these figures, click here.)

In short, these statistics suggest that John McCain is more than fair with his female employees, while Barack Obama — at the expense of the women who work for him — quietly perpetuates the very same pay-equity divide that he loudly denounces. Of all people, the Democratic standard bearer should understand that equal pay begins at home.

[Hook Dem]

"In short, these statistics suggest that John McCain is more than fair with his female employees, while Barack Obama — at the expense of the women who work for him — quietly perpetuates the very same pay-equity divide that he loudly denounces. Of all people, the Democratic standard bearer should understand that equal pay begins at home."
Come on people......these are just talking points for the liberals. Don't expect them to adhere to them!:lmao

[SpursFanFirst]

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/09/21/1430406.aspx"We need to look no further than Sen. Obama's own senate office, where it's been documented that he pays women less on his staff than males on his staff,” said Secaira. “He talks the talk but doesn't walk the walk."


Hmmm..doesn't he have an ad running saying that he believes women's pay should be equal to men's?

He ends the spot by saying that he wants his "daughters to have the same rights as your sons!"

Something like that anyway.


edit: I just saw the other comments...but hey, I was onto something.

[RandomGuy]

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/09/21/1430406.aspx


From NBC's Cherelle Kantey
Former Hillary Clinton campaign staffers charged Obama with being too inexperienced for the presidency, shifting their support to McCain, on a conference call sponsored by the McCain campaign Friday afternoon.


Because, I am sure such a call would present something in a truly unbiased fashion, and not exaggerate anything. :lmao

[ElNono]

Because, I am sure such a call would present something in a truly unbiased fashion, and not exaggerate anything. :lmao

Surely no money exchanged hands before those staffers made those comments. :rolleyes

[johnsmith]

Surely no money exchanged hands before those staffers made those comments. :rolleyes

Off topic, but this post made me think about it, who is more likely to believe a conspiracy theory, lib or conservative?

[RandomGuy]

Off topic, but this post made me think about it, who is more likely to believe a conspiracy theory, lib or conservative?

More likely? Liberal, but not by much.

Conspiracy nuts don't really have a left/right political orientation, from what I have seen.

Ron Paul-tards definitely have some features of both.

I think the old left-right concept of political leanings is breaking down anyways.

[01.20.09]

Big freakin' deal. Whottt needs to get back on his drugs.

[Spurtacular]

https://img.youtube.com/vi/hxY70LZjIyc/0.jpg

[Spurtacular]

Luchy Secaira, former Sen. Hillary Clinton Delegate-at-Large, said that
stance on women’s issues is all talk and no action. Secaira said that Obama’s rhetoric on the Equal Pay Act is not backed up with hiring practices in his Senate office.

"We need to look no further than Sen. Obama's own senate office, where it's been documented that he pays women less on his staff than males on his staff,” said Secaira. “He talks the talk but doesn't walk the walk."



950159000070512640

[spurraider21]

yes. clinton foundation is going down because of their gender wage gap

THAT'S the one crime you're going to allege?

[Spurtacular]

yes. clinton foundation is going down because of their gender wage gap

THAT'S the one crime you're going to allege?

Probably a civil crime; but never enforced. I never focused on a criminal angle; but if that's the distraction you need to sperm shield for your hero, go for it.

[Pavlov]

lol "civil crime"

[DarrinS]

Whott, R.I.P.

[Spurtacular]

lol "civil crime"

Are you under the illusion that breaking the federal equal pay law is not a civil crime?

[Pavlov]

Are you under the illusion that breaking the federal equal pay law is not a civil crime?Since civil offenses are not criminal by definition, lol.

[Will Hunting]

Since civil offenses are not criminal by definition, lol.
:lmao Jesus he’s so fucking stupid

[Spurtacular]

I am well aware of the difference between civil and criminal law. I misappropriated a term. I can live with that. My point still remains that Hillary violated the law, civilly. And my point remains that the enforcement of the law is pretty weak so that enablers and violators like Hillary can act without the fear of especially serious reprisals.

[Pavlov]

I am well aware of the difference between civil and criminal law.Well, now you do.
I misappropriated a term. I can live with that. My point still remains that Hillary violated the law, civilly.Oh? Does everyone do the same job there? Do VPs get the same pay as CEOs by law?
And my point remains that the enforcement of the law is pretty weak so that enablers and violators like Hillary can act without the fear of especially serious reprisals.You're a champion of equal pay for women when it jibes with your political bias.

[Spurtacular]

Well, now you do.Oh? Does everyone do the same job there? Do VPs get the same pay as CEOs by law? You're a champion of equal pay for women when it jibes with your political bias.

I am not a champion equal pay for women. Hillary is. She's also a champion of women breaking through the glass ceilings. I know all this irony is not lost on you.

[Pavlov]

I am not a champion equal pay for women.Then why are you complaining about a pay gap anywhere?

:lol

[Spurtacular]

Then why are you complaining about a pay gap anywhere?

:lol

Why am I noting Hillary's utter hypocrisy? I think that question answers itself.

[Pavlov]

Why am I noting Hillary's utter hypocrisy? I think that question answers itself.Well, if you can list all the people, positions and corresponding salaries, you can start to prove a civil case, counselor.

But you won't.

You're only interested in rumor and innuendo.

[Spurtacular]

Well, if you can list all the people, positions and corresponding salaries, you can start to prove a civil case, counselor.

But you won't.

You're only interested in rumor and innuendo.

:lol Look at you throwing a tantrum ploy even though I said at the outset that this would not be prosecuted.
:lol Numbers are "rumor and innuendo."

[Pavlov]

:lol Look at you throwing a tantrum ploy even though I said at the outset that this would not be prosecuted.
:lol Numbers are "rumor and innuendo."You made the accusation.

Back it up or back down.

[Spurtacular]

You made the accusation.

Back it up or back down.

I posted the tweet that backs it up. This has triggered you very badly.

[Pavlov]

I posted the tweet that backs it up.Nope, that makes the allegation.

Averages and medians don't prove a federal case.

Try again, counselor.

[Spurtacular]

Nope, that makes the allegation.

Averages and medians don't prove a federal case.

Try again, counselor.

Oh, you want me to go citizen journalist and prove a federal case? :lol

I think the indicator is there. Hillary grossly pays men more. I don't see any justification on the horizon for this champion of women. Do you?

[Pavlov]

Oh, you want me to go citizen journalist and prove a federal case? :lol

I think the indicator is there. Hillary grossly pays men more. I don't see any justification on the horizon for this champion of women. Do you?You just admitted you can't prove your allegation so there's no reason to believe your allegation.

[Spurtacular]

You just admitted you can't prove your allegation so there's no reason to believe your allegation.

The veracity of the allegation is not in question. You're just sperm shielding for Hillary as usual. :lmao

[Pavlov]

The veracity of the allegation is not in question.Of course it is.

I questioned it and you folded.

[Spurtacular]

:cry But muh feelings :cry

:lmao

....

The claim/data against Clinton is huge and damning. If you have something to show that the veracity of the claim is in question, show it. Your feelings don't count, snowflake.

[Chris]

:lol

[Pavlov]

:lmao

....

The claim/data against Clinton is huge and damning. If you have something to show that the veracity of the claim is in question, show it. Your feelings don't count, snowflake.I did.

I questioned your claim and you couldn't prove it.

QED

[Spurtacular]

I did.

I questioned your claim and you couldn't prove it.

QED

You've showed me nothing to state that the veracity of the claim is in question. Your feelings don't count, snowflake. :lmao

[Chris]

I did.

I questioned your claim and you couldn't prove it.

QED

Legally speaking he doesn't have to prove anything.

[Pavlov]

You've showed me nothing to state that the veracity of the claim is in question.:lol I stated the veracity of the claim is in question because I questioned it.

When I did, you admitted you couldn't prove it.

The only feelings involved are yours.

QED

[Pavlov]

Legally speaking he doesn't have to prove anything.Well, he made a legal charge he admitted he can't prove.

[Spurtacular]

:lol I stated the veracity of the claim is in question because I questioned it.

When I did, you admitted you couldn't prove it.

The only feelings involved are yours.

QED

No, I said that I would not be taking it to federal case / citizen journalist levels to support the solid information that has already been presented. Now, if you have something to show that the veracity of the claim is in question, then go for it. But again, your feelings don't count, snowflake.

[Pavlov]

No, I said that I would not be taking it to federal case / citizen journalist levels to support the solid information that has already been presented.The information is not solid. No case has ever been made on such information.

[Spurtacular]

The information is not solid. No case has ever been made on such information.

What are you talking about? Wikileaks presented "the case." You just don't like damning info; you triggered, brah.

[Pavlov]

What are you talking about? Wikileaks presented "the case." :lol exactly

[Chris]

Hillary did nothing wrong! Dindunuffin!

[Spurtacular]

:lol exactly

:lol Exactly. Wikileaks presented damning evidence and shat all over your feelings.

[Pavlov]

:lol Exactly. Wikileaks presented damning evidence and shat all over your feelings.:lol it's not damning evidence, no matter your delicate feelings about Clinton.

[Spurtacular]

https://fellowshipofminds.files.wordpress.com/2017/02/wikileaks-tweet-on-mccain-institute.png


https://fellowshipofminds.files.wordpress.com/2017/02/rothschild-tweet.png

[Spurtacular]

:lol it's not damning evidence, no matter your delicate feelings about Clinton.

You cannot say that it is not unless you are willing to present something to the contrary other than your feelings, snowflake.

[Pavlov]

Wow.

February.

[Pavlov]

You cannot say that it is not unless you are willing to present something to the contrary other than your feelings, snowflake.I don't have to. I didn't charge them with breaking federal law.

You did.

Your burden of proof.

Your feelings.

[Spurtacular]

But.. but.. It didn't just happen. :cry

Did you grow up wanting to be a sperm shielder?

[Spurtacular]

I don't have to. I didn't charge them with breaking federal law.

You did.

Your burden of proof.

Your feelings.

This ain't a courtroom, bitch. The tweet speaks for itself. Do you have something to the contrary other than your feelings, snowflake?

[Pavlov]

Did you grow up wanting to be a sperm shielder?Why did you post that anyway?

Explain yourself.

[Pavlov]

This ain't a courtroom, bitch. The tweet speaks for itself. Do you have something to the contrary other than your feelings, snowflake?It's your claim that you didn't prove.

You have nothing but your feelings, snowflake.

[Spurtacular]

Why did you post that anyway?

Explain yourself.

Tangent interest.

:lol "Explain yourself."

[Pavlov]

TangentFor no reason.

OK.

[Chris]

Rothschild? The family that has been funding both sides of every major war since the French Revolution? Globalists in bed with Hillary? No way!

[Spurtacular]

It's your claim that you didn't prove.

You have nothing but your feelings, snowflake.

And if I were a prosecutor and you were a defense attorney, your line of thinking might mean something other than sperm shielding.

[Pavlov]

Rothschild? The family that has been funding both sides of every major war since the French Revolution? Globalists in bed with Hillary? No way!What's your definition of a globalist, Chris?

[Spurtacular]

For no reason.

OK.

Tangent is not no reason. You triggered as fuck. :lmao

[Pavlov]

And if I were a prosecutor and you were a defense attorney, your line of thinking might mean something other than sperm shielding.Nope, we don't have to be attorneys for you to fail utterly in proving a claim.

You fail all the time here.

[Pavlov]

Tangent is not no reason. You triggered as fuck. :lmaoTriggered is searching for ten year old threads to bump.

[Spurtacular]

Nope, we don't have to be attorneys for you to fail utterly in proving a claim.

You fail all the time here.

I never set out to prove a case. Why you insist on being a faggot like this in every thread? You do realize it's sperm shielding, right?

[Pavlov]

I never set out to prove a case.Of course not. You admitted you couldn't prove it.

Yet another failure.

[Spurtacular]

Of course not. You admitted you couldn't prove it.

Yet another failure.

Is this forum a courtroom?

Check no.

Okay, then. So, now that we've thrown out your sperm shielding argumentation, go ahead and show something that throws the tweet into question. Again, your feelings don't count, snowflake.

[Pavlov]

Is this forum a courtroom?Claims can be made anywhere.

You can fail to prove a claim anywhere.

[Spurtacular]

Claims can be made anywhere.

You can fail to prove a claim anywhere.

What is your reason for disputing the claim? (Because clearly you have no information contrary to the claim).

Triggered or sperm shielding or both?

[Pavlov]

What is your reason for disputing the claim?Neither you nor they proved the claim.

QED

[Spurtacular]

Neither you nor they proved the claim.

QED

What is your reason for disputing the claim if you don't have any info to the contrary?

[Pavlov]

What is your reason for disputing the claim if you don't have any info to the contrary?When I see what looks like a bullshit claim, I will often ask for someone to prove it.

You admitted you couldn't prove your bullshit claim.

It's your failure. I do enjoy watching you fail.

[Spurtacular]

When I see what looks like a bullshit claim, I will often ask for someone to prove it.

You admitted you couldn't prove your bullshit claim.

It's your failure. I do enjoy watching you fail.

Wow, it went from "looks like a bullshit claim" to "your bullshit claim" in the very next sentence. Glad we could establish you're triggered. And given your history it is also established that you're sperm shielding pretty hard for Hillary.

:lol It's your failure. I do enjoy watching you fail.

[Pavlov]

Wow, it went from "looks like a bullshit claim" to "your bullshit claim" in the very next sentence. Glad we could establish you're triggered. And given your history it is also established that you're sperm shielding pretty hard for Hillary.:lol It looked like a bullshit claim

I asked you to prove what looked like a bullshit claim.

You failed to prove what looked like a bullshit claim.

I concluded what looked like a bullshit claim is indeed a bullshit claim after your abject failure to prove it.

Now you're just a big ball of feelings about it.

[Chris]

When I see what looks like a bullshit claim, I will often ask for someone to prove it.

You admitted you couldn't prove your bullshit claim.

It's your failure. I do enjoy watching you fail.

The burden of proof is on the accuser tough guy. Legally speaking.

[Pavlov]

The burden of proof is on the accuser tough guy. Legally speaking.Exactly. Spurtacular made a legal claim against Hillary Clinton.

That sure didn't go the way you wanted, did it?

:lol

[Chris]

When I see what looks like a bullshit claim, I will often ask for someone to prove it.

[Spurtacular]

:lol It looked like a bullshit claim

I asked you to prove what looked like a bullshit claim.

You failed to prove what looked like a bullshit claim.

I concluded what looked like a bullshit claim is indeed a bullshit claim after your abject failure to prove it.

Now you're just a big ball of feelings about it.

Well you're citing the absence of evidence as proving a negative as you'd say. You love that concept except when you don't.

But how could it be an "abject failure to prove it" if I never set out to prove it? Therefore, your "bull shit" conclusion is bull shit and you're just triggered as I said.

Oh, this has been apparent for awhile, but....

http://www.thehardtackle.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/8503860555_85b5953c7c_z.jpg

[Pavlov]

:cryRight. Spurtacular made the legal claim against Clinton.

What part of that are you not getting?

[Pavlov]

Well you're citing the absence of evidence as proving a negative as you'd say. You love that concept except when you don't.No I am citing your failure to prove the claim as your failure to prove your claim.

Don't bleed your feelings all over it. You just failed.

[Spurtacular]

No I am citing your failure to prove the claim as your failure to prove your claim.

Don't bleed your feelings all over it. You just failed.

Well, you've claimed it was a "bullshit claim." What evidence do you have to support that? By your own standard, you must prove it.

[Pavlov]

Well, you've claimed it was a "bullshit claim." What evidence do you have to support it? By your own standard, you must prove it.:lol The fact you failed to prove it is my proof.

Your failure is my proof.

Thanks for the confirmation!

[Spurtacular]

:lol The fact you failed to prove it is my proof.

Your failure is my proof.

Thanks for the confirmation!

That's not evidence. That's conjecture, counselor.


:cry I love to treat this board like a courtroom, 'cept when I don't. :cry

:lmao

[Pavlov]

That's not evidence. That's conjecture, counselor. Your failure is all the proof I need.

Thanks for failing!

[Spurtacular]

950159000070512640


:cry That's a bullshit claim :cry
:cry But I have no evidence to support my counter claim :cry

[Pavlov]

:lol "counterclaim"

You're just running on pure emotion right now.

[Spurtacular]

:lol "counterclaim"

You're just running on pure emotion right now.

Actually, the point that I "proved" is that you're running on pure emotion (triggered). And now you cannot "prove" your counter claim either.


:cry I like the courtroom bar (for burden of proof) until I don't :cry

[Pavlov]

Actually, the point that I "proved" is that you're running on pure emotion (triggered). And now you cannot "prove" your counter claim either.:lol "counter claim"

Sorry, you completely failed to prove your claim. Your complete failure is proof your claim is bullshit.

And there's not a thing you can do about it.

[Spurtacular]

:lol "counter claim"

You have claimed something contrary to my original claim IE a counter claim. It's obvious that you've hit a wall. Or in other words, CHECKMATE.

[koriwhat]

Actually, the point that I "proved" is that you're running on pure emotion (triggered). And now you cannot "prove" your counter claim either.

that's all they run on... emotion... fuck their feelings!

[Pavlov]

You have claimed something contrary to my original claim IE a counter claim.Your claim is bullshit.

My proof of that is your complete failure to prove your claim.

What part of that do you not understand?

[Pavlov]

that's all they run on... emotion... fuck their feelings!:lol from the most emotional poster on SpursTalk.

[koriwhat]

:lol from the most emotional poster on SpursTalk.

boohoo pav... ask some more merrygoround line of questions.

[Pavlov]

boohoo pav... ask some more merrygoround line of questions.Show some more emotion.

[Spurtacular]

Your claim is bullshit.

My proof of that is your complete failure to prove your claim.

What part of that do you not understand?

Your proof (that my claim is bull shit) is that I did not prove a claim that I quite clearly stated I would not be proving.

:lmao Today's (flaccid) chump
:lmao You gonna keep trying to talk your way around this even though it's checkmate.

[koriwhat]

Show some more emotion.

show? like visually? almost as funny as you claiming i'm oh so emo. i have very little emotion unless on psychedelics. ha

[Pavlov]

Your proof (that my claim is bull shit) is that I did not prove a claim that I quite clearly stated I would not be proving.Indeed you did not.

That's your failure.

Congratulations.

[Pavlov]

show? like visually?Like verbally.

You're the most emotional poster here.

Don't fight it.

[Spurtacular]

:cry My proof is no evidence to the contrary :cry

:lmao Today's chump.

[Pavlov]

:cry I proved my claim is bullshit :cry:lol

Your failure.

[koriwhat]

Like verbally.

You're the most emotional poster here.

Don't fight it.

oh verbally, like audio or face to face? notice how fucking retarded you are yet pav?

[Spurtacular]

Your claim is bullshit.

My proof of that is your complete failure to prove your claim.

What part of that do you not understand?

That would be proof that I have not proved my claim. It would not be proof that my claim is bull shit. This isn't hard stuff, dickhead.

[Pavlov]

oh verbally, like audio or face to face?ver·bal·ly
ˈvərbəlē/
adverb
1. by means of words.

You use words here, do you not?

[Pavlov]

That would be proof that I have not proved my claim. It would not be proof that my claim is bull shit. This isn't hard stuff, dickhead.All the proof I need is your failure.

And you provide more failure than I'll ever need.

[koriwhat]

ver·bal·ly
ˈvərbəlē/
adverb
1. by means of words.

You use words here, do you not?

verbage... verballly.... hey did you know shithole is in the dictionary too?

[Pavlov]

verbage... verballly.... hey did you know shithole is in the dictionary too?So you do use words here.

To express your emotions.

[Spurtacular]

All the proof I need is your failure.

And you provide more failure than I'll ever need.

You have put forth a claim that you have not proven. Being that this is the standard you want to hold people to, you've failed.

Sorry you're taking your checkmate hard, bro.

[Pavlov]

You have put forth a claim that you have not proven.Sure I did.

Your failure is all the proof I need.

And you can't do anything about it but fail again.

:lol

[koriwhat]

So you do use words here.

To express your emotions.

how do i express emotion through typed words? you use your tiny brain to interpret my words as emotional responses. you couldn't be further from the truth. reality is i sit back and laugh at most of you but you most definitely.

[Spurtacular]

Sure I did.

Your failure is all the proof I need.

And you can't do anything about it but fail again.

:lol

You've had hours to look it up and prove it. You don't want to fight that losing battle though. Sorry you're taking your checkmate so hard. Maybe take it easy on the sperm shielding for Hillary if this hurts your pride.

[Pavlov]

how do i express emotion through typed words?Thoroughly.

[Pavlov]

You've had hours to look it up and prove it.Look up what?

Your failure?

It's right here.

[Spurtacular]

Look up what?

Evidence to your claim (that you haven't proven).

Just take it easy on the Hillary sperm shielding if this has hurt any pride you might actually have.

[Pavlov]

Evidence to your claimYour failure is all the evidence I need.

It's all here.

Thanks again!

[Chris]

how do i express emotion through typed words? you use your tiny brain to interpret my words as emotional responses. you couldn't be further from the truth.

Pavlov the forum whisperer :lol

[koriwhat]

Thoroughly.

you interpret my words to fit some sort of bs emotional response you might have. i have no emotional response to most of what goes on here at ST. it's the same as other far leftys screaming nazi at all white dudes. it's what you want to believe that counts and not reality.

[Spurtacular]

Your failure is all the evidence I need.

It's all here.

Thanks again!

It's not though. You've FAILED to prove your own claim. I however have shown that you were emotionally triggered / sperm shielding for Hillary.

Just enjoy being checkmated. K.

[Pavlov]

you interpret my words to fit some sort of bs emotional response you might have.No.

It's your emotional response.

It's OK. It's not illegal or anything.

[Pavlov]

It's not though. You've FAILED to prove your own claim.You proved it for me.

Thanks again!

[Spurtacular]

You proved it for me.

Thanks again!

Your claim is that the numbers are wrong. You've presented no numbers to the contrary. That's how easy you are to checkmate! :rollin

[koriwhat]

No.

It's your emotional response.

It's OK. It's not illegal or anything.

how can it be my emotional response if you interpret it as such?

fruitcake pav with all his emo takes

[Pavlov]

Your claim is that the numbers are wrong.:lmao Not at all.

Jesus, you really are this stupid.

[Pavlov]

how can it be my emotional response if you interpret it as such?Because it's your emotional response.

[Spurtacular]

:lmao Not at all.

Jesus, you really are this stupid.

It can't be a "bullshit claim" unless the numbers are wrong.

Jesus, you really are this stupid.

[koriwhat]

Because it's your emotional response.

your interpretation but keep screaming in your little echo chamber til it sticks little 5yr old girl.

[Mark Celibate]

All the questions will be asked in this thread, ALL of them :lol

[Mark Celibate]

Wooow, 100k on the main And already 9k on the alt!!!

[koriwhat]

Wooow, 100k on the main And already 9k on the alt!!!

someone has a 100K post count? wtf!? i've been here since like 2005 and no where close to 100k. i think i spend too much time here.

[Spurtacular]

Wooow, 100k on the main And already 9k on the alt!!!

Minus four. They took away his dignified retirement. :lol

[Pavlov]

It can't be a "bullshit claim" unless the numbers are wrong.:lmao

No. I already explained how the numbers posted mean nothing. You agreed since you couldn't prove your claim of breaking equal pay law.

That's your failure, which was all the proof I needed that your claim the foundation broke equal pay laws is bullshit.

Period.

You failed.

Accept it.

[Pavlov]

Wooow, 100k on the main And already 9k on the alt!!!:lol m>s

[Mark Celibate]

someone has a 100K post count? wtf!? i've been here since like 2005 and no where close to 100k. i think i spend too much time here.
Pavlov is chump dumper if you didn’t know, and this is a bump/rogue/dirk4mvp and others multi account :lol

[Pavlov]

Pavlov is chump dumper if you didn’t know, and this is a bump/rogue/dirk4mvp and others multi account :lolEveryone knows, scoop.

You're m>s.

[koriwhat]

Pavlov is chump dumper if you didn’t know, and this is a bump/rogue/dirk4mvp and others multi account :lol

ah it all makes sense.

[Mark Celibate]

:lol m>s
Yeah because m>s used to post in the nfl forum or even cared about football to my knowledge, dumbass.

[koriwhat]

btw i think i'm spurraider alt but i am unsure. i read that i was the other day. i think it was spurraider that said it. lol. i'm an alt! it's like the 51st gender.

[Mark Celibate]

Because dmc is great at sniffing out alts and fucking with people now everyone wants to do it :lol

[Pavlov]

Yeah because m>s used to post in the nfl forum or even cared about football to my knowledge, dumbass.Oh, then I've never heard of you.

[Pavlov]

Because dmc is great at sniffing out alts and fucking with people now everyone wants to do it :lolHe failed pretty hard with this one tbh.

[Mark Celibate]

He failed pretty hard with this one tbh.
Pretty sure he outed you as mr 100k, no?

[Pavlov]

Pretty sure he outed you as mr 100k, no?Nope. He failed.

Sorry to disappoint you, whoever you claim you be using someone else's alt.

[Mark Celibate]

Nope. He failed.

Sorry to disappoint you, whoever you claim you be using someone else's alt.
Who outed you then? I don’t keep up with this place 24/7 around the clock like you do.

[Pavlov]

Who outed you then?Not him.

Seems important to you though.

Is it?

[Mark Celibate]

Not him.

Seems important to you though.

Is it?
Not that much. But all the questions are being asked as I predicted a few posts up tbh.

[Spurtacular]

Nope. He failed.

Sorry to disappoint you, whoever you claim you be using someone else's alt.

:lol Are you fucking kidding? There's been many convos in which you've operated on the basis that chump was your sn. Now, you're trying to deny it?

:lmao Today's chump

[Pavlov]

Not that much.Well there you go.

[Pavlov]

:lol Are you fucking kidding? There's been many convos in which you've operated on the basis that chump was your sn. Now, you're trying to deny it?

:lmao Today's chumpNo, I just confirmed it.

Jesus, you're stupid.

[Spurtacular]

Pretty sure he outed you as mr 100k, no?


Not him.

To be fair, he likes his technicalities. He's now Mr. 99,996. They stripped him of his dignity :lmao

[Spurtacular]

No, I just confirmed it.

Jesus, you're stupid.


He failed pretty hard with this one tbh.

The implication would've been that he tried but that you weren't him. But then again, clarity has never been your strong suit.

[Mark Celibate]

Chump thinks he’s 150 iq but he’s really 120 iq. Somewhat decent verbal intelligence though.

[Pavlov]

The implication would've been that he tried but that you weren't him. But then again, clarity has never been your strong suit.

He guessed. He was wrong.

[Spurtacular]

He guessed. He was wrong.

What was his guess, exactly?

[Pavlov]

What was his guess, exactly?

Is it important to you?

[Spurtacular]

Is it important to you?

Dancing around a seemingly innocuous question. :lol

[Pavlov]

Dancing around a seemingly innocuous question. :lolYes, you are.

I will gladly answer if you say it's important to you.

[Spurtacular]

Yes, you are.

I will gladly answer if you say it's important to you.

Man, you are desperate for any power you can get. :lol

[Pavlov]

Man, you are desperate for any power you can get. :lol:lol you think that's power. Only a truly weak person like you would think that.

[Spurtacular]

:lol you think that's power. Only a truly weak person like you would think that.

I think you perceive that to be power; pretty sad.

[Pavlov]

I think you perceive that to be power; pretty sad.You must think it's true power if you're afraid to say it's important to you to find out what you want to know.

:lmao

[Spurtacular]

You must think it's true power if you're afraid to say it's important to you to find out what you want to know.

:lmao

It's not particularly important to me; I think it's important to you to play your little power games cos you are a weak person.

[Pavlov]

It's not particularly important to meGreat. Quit whining about it then.

[Spurtacular]

Great. Quit whining about it then.

It's important to you, though. You carried on about this and apparently seek to hide a simple answer to the question or otherwise only barter before answering it. :lol

[Pavlov]

It's important to you, though. You carried on about this and apparently seek to hide a simple answer to the question or otherwise only barter before answering it. :lolYou're the one ascribing power to it.

:lol barter

I'll tell you if you say it's important to you, but you think saying it's important to you gives me power in some way, so you won't.

That's all.

Quit whining about it if none of this is important to you.

[Spurtacular]

Because dmc is great at sniffing out alts and fucking with people now everyone wants to do it :lol


He failed pretty hard with this one tbh.


Pretty sure he outed you as mr 100k, no?


Nope. He failed.

Sorry to disappoint you.


Who outed you then? I don’t keep up with this place 24/7 around the clock like you do.


Not him.

Seems important to you though.

Is it?


Not that much. But all the questions are being asked as I predicted a few posts up tbh.


The implication would've been that he tried....


He guessed. He was wrong.


What was his guess, exactly?


Is it important to you?


Dancing around a seemingly innocuous question. :lol


Yes, you are.

I will gladly answer if you say it's important to you.


Man, you are desperate for any power you can get. :lol


:lol you think that's power. Only a truly weak person like you would think that.


I think you perceive that to be power; pretty sad.


You must think it's true power if you're afraid to say it's important to you to find out what you want to know.

:lmao


It's not particularly important to me; I think it's important to you to play your little power games cos you are a weak person.


Great. Quit whining about it then.


It's important to you, though. You carried on about this and apparently seek to hide a simple answer to the question or otherwise only barter before answering it. :lol


You're the one ascribing power to it.

:lol barter

I'll tell you if you say it's important to you, but you think saying it's important to you gives me power in some way, so you won't.

That's all.

Quit whining about it if none of this is important to you.

:lol DMC

[Pavlov]

:lol DMCDamn, this really is important to you!

Calling for help and everything!

You gonna ask him who he thought I was?

[Spurtacular]

Damn, this really is important to you!

Calling for help and everything!

You gonna ask him who he thought I was?

Is it important for you to know that?

[Pavlov]

Is it important for you to know that?It's clear enough you will.

That's how important this is to you.

lol

[Spurtacular]

It's clear enough you will.

That's how important this is to you.

lol

Quantify its importance. Is that all that important?

[Pavlov]

Quantify its importance. Is that all that important?Is it important for me to know how important this is to you?

:lmao

[Spurtacular]

Is it important for me to know how important this is to you?

:lmao

You just said it was important. So, give me a quantifiable level of importance.

[Pavlov]

You just said it was important. So, give me a quantifiable level of importance.You're still whining about it after a full day -- that's 24 hours worth of importance.

And counting.

[Spurtacular]

You're still whining about it after a full day -- that's 24 hours worth of importance.

And counting.

Then by your definition, you'll be telling me the answer.

[Pavlov]

Then by your definition, you'll be telling me the answer.I told you what would get you an answer. You'd rather whine about it.

Because it's important to you.

[Spurtacular]

I told you what would get you an answer. You'd rather whine about it.

Because it's important to you.

Oh, so it's not enough that I just show you (it's important); it's important that I say it, too? Remind me how this isn't one of your gimpy power plays? :lol

[Pavlov]

Oh, so it's not enough that I just show you (it's important); it's important that I say it, too? Remind me how this isn't one of your gimpy power plays? :lolI told you what would get you an answer. If you ascribe power to that, it's your hang up.

[Reck]

Pavlov bodied Spurtacular all up in this thread. Fuck. :lol

[Spurtacular]

I told you what would get you an answer. If you ascribe power to that, it's your hang up.

It's really not. My answer is it's not important. Although I wasn't here for it, I'm sure one could've spotted you from a country mile away. You can keep your girly secret to yourself.

[Spurtacular]

Pavlov bodied Spurtacular all up in this thread. Fuck. :lol

TBH, for the last page or so, probably the closest he's came to a W; and that's pretty sad given we were talking about nothing and he came off like a girl clinging to a secret. :lol

[Pavlov]

It's really not. My answer is it's not important. Although I wasn't here for it, I'm sure one could've spotted you from a country mile away. You can keep your girly secret to yourself.It's no secret.

You just kept asking and going on about it.

For no reason.

For a day.

Because it's not important to you.

[Spurtacular]

It's no secret.

You just kept asking and going on about it.

For no reason.

For a day.

Because it's not important to you.

Maybe you should make up your mind about whether it's important to me or not :lmao

[Pavlov]

Maybe you should make up your mind about whether it's important to me or not :lmaoMaybe you should post about it for another few days.

[Spurtacular]

:cry It's important to you, but you didn't say it, so I'm keeping my girly secret. :cry

:lmao

[spurraider21]

Pretty sure I’m the one who outed pavs

[Reck]

Pretty sure I’m the one who outed pavs

Is fagtacular claiming he was the one?

He spent like a month calling Djonh Chump under the Pav account when everyone kept telling him it wasn't him. :lol retard.

[Spurtacular]

Is fagtacular claiming he was the one?

He spent like a month calling Djonh Chump under the Pav account when everyone kept telling him it wasn't him. :lol retard.

Tranny tantrum...

:lol You don't know what is going on even though you were declaring victory for chump.