Election results --no skiing content

On Wednesday, November 5, 2014 6:28:19 PM UTC-8, wrote:
On Wed, 5 Nov 2014 15:26:47 -0800, Alan Baker
wrote this crap:

make the problem his.

Mmmm, I sense someone is missing his favourite chew toy... easy there,
fella. ;-)

Naah.

The Lieutenant is known to me from other groups...

...and he lies constantly.

:-)

Name one lie.


This signature is now the ultimate
power in the universe

The potato in your speedo picture.

pigo wrote:
On Wednesday, November 5, 2014 11:46:24 AM UTC-7, wrote:
wrote:
The election night vote counts released by the Texas Secretary of State
and posted at https://team1.sos.state.tx.us/enr/results/nov04_175_state.htm show James
Arthur Strohm polling 38,592 votes, or 20.02% in Texas Senate District 14.

Those numbers may shift slightly as absentee and provisional ballots are
counted. Multiply Strohm's total by 4 to get Kirk Watson's approximate total.

It's more compelling to consider how much was spent per vote by the two
gentlemen on the ballot. Neither candidate did diddley-squat as far as
actual campaigning. If anything, Strohm was the more active candidate
because he responded to more surveys and questionnaires than Watson, his
incumbent opponent.

The following figures include all reports filed in 2014, but not reports
for expenditures through election day. Some 2013 expenses are included;
the Texas Senate has a four-year term so all expenses for this election
cycle are not included. Only reports filed by both candidates are compared.

Watson's total expenditures for 2014 reporting to date exceed half a million dollars.

Strohm spent $6.31. For his whole campaign, start to finish.

That is $0.000164 spent per vote.

Watson spent somewhere north of $3.25 per vote, or about 20,000 times more per vote.

Final financial reports will be available online in a few weeks from the
Texas Ethics Commission http://www.ethics.state.tx.us/ .

If you wonder why Libertarians scare the other parties so much, this is a
perfect example of why. We do so much more for so much less, if we were
to come into power, all the political consultants and other parasites
would be out of a job. And we'd run our offices like we run our
campaigns, with saving our constituents' money at every step.

We wouldn't just drown big government in the bathtub (thank you, Grover
Norquist, for that wonderful image), we'd also bury the remains in the
compost heap to grow our non-Monsanto organic heirloom tomatoes next year.


Ob-ski content: With government mandated costs removed from ski areas,
you could expect to see a 10 to 20% reduction in the cost of your lift tickets.



P.S. That vote total is the same as having 38,592 people "like" you on a
social network in just 12 hours.

I will tell you one thing, you will never be elected for stating that
Charles Manson was right about "Helter Skelter", and it is no surprise that
there 38,592 idiots who voted for a guy, who stated many of the crazy
libertarian ideas that don't work in a nation with over 300 million people,
and is modern complex OECD nation.

If you want to be elected, you need to disavowed many of the racist ideas
and people that surround the Libertarian Movement in the US.

Oh oh. Someone seems upset that the Senate is going to start sending out
legislation. Is the prospect of investigation bothersome as well?

No,it is part of the election cycle, and I have to respect the American
voters choices for Senators.

I am talking about the huge denial of Libertarians of some huge racists in
their party and the main intellectuals of their party and philosophy, like
Murray Rothbard. Most Libertarians cover up their racism with the sheen
they are for freedom,when they are actually Social Darwinists.

When someone says that "Charlie Manson was right", that is big problem,
when they agreed with a sociopathic murderer.

On Wed, 5 Nov 2014 20:10:05 -0800 (PST), Richard Henry
wrote this crap:

On Wednesday, November 5, 2014 6:28:19 PM UTC-8, wrote:
On Wed, 5 Nov 2014 15:26:47 -0800, Alan Baker
wrote this crap:

make the problem his.

Mmmm, I sense someone is missing his favourite chew toy... easy there,
fella. ;-)

Naah.

The Lieutenant is known to me from other groups...

...and he lies constantly.

:-)

Name one lie.


The potato in your speedo picture.

That was no lie. I was happy that your sister was taking the picture.


This signature is now the ultimate
power in the universe

On Thursday, November 6, 2014 6:48:32 AM UTC-7, wrote:

That was no lie. I was happy that your sister was taking the picture.

But please, next time you do that, put it in the front! :-)

On Wednesday, November 5, 2014 9:44:21 PM UTC-7, wrote:

When someone says that "Charlie Manson was right", that is big problem,
when they agreed with a sociopathic murderer.

No it doesn't. It's merely a belief that Charlie's race war predictions were correct if not timely.

On Wednesday, November 5, 2014 11:11:08 AM UTC-7, wrote:
On Wednesday, November 5, 2014 11:59:59 AM UTC-6, lal_truckee wrote:
On 11/5/14 8:35 AM, wrote:
Ob-ski content: With government mandated costs removed from ski areas, you could expect to see a 10 to 20% reduction in the cost of your lift tickets.

What "government mandated costs" are you planning to remove? Lift
inspections? Payments for commercial use of publicly owned property i.e..
Forest Service land owned by you and me equally?

(PS If you did happen to get elected I'd like you to legislate to the
effect it's a federal crime to deny public backcountry access anywhere a
resort abuts Forest Service land.)

Let's see ... most environmental restrictions, most OSHA requirements, most employment restrictions, for starters. I'm not well-versed on the subject but I'm confident that with a copy of the Federal budget and a few weeks to search I could come up with a huge stack of Federal cuts.

Yeah, that's just what we need in Breckenridge. The ski area is already contaminating an environmentally sensitive area with silt runoff from improperly configured drainage. Last year, they illegally pumped the Blue River dry with their snow making. So yeah, get rid of those environmental restrictions. We don't need things like fish in our rivers. It's not like fly fishing is a huge industry in Colorado. And who cares if the Boreal Toad goes extinct? You can't eat them. Lynx? They can find a new place to live, they're getting in the way of ski area expansion anyway. And OSHA requirements like requiring safety harnesses on maintenance workers hanging off lift towers aren't really needed.

It's a good thing you are a clueless asshole who has no chance of ever getting elected. Even in a state full of clueless assholes.

On Thursday, November 6, 2014 10:20:12 AM UTC-6, wrote:


It's a good thing you are a clueless asshole who has no chance of ever getting
elected. Even in a state full of clueless assholes.


I am waiting for 38,592 people to "like" that post.

Waiting ...

.... waiting ...

On Thu, 6 Nov 2014 06:58:46 -0800 (PST), pigo
wrote this crap:

On Thursday, November 6, 2014 6:48:32 AM UTC-7, wrote:

That was no lie. I was happy that your sister was taking the picture.

But please, next time you do that, put it in the front! :-)

You saw the pic and you liked it.


This signature is now the ultimate
power in the universe

On Thursday, November 6, 2014 11:31:16 AM UTC-7, wrote:
On Thursday, November 6, 2014 10:20:12 AM UTC-6, wrote:


It's a good thing you are a clueless asshole who has no chance of ever getting
elected. Even in a state full of clueless assholes.


I am waiting for 38,592 people to "like" that post.

Waiting ...

... waiting ...

Yeah, you would be dumb enough to do that.

Fortunately you live in Texas which is already a **** hole so environmental laws don't matter so much there. At least in Colorado there will always be a majority of people who feel that our states natural beauty is worth protecting.

And I've got news for you. Relaxing environmental regulations wouldn't reduce lift tickets one cent. All it will do is put more profits into the pockets of the CEO's of companies like Vail Resorts.

You can always find another 38,591 ignorant assholes there so it's not surprising that many retards voted for you. Let us all know when you get elected. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

On Thursday, November 6, 2014 11:31:16 AM UTC-7, wrote:

I am waiting for 38,592 people to "like" that post.

Waiting ...

... waiting ...

It appears we have a new ranter?