% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Altria Group Inc. Message Board

sir_carson_of_wikipedia 125 posts  |  Last Activity: Dec 17, 2015 8:18 PM Member since: Mar 21, 2008
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • sir_carson_of_wikipedia sir_carson_of_wikipedia Mar 21, 2008 8:35 AM Flag

    < < he is always concerned about the health issues of smoking, he strikes me as a hypocrite>>

    How would that make ne a hypocrite.

    ("Hypocrite" is one of the main words in the Internet rodent vocabulary. But sometimes rodents do not actually understand what it means, but they do know it is something bad, so they use it when they want to say something bad about someone.)

    Claiming concern over the dangers of smoking while advocating genocide? I think that qualifies.

    (On the other hand, Hitler had the same positions (non-smoking + genocide) and is generally considered to have been nuts rather than a hypocrite. Which are you?)

  • sir_carson_of_wikipedia sir_carson_of_wikipedia Mar 21, 2008 10:01 AM Flag

    Another example:

    You yourself have accused people who are pro-smoking and antiwar of hypocrisy. So BY YOUR OWN STANDARDS, the reverse must also be true: being anti-smoking and pro-war is a paradox.


    You whine endlessly about the persecution of jews, yet you are a racist.


    You whine about people not answering your questions, yet you yourself are a poster child for evasion (emphasis on "child").


    You complain about liars, yet you yourself have been caught lying on several occasions. A paragon of honesty you ain't.


  • sir_carson_of_wikipedia sir_carson_of_wikipedia Mar 21, 2008 9:31 PM Flag

    Your weird sex issues and your habitual projection/transference do not, repeat not, imply you've any expertise re Freudian psychology.

    You've been 10 years old for decades. Psychotherapy at this point is probably useless.

  • Reply to

    General Vermowitz....HELP

    by en_light_ened Mar 25, 2008 5:16 PM
    sir_carson_of_wikipedia sir_carson_of_wikipedia Mar 25, 2008 7:02 PM Flag

    When I come to a sewer I expect--no, I demand--to be treated like I am in a sewer.


    "There is no process which completely eliminates the need to dispose of biosolids. There is, however, an additional step some cities are taking to superheat the wastewater sludge and convert it into small pelletized granules that are high in nitrogen and other organic materials. This product is then sold to local farmers and turf farms as a soil amendment or fertilizer, reducing the amount of space required to dispose of sludge in landfills"

    How many times has yahoo eliminated your dumb ass?? Of course, you currently have multiple logins and therefore can't be completely eliminated.

  • sir_carson_of_wikipedia by sir_carson_of_wikipedia Mar 26, 2008 1:32 PM Flag

    Powers and abilities
    Vermin's strength was enhanced by the mutagenic process forced upon him. His agility, reflexes, and durability are roughly equivalent to the absolute peak attainable for the human body but, unlike his strength and speed, they do not reach superhuman levels. He has enhanced senses, particularly his sense of smell.

    Vermin has the ability to control rats and stray dogs within a two mile radius of his person. It has not been clearly explained how he does this but some writers have implied it might be hyper-sonic communication.

    Though Vermin has no formal martial arts training, he utilizes animal cunning and instincts which make him a very formidable hand-to-hand combatant. He once bested Spider-Man in a physical struggle, but was prevented from killing him by Kraven the Hunter.

    Special skills
    Before being altered by Zola, Whelan was an accomplished geneticist. As Vermin, his intellect is reduced to a child-like (yet cunning) level and he suffers from paranoid delusions.

  • Reply to


    by lo_biff Mar 25, 2008 10:24 PM
    sir_carson_of_wikipedia sir_carson_of_wikipedia Mar 26, 2008 3:53 PM Flag

    Come on Carson, what part about the simple math do you NOT understand? The South had the political muscle to keep slavery in their states legal. If Slavery was the only issue, staying put was the answer.

    So, well, maybe, now listen....just'e wrong......AGAIN!!!!

    I never said slavery was the only issue at hand in the civil war; your little buddy over there was saying it wasn't an issue at all.

    Let me know if you have trouble with the big abolitionism.

  • Reply to


    by lo_biff Mar 25, 2008 10:24 PM
    sir_carson_of_wikipedia sir_carson_of_wikipedia Mar 27, 2008 9:30 AM Flag



    Don't make me go jihad on your ass. Just don't.

  • Reply to


    by utah_trailer_trash_girl Apr 7, 2008 1:29 PM
    sir_carson_of_wikipedia sir_carson_of_wikipedia Apr 7, 2008 6:42 PM Flag

    Your civil war numbers are a little low-

    The Price in Blood!
    Casualties in the Civil War

    At least 618,000 Americans died in the Civil War, and some experts say the toll reached 700,000. The number that is most often quoted is 620,000. At any rate, these casualties exceed the nation's loss in all its other wars, from the Revolution through Vietnam.

    The Union armies had from 2,500,000 to 2,750,000 men. Their losses, by the best estimates:

    Battle deaths: 110,070
    Disease, etc.: 250,152
    Total 360,222

    The Confederate strength, known less accurately because of missing records, was from 750,000 to 1,250,000. Its estimated losses:

    Battle deaths: 94,000
    Disease, etc.: 164,000
    Total 258,000

    Agreed. "CIVIL WAR ( both sides) 191,963" doesn't even come close.
    "The war produced about 970,000 casualties (3% of the population), including about 620,000 soldier deaths —two-thirds by disease.[128] The war accounted for more casualties than all other U.S. wars combined.[129]"

  • Reply to

    MO dropping like U.S. troops in Iraq

    by ann_lynn_24 Apr 16, 2008 1:05 PM
    sir_carson_of_wikipedia sir_carson_of_wikipedia Apr 17, 2008 9:39 PM Flag

    When you add it up, it really is shocking just how many wars / military actions the US has waged in the last 60 years -- more than all the other Western nations combined, I'd bet...Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Laos, Cambodia, Grenada, Panama, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Somalia, Lebanon, Serbia, Iraq (twice), Libya, Cuba, and Sudan, plus a bunch of CIA assasinations, overthrow plots, etc in Iran, Chile, and elsewhere

    I think the number of military "actions" attributed to the US since WW2 is well over 100. But that's our military-industrial complex for you: a multihundredbilliondollar solution in search of a problem.

    Always good for a laugh

  • Reply to

    NO Sorry but You Dont Get It

    by pjdiktas Apr 21, 2008 5:52 PM
    sir_carson_of_wikipedia sir_carson_of_wikipedia Apr 22, 2008 8:32 AM Flag

    ..."diahrea of the mouth"...

    Another reason to heart the internets.

  • Reply to

    psyops works best on stupid people

    by carsonogenik Apr 21, 2008 11:35 AM
    sir_carson_of_wikipedia sir_carson_of_wikipedia Apr 23, 2008 7:11 PM Flag

    The best brainwashing occurs when one party convinces the public the war in Iraq and tax cuts are too expensive .. and convince the same people of the need of a Universal Health Care system that will cost 1.2-1.5 Trillion a year.

    Well let's see...

    The Iraq War currently operates at a cost of approx $12 billion/month. And every single dollar spent is another dollar that goes into the budget deficit; ie, the "war" is "financed" entirely on credit. I laughed when Bush said the war would cost $100 billion, I laughed when they said it would be $500 billion, I laughed at the $1 trillion estimate. The final bill for Bush's criminal invasion of Iraq will probably top $4 trillion....minimum.

    wrt Universal Health Care: what's your source for citing $1+ trillion annual costs? US GDP is around $14 trillion, about 4% of which goes to the military...far and away the largest segment of GDP.

    Wikipedia cites 16% of GDP (over $2 trillion) attributed to total health care expenditures. But most of that is private health care

    The normalized amount, in dollars, spent utilizing public health insurance benefits, is something like $50 billion, or 0.36% of GDP. Meaning the US government spends approximately one-tenth as much money funding health care as it does funding the military.

    Once again: wrt Universal Health Care, what's your source for citing $1+ trillion as an annual cost?

  • Reply to

    Democrat refuses to resign

    by i_had_a_plan_jkerry May 5, 2008 10:53 PM
    sir_carson_of_wikipedia sir_carson_of_wikipedia May 6, 2008 5:51 PM Flag

    From your link:

    "Dann is the third high-ranking Democratic official around the country to be marred by sexual scandal in recent months.

    Former New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer resigned abruptly in March after revelations that he had been a customer of a high-end prostitution service. But Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick continues to hold office despite being charged with perjury, misconduct and obstruction of justice for accusations that he tried to hide a long-term romantic relationship with his former chief of staff."
    Republican Sex Scandals Dwarf Those of Democrats

    IMO the article goes too far back in time: "Strom Thurmond was an outspoken southern republican senator and racist. According to information revealed toward the end of his life, he had as a younger man raped and impregnanted a 15-year old African American maid." The year in question was 1924.

    Via wikipedia (the site God uses when He looks something up)
    Since 2004, Repukes have racked up 13 sex scandals, Democraps 9.
    Since 2007, Repukes 5, Democraps 5.
    Since 2008, Repukes 0, Democraps 3.

    PS - This pissed me off. From the Salem News article: "Our nation spent more tax money conducting Ken Starr's investigation of President Bill Clinton's affair with intern Monica Lewinsky, than they did in the investigation of the September 11th 2001 attacks on the United States. Many Americans fail to see the logic behind this."

  • Reply to

    As regards Obama, and the liberal losers

    by haroldsnoad2002 Jun 2, 2008 4:38 PM
    sir_carson_of_wikipedia sir_carson_of_wikipedia Jun 3, 2008 12:41 PM Flag

    in Studds's case, sexual encunters with a minor come under assualt in the law.


    Studds was a central figure in the 1983 Congressional page sex scandal, when he and Representative Dan Crane were censured by the House of Representatives for separate sexual relationships with minors — in Studds' case, a 1973 sexual relationship with a 17-year-old male congressional page who was of the age of legal consent. The relationship was consensual (which made it legal, in accordance with state law) but presented ethical concerns relating to working relationships with subordinates.

  • Reply to

    Rumours abound...RAT HIT BY BUS

    by haroldsnoad2002 Jul 18, 2008 11:20 AM
    sir_carson_of_wikipedia sir_carson_of_wikipedia Jul 18, 2008 4:18 PM Flag

    This alias believes Wikipedia is the font of all that is good and noble in the world.

    Bless you.

    Official ode to Wikipedia:

  • Reply to

    NOBAMA says surge was a failure

    by cpwrguy_99 Jul 23, 2008 9:57 PM
    sir_carson_of_wikipedia sir_carson_of_wikipedia Jul 24, 2008 11:15 PM Flag

    Wikipedia is a tool...

    A powerful tool that should be used in the name of truth and righteousness!

    Recall, if you will, what happened to that guy who drank from the wrong grail:
    He chose...poorly.

  • sir_carson_of_wikipedia sir_carson_of_wikipedia Jul 28, 2008 9:21 PM Flag

    "Born Jewish, Novak converted to Catholicism in 1996."

    ...making him a Catholic jew. Or does converting to Catholicism involve some sort of genetic engineering?

    "BTW, what is it about yiu Nazis always referencing wikipedia?"

    Must be the free sauerkraut and jackboots. Heil Wikipedia!

  • sir_carson_of_wikipedia sir_carson_of_wikipedia Sep 15, 2008 6:15 PM Flag

    Does he not know that many mid income and up are invested in the market?Cap gains tax/dividend tax would almost double for these people, 10-15% to 28%.

    Short-term capital gains are taxed at the investor's ordinary income tax rate, and are defined as investments held for a year or less before being sold. Long-term capital gains, which apply to assets held for more than one year, are taxed at a lower rate than short-term gains. In 2003, this rate was reduced to 15%, and to 5% for individuals in the lowest two income tax brackets. These reduced tax rates were passed with a sunset provision and are effective through 2011; if they are not extended before that time, they will expire and revert to the rates in effect before 2003, which were generally 20%.

    The reduced 15% tax rate on eligible dividends and capital gains, previously scheduled to expire in 2008, was extended through 2010 as a result of the Tax Reconciliation Act signed into law by President George W. Bush on May 17, 2006. As a result:

    * In 2008, 2009, and 2010, the tax rate on eligible dividends and long term capital gains is 0% for those in the 10% and 15% income tax brackets.

    * After 2010, dividends will be taxed at the taxpayer's ordinary income tax rate, regardless of his or her tax bracket.

    * After 2010, the long-term capital gains tax rate will be 20% (10% for taxpayers in the 15% tax bracket).

    * After 2010, the qualified five-year 18% capital gains rate (8% for taxpayers in the 15% tax bracket) will be reinstated.

  • Reply to

    Obama wants to protect the "right" to vacuum out

    by boechair Sep 19, 2008 9:48 AM
    sir_carson_of_wikipedia sir_carson_of_wikipedia Nov 1, 2008 7:13 PM Flag

    a baby's brain in a third trimester abortion. This is consistent with the Democrats being the party of fairness, equity, justice, and protection of the downtrodden. Correct?

    Sir, I am afraid you must be penalized for unsanctioned use of Wikipedia (whose powers are meant for good, not evil).

    Please observe proper protocol in the future by citing material supporting your freaky primitive political beliefs from a more appropriate source.

    Health risks from abortion

    Abortion always stops the beating heart of the unborn child.

  • Reply to

    Connecticut Constitution attack

    by happygambler34 Mar 10, 2009 7:26 PM
    sir_carson_of_wikipedia sir_carson_of_wikipedia Mar 10, 2009 9:02 PM Flag

    on 1st amendment, seperation of Church and State. It probably won't pass this time. But, it's the 1st crack in the door wedged by secular forces to void the constitution-

    URGENT CT legislation attacks Roman Catholic Church

    The Judiciary Committee of the Connecticut General Assembly is considering legislation that would restructure Catholic parishes. Senate Bill 1098 directly attacks the Roman Catholic Church in our state. The legislation is scheduled for a public hearing on Wednesday, March 11th, at 12:00 noon, in Room 2C of the Legislative Office Building in Hartford.

    Suprise! Separation of church & state isn't spelled out in the Constitution.

    "The First Amendment to the United States Constitution is the part of the United States Bill of Rights that expressly prohibits the United States Congress from making laws "respecting an establishment of religion" or that prohibit the free exercise of religion, laws that infringe the freedom of speech, infringe the freedom of the press, limit the right to peaceably assemble, or limit the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

    Although the First Amendment only explicitly applies to the Congress, the Supreme Court has interpreted it as applying to the executive and judicial branches. Additionally, in the 20th century the Supreme Court held that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment applies the limitations of the First Amendment to each state, including any local government within a state."

    So while the Catholic Church is free to espouse its views --via the 1st amendment, it is prohibited from enacting legislation into theocracy --via the 1st amendment.

    Boo friggin hoo. My liberal heart bleeds.

60.05-0.40(-0.66%)Feb 10 4:00 PMEST