Tea Party Favorite Caught Trolling Craigs List

[Raider]

It's a fake Raider.
Most thought at the time Bill C. got out of the scandal too easy.
May 8, 1996, President Clinton signed the law, dubbed "Megan's Law"

Thanks Greg, I kind of thought it was.

As far as getting off easy, I think the only satisfaction of justice were going to get is that Clintons impeachment is going to stick with him forever.... That seemed to really bother him.

The charge of perjury is nothing compared to what this dirt bag did, Aside from his complete neglect for National Security, Charges should of been brought for Clinton abusing his power when he used the White House like a Whore House for donations... Charging Americans and Businessmen for the privilege of meeting him? Charging them to sleep in the Lincoln Bedroom? That money was of course a "Donation" A donation to Hillary's campaign for her Senate run, Nearly $700,000 collected.

And how can we forget Billy's CASH for PARDONS program, where pardoning FUGITIVE Mark Rich and others in exchange for CASH.. Another "Donation" of his that went towards the construction of his Library.

Oh, and did I mention how Hillary looted the White House? grabbing presidential dishes, cutlery and other items that were the property of the PEOPLE.

[ilovedomains]

The illustrated guide to GOP scandals...
http://www.slate.com/features/2007/s...candalmap.html

Text version (three pages long)...
http://www.slate.com/id/2165980/

[Raider]

It's a fake Raider.
Most thought at the time Bill C. got out of the scandal too easy.
May 8, 1996, President Clinton signed the law, dubbed "Megan's Law"

You had to go back 8 years to scrape those up?... LOL.

Here's that 2010 list... It appears Democrats have Republicans outnumbered 9-2 when it comes to corruption;


Judicial Watch Announces List of Washington's “Ten Most Wanted Corrupt Politicians” for 2010

[DomainsInc]

Can you post some examples of politicians who have done this? You throw out these wild accusations but you never seem to back them up.

There has been a few the past few years. I can't recall them all off hand as I don't really care that much. There was one guy who was solicisting sex in a mens washroom a couple years back, another one that was caught with a male prostitute. Here is an article about all the closeted republicans.. http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/66686/

Here is another one, lots of young gay prostitutes... http://www.faqs.org/periodicals/201006/2108964481.html

If that's true, then why are Democrats faced with charges of corruption far more than Republicans are?


Judicial Watch Announces List of Washington’s “Ten Most Wanted Corrupt Politicians” for 2009
Washington, DC


Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, today released its 2009 list of Washington’s “Ten Most Wanted Corrupt Politicians.” The list, in alphabetical order, includes:


1. Senator Christopher Dodd (D-CT): This marks two years in a row for Senator Dodd, who made the 2008 “Ten Most Corrupt” list for his corrupt relationship with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and for accepting preferential treatment and loan terms from Countrywide Financial, a scandal which still dogs him. In 2009, the scandals kept coming for the Connecticut Democrat. In 2009, Judicial Watch filed a Senate ethics complaint against Dodd for undervaluing a property he owns in Ireland on his Senate Financial Disclosure forms. Judicial Watch’s complaint forced Dodd to amend the forms. However, press reports suggest the property to this day remains undervalued. //

2. Senator John Ensign (R-NV): A number of scandals popped up in 2009 involving public officials who conducted illicit affairs, and then attempted to cover them up with hush payments and favors, an obvious abuse of power. The year’s worst offender might just be Nevada Republican Senator John Ensign. Ensign admitted in June to an extramarital affair with the wife of one of his staff members, who then allegedly obtained special favors from the Nevada Republican in exchange for his silence. According to The New York Times: “The Justice Department and the Senate Ethics Committee are expected to conduct preliminary inquiries into whether Senator John Ensign violated federal law or ethics rules as part of an effort to conceal an affair with the wife of an aide…” //

3. Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA): Judicial Watch is investigating a $12 million TARP cash injection provided to the Boston-based OneUnited Bank at the urging of Massachusetts Rep. Barney Frank. As reported in the January 22, 2009, edition of the Wall Street Journal, the Treasury Department indicated it would only provide funds to healthy banks to jump-start lending. Not only was OneUnited Bank in massive financial turmoil, but it was also “under attack from its regulators for allegations of poor lending practices and executive-pay abuses, including owning a Porsche for its executives’ use.” Rep. Frank admitted he spoke to a “federal regulator,” and Treasury granted the funds. (The bank continues to flounder despite Frank’s intervention for federal dollars.) Moreover, Judicial Watch uncovered documents in 2009 that showed that members of Congress for years were aware that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were playing fast and loose with accounting issues, risk assessment issues and executive compensation issues, even as liberals led by Rep. Frank continued to block attempts to rein in the two Government Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs). For example, during a hearing on September 10, 2003, before the House Committee on Financial Services considering a Bush administration proposal to further regulate Fannie and Freddie, Rep. Frank stated: “I want to begin by saying that I am glad to consider the legislation, but I do not think we are facing any kind of a crisis. That is, in my view, the two Government Sponsored Enterprises we are talking about here, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, are not in a crisis." //


4. Secretary of Treasury Timothy Geithner: In 2009, Obama Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner admitted that he failed to pay $34,000 in Social Security and Medicare taxes from 2001-2004 on his lucrative salary at the International Monetary Fund (IMF), an organization with 185 member countries that oversees the global financial system. (Did we mention Geithner now runs the IRS?) It wasn’t until President Obama tapped Geithner to head the Treasury Department that he paid back most of the money, although the IRS kindly waived the hefty penalties. In March 2009, Geithner also came under fire for his handling of the AIG bonus scandal, where the company used $165 million of its bailout funds to pay out executive bonuses, resulting in a massive public backlash. Of course as head of the New York Federal Reserve, Geithner helped craft the AIG deal in September 2008. However, when the AIG scandal broke, Geithner claimed he knew nothing of the bonuses until March 10, 2009. //


5. Attorney General Eric Holder: Tim Geithner can be sure he won’t be hounded about his tax-dodging by his colleague Eric Holder, US Attorney General. Judicial Watch strongly opposed Holder because of his terrible ethics record, which includes: obstructing an FBI investigation of the theft of nuclear secrets from Los Alamos Nuclear Laboratory; rejecting multiple requests for an independent counsel to investigate alleged fundraising abuses by then-Vice President Al Gore in the Clinton White House; undermining the criminal investigation of President Clinton by Kenneth Starr in the midst of the Lewinsky investigation; and planning the violent raid to seize then-six-year-old Elian Gonzalez at gunpoint in order to return him to Castro’s Cuba. Moreover, there is his soft record on terrorism. //

6. Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr. (D-IL)/ Senator Roland Burris (D-IL): One of the most serious scandals of 2009 involved a scheme by former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich to sell President Obama’s then-vacant Senate seat to the highest bidder. Two men caught smack dab in the middle of the scandal: Senator Roland Burris, who ultimately got the job, and Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr. According to the Chicago Sun-Times, emissaries for Jesse Jackson Jr., named “Senate Candidate A” in the Blagojevich indictment, reportedly offered $1.5 million to Blagojevich during a fundraiser if he named Jackson Jr. to Obama’s seat. Three days later federal authorities arrested Blagojevich. Burris, for his part, apparently lied about his contacts with Blagojevich, who was arrested in December 2008 for trying to sell Obama’s Senate seat. //


7. President Barack Obama: During his presidential campaign, President Obama promised to run an ethical and transparent administration. However, in his first year in office, the President has delivered corruption and secrecy, bringing Chicago-style political corruption to the White House. Consider just a few Obama administration “lowlights” from year one: Even before President Obama was sworn into office, he was interviewed by the FBI for a criminal investigation of former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich’s scheme to sell the President’s former Senate seat to the highest bidder. (Obama’s Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel and slumlord Valerie Jarrett, both from Chicago, are also tangled up in the Blagojevich scandal.) Moreover, the Obama administration made the startling claim that the Privacy Act does not apply to the White House. The Obama White House believes it can violate the privacy rights of American citizens without any legal consequences or accountability. President Obama boldly proclaimed that “transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency,” but his administration is addicted to secrecy, stonewalling far too many of Judicial Watch’s Freedom of Information Act requests and is refusing to make public White House visitor logs as federal law requires. The Obama administration turned the National Endowment of the Arts (as well as the agency that runs the AmeriCorps program) into propaganda machines, using tax dollars to persuade “artists” to promote the Obama agenda. //


8. Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA): At the heart of the corruption problem in Washington is a sense of entitlement. Politicians believe laws and rules (even the U.S. Constitution) apply to the rest of us but not to them. Case in point: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her excessive and boorish demands for military travel. Judicial Watch obtained documents from the Pentagon in 2008 that suggest Pelosi has been treating the Air Force like her own personal airline. These documents, obtained through the Freedom of Information Act, include internal Pentagon email correspondence detailing attempts by Pentagon staff to accommodate Pelosi’s numerous requests for military escorts and military aircraft as well as the speaker’s 11th hour cancellations and changes. //

9. Rep. John Murtha (D-PA) and the rest of the PMA Seven: Rep. John Murtha made headlines in 2009 for all the wrong reasons. The Pennsylvania congressman is under federal investigation for his corrupt relationship with the now-defunct defense lobbyist PMA Group. PMA, founded by a former Murtha associate, has been the congressman’s largest campaign contributor. Since 2002, Murtha has raised $1.7 million from PMA and its clients. And what did PMA and its clients receive from Murtha in return for their generosity? Earmarks — tens of millions of dollars in earmarks. In fact, even with all of the attention surrounding his alleged influence peddling, Murtha kept at it. Following an FBI raid of PMA’s offices earlier in 2009, Murtha continued to seek congressional earmarks for PMA clients, while also hitting them up for campaign contributions. //

10. Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY): Rangel, the man in charge of writing tax policy for the entire country, has yet to adequately explain how he could possibly “forget” to pay taxes on $75,000 in rental income he earned from his off-shore rental property. He also faces allegations that he improperly used his influence to maintain ownership of highly coveted rent-controlled apartments in Harlem, and misused his congressional office to fundraise for his private Rangel Center by preserving a tax loophole for an oil drilling company in exchange for funding. //

http://www.judicialwatch.org/news/20...liticians-2009


So as not to overwhelm the reader, I'll post the 2010 list in my next post.




:

One glance at the site and its obvious its written by republicans for republicans. Of course they would leave them out. They don't want to drag their own people through the dirt.

[Gerry]

Look out. I think this is going to turn into Mother Eva saying her d--- is bigger than yours.

Sorry for the typo, I meant her list is bigger than yours.

[ilovedomains]

Look out. I think this is going to turn into Mother Eva saying her d--- is bigger than yours.

Sorry for the typo, I meant her list is bigger than yours.

She always get angry when she has been proven wrong.

[Gerry]

She always get angry when she has been proven wrong.

It is not the anger that is disgusting. She has to be one of the most prejudicial, discriminatory, bigoted, and close minded people I have ever come across.

When she starts pointing out and using as part of her defense against a member...their age, their occupation, where they are from, who they voted for, who they like, who they dislike, what your color is, what flag is in your profile, what is your avatar...for someone to use those small insignificant bits of information to build a case against someone is simply pathetic and psychotic.

How many times do we have to read her telling people to shut up, you have no say, you have no right, you don't know what you are talking about, you are clueless and at the same time trying to convince us how well informed she is and how balanced that information is and why she has the right not to shut up, has the right to say whatever she wants to say, always knows what she is talking about, and how rational her thinking is and how much time and effort she has spent researching and formulating a just and right opinion.

We witness her ranting about taking away her liberties, freedoms, rights. Then turns around and insists other members do not have those rights when it comes to her threads or comments.

Oh, no no no - don't you dare tell me what Canada is like. I've got links to stories showing how bad it is. Who are you to tell me I'm wrong. You're not even from this country.

She has gone as far (or as low) to point out how many friends she has on the forum vs. the amount of her adversary when in reality it is nothing more than a cry for her acceptance and or to wear a badge or a social status symbol. It's as if a number of "friends" erases her crassness and caustic nature of her posts. If someone has to point out the number of people she has asked to be her friend and who has accepted her offer as a guide for social acceptance, then there are some serious psycho-social issues at play.

I absolutely can not recall ever running across such a classic definition of Schizophrenia on the internet. Other words like psychosis, paranoia, delusional come to mind...never one to accept responsibility or accountability for her own action or words but challenges the other person to be accountable/responsible for what they say, post, their action, or their words. Always trying to demonstrate one-upmanship by boasting either being of superior intelligence or of better character than the opponent...oh yeah? My father can beat up your father. My mother is prettier than your mother. Seriously, I have not seen such behavior since recess playground in elementary school.

And this obsession with me...Mother Eva, did you make it your life's calling to attempt to discredit me? You have failed miserably at every attempt that now you are trying to discredit my family members? Is this not proof enough of your mental illness? You are so obsessed with me you spend countless hours digging through old threads and posts to dig up some dirt on me? Don't you have better things to do with your time and energy?

Psychotic, paranoid, schizophrenic...all treatable with medication and therapy.

But, she would never admit to being wrong or anything being wrong with her thought process, the way she acts and reacts.

[ilovedomains]

Edit.

Update! A few hundred more Republican felons...
http://www.republicanoffenders.com/

[Raider]

Preserved

It is not the anger that is disgusting. She has to be one of the most prejudicial, discriminatory, bigoted, and close minded people I have ever come across.

When she starts pointing out and using as part of her defense against a member...their age, their occupation, where they are from, who they voted for, who they like, who they dislike, what your color is, what flag is in your profile, what is your avatar...for someone to use those small insignificant bits of information to build a case against someone is simply pathetic and psychotic.

How many times do we have to read her telling people to shut up, you have no say, you have no right, you don't know what you are talking about, you are clueless and at the same time trying to convince us how well informed she is and how balanced that information is and why she has the right not to shut up, has the right to say whatever she wants to say, always knows what she is talking about, and how rational her thinking is and how much time and effort she has spent researching and formulating a just and right opinion.

We witness her ranting about taking away her liberties, freedoms, rights. Then turns around and insists other members do not have those rights when it comes to her threads or comments.

Oh, no no no - don't you dare tell me what Canada is like. I've got links to stories showing how bad it is. Who are you to tell me I'm wrong. You're not even from this country.

She has gone as far (or as low) to point out how many friends she has on the forum vs. the amount of her adversary when in reality it is nothing more than a cry for her acceptance and or to wear a badge or a social status symbol. It's as if a number of "friends" erases her crassness and caustic nature of her posts. If someone has to point out the number of people she has asked to be her friend and who has accepted her offer as a guide for social acceptance, then there are some serious psycho-social issues at play.

I absolutely can not recall ever running across such a classic definition of Schizophrenia on the internet. Other words like psychosis, paranoia, delusional come to mind...never one to accept responsibility or accountability for her own action or words but challenges the other person to be accountable/responsible for what they say, post, their action, or their words. Always trying to demonstrate one-upmanship by boasting either being of superior intelligence or of better character than the opponent...oh yeah? My father can beat up your father. My mother is prettier than your mother. Seriously, I have not seen such behavior since recess playground in elementary school.

And this obsession with me...Mother Eva, did you make it your life's calling to attempt to discredit me? You have failed miserably at every attempt that now you are trying to discredit my family members? Is this not proof enough of your mental illness? You are so obsessed with me you spend countless hours digging through old threads and posts to dig up some dirt on me? Don't you have better things to do with your time and energy?

Psychotic, paranoid, schizophrenic...all treatable with medication and therapy.

But, she would never admit to being wrong or anything being wrong with her thought process, the way she acts and reacts.

[fab]

It is not the anger that is disgusting. She has to be one of the most prejudicial, discriminatory, bigoted, and close minded people I have ever come across.

I actually think she's quite nice. Gets carried away too often though.

[Raider]

I actually think she's quite nice. Gets carried away too often though.

Thank you Fab, I think your nice too.

I don't think they will ever know the real me because their far too busy tapping into my bad side.

As for Doc's outrageous and slanderous charge of discrimination. Let me clear that up;

Criticizing Obama on policy does not mean I hate black people.
Criticizing Canada's Government run health care does not mean I hate Canada or Canadians.
Criticizing Bill Clinton for allowing Al Qaeda to build their network for 8 years, does not mean I hate White People.
Criticizing Illegal Aliens does not mean I hate Immigrants.
Criticizing Muslims for supporting terrorism does not mean I hate Muslims.
Criticizing MSNBC does not mean I'm against freedom of Speech.
Criticizing a domain extension does not mean I hate Domainers.
Calling somebody Old because they call me a b*tch, does not make me a agist.


As for the remainder of his post, I'm not even going to reply to it... We all know it's filled with Lies, Half truths, Gross exaggerations and extreme Paranoia.

I'm not the root of the problem here, The guy who is, is the one who goes into my threads posting flame bait, completely unprovoked.

This thread is a good example of that... READ IT FROM THE START, Were all having a civil discussion here, I choose to ignore his posts to avoid getting into another flamer and what does he do? Comes out attacking me with insults for no reason.

Here is another thread of mine where he comes out swinging with insults and then says I'm obsessing over him;
http://www.dnforum.com/f254/keith-ol...ad-445312.html

Here's a thread where he goes on the attack just for me giving my opinion;
http://www.dnforum.com/f254/republic...ml#post1950159

It took me just 1 minute to find these... There must be at least 2 dozen more.

If this isn't Cyber-Bullying I don't know what is.

[Bill Roy]

I do not see the harm in Raider's posts, she always seems polite and very quiet and reasoned in her responses, I can honestly say I have not seen a word in any of her posts for about a year that I would disagree with, .........................

but then again I have her permanently on 'ignor'!