[johnforbes]

Heck, even I only disliked him as a pampered socialist for 8 years.

Thoughts on Manchelle's dislike for an extra 2 yrs?

[Clownkicker]

And did you hear that Tiffany doesn't want to date Alexander OR Steven?

And the real shocker is that Janet actually likes Robert.

Imagine that!

Thoughts on the latest hot gossip from high school?

[johnforbes]

Well, if you had ever met one of my girlfriends from high school -- particularly Eva, the exchange student from Austria who helped me learn German -- you would indeed be talking.

Then there was her sister, but I digress.

[Clownkicker]

This just in: Michelle Obama would like to thank dimwit johnforbes and all the assholes at FOXnews for giving her a million dollars in free promotional publicity to her new book.

The ironic thing is that johnforbes' wife will undoubtedly be one of the first purchasers of the book. Being the sort of woman who always looks for a silver lining when in a truly crappy situation, she will be desperately reading it to find the answer to her nagging question: "Just how does someone endure living for years with an annoying, basketball-playing loudmouth and still remain married to them?"

[johnforbes]

Given the worship of Barry by the Left, it is quite relevant to learn that even
Manchelle could not stand the pompous socialist for a full decade.

Moi? It was only 8 years that the leftist helped ruin the country which invited my own attention, and then I turned toward hoping America -- the best big experiment in governance in the history of mankind in this vale of tears -- could find a better leader.

Socialism is a road to ruin, and you can look at the crime and drugs and poverty in LA, Chicago, Baltimore, DC, New York, etc to witness the truth of that.

[Clownkicker]

"Socialism is a road to ruin, and you can look at the crime and drugs and poverty in LA, Chicago, Baltimore, DC, New York, etc to witness the truth of that."-Dishonestjohn

Those societal ills in the U.S. were caused by capitalism, not socialism, dummy. All you need to do to witness the truth of that is look at history in the U.S. before any socialism existed here during the times of 18th century capitalist slavery and 19th century robber barons and monopolies. Look at the Triangle Shirtwaist fire caused by unbridled capitalism. Look at the large city slums already there before the New Deal. Look at organized crime that operates on pure capitalism--supply and demand and survival of the fittest. And look at the corporate crime, pollution, and climate change running rampant today which is all based on capitalism.

It was all there before socialism stood up for humans and instituted things like the 8-hour workday and living wages.

[johnforbes]

There isn't much question that utterly unchained laissez faire would not be wanted because it would be akin to Tennyson's "nature red in tooth and claw."

I grew up doing arduous manual labor, and we viewed it as luxury that people could work indoors in comparatively easy jobs like factory work. But there is a giant flaw in what we thought as kids because it is easy to work hard for yourself but it becomes mighty tedious doing repetitive work for somebody else's profit.

One of the most interesting cases was Lochner in 1905, where the Sup Ct struck down a state law setting 10 hours as the max for a bakery. At that time, these places were hot, dusty, and employees often slept there. Sanitary standards were very low. On the other hand, the Sup Ct at that time wanted to allow free people to form contracts and decide where/how they wanted to work.

Once modern air conditioning began in about the 1930s with movie theaters, it wasn't too long before factories also realized that a workplace which was not boiling hot might be more productive.

That aside, it was interesting that Manchelle admitted she did not like Barry for 10 years, while we voters only disliked the pompous dude for 8 years.

[Clownkicker]

^^^^^^ Look at johnforbes doing his pathetic soft shoe routine, pretending the Johnstown Flood didn't happen.

Well, at least it got Carnegie feeling guilty enough that he started using his ill-gotten gains to set up socialist institutions for the benefit of the public.

[johnforbes]

The Johnstown Flood did happen.

Like most floods, it was due to water.

[Clownkicker]

^^^^^^^ It's stupid, evasive comments like that that are the reason I haven't liked johnforbes for 10 years.

[johnforbes]

What?

You inquired regarding the cause of the Johnstown Flood.

Faced with a query relating to the cause of that flood, I merely noted that most floods tend to be caused by a lot of
water.

Just as Tammy Wynette urged listeners (in a song co-written by Billy Sherrill) to "Stand By Your Man," we all must stand behind the inherent science of noting that floods involve water.

[Clownkicker]

"You inquired regarding the cause of the Johnstown Flood."-johnfibs

No I didn't, dumbfuck. You made it up. I didn't inquire about anything, and I particularly didn't inquire about the cause of the Johnstown flood.

Lies such as that one are just more reasons I haven't liked johnfibss for 10 years.

But as with everything else you dodn't understand, floods such as the Johnstown flood are not CAUSED by a lot of water. Floods such as the Johnstown flood are directly caused by scumbag people such as capitalists Frick and Carnegie, not socialists or socialism. If you were the least bit educated you would know this already.

[johnforbes]

Follow the science.

For a flood to occur, you need water.

Lots of water.

[Clownkicker]

"For a flood to occur, you need water.
Lots of water."-Dishonestjohn

But having "lots of water" does not cause floods, dimwit. That's another of your lies.

There's lots of water behind Hoover Dam but there's still no flood caused by it. I know that mystifies a simpleton like you, but it's true--water itself doesn't cause a flood.

The Johnstown flood was not "caused" by the water. It was caused by the capitalist scum who built a man made lake for themselves and then consciously, intentionally refused to maintain the dam holding back potential disaster even when government officials downstream begged them to repair it.

Criminally negligent lack of dam maintenance CAUSED the flood, dummy. Money grubbing capitalists CAUSED the lake of "lots of water" to be there in the first place. Without the unmaintained dam, all that water would have flowed downstream harmlessly each year in smaller amounts.

[johnforbes]

Gamma radiation is the most penetrating form, but it can be blocked by 3 feet of concrete.

In a twist of science, the brain of Clowntroller is effectively as thick as 3 feet of concrete, and it resists new information.

Floods do require water -- a lot of it.

[Clownkicker]

"Floods do require water -- a lot of it."-Dishonestjohn

But water doesn't CAUSE the floods as you dishonestly claimed. Why do you so desperately resist new information, johnny? I knew your Neanderthal skull was thick, but I didn't realize it was THAT thick.

Specific CIRCUMSTANCES cause floods, such as when a dam that is not maintained, as in the case of the capitalist-caused disaster at Johnstown. Hoover Dam proves that water itself does not cause floods as dimwit johnny claims; for decades, "lots of water" stored but never a flood because of it. If water caused floods, there would have been a flood at Hoover Dam long ago because for decades it has stored "lots of water.". But in fact, the maintained SOCIALIST dam actually reduces flooding, which proves that johnfibs is lying.

"Lots of water" by itself doesn't cause floods. Clearly, the evidence shows capitalist owned dams such as the Johnstown dam=floods. Socialist owned dams such as Hoover Dam=no floods. Capitalism-maximizing profits through negligence of necessary maintenance was the deciding factor in causing the Johnstown flood. QED

[johnforbes]

"Avatar: The Way of Water" is the latest bit of leftist lunacy littering the lights of local theaters.

But floods do involve copious amounts of water.

Go with the flow.

[Clownkicker]

"But floods do involve copious amounts of water."-johnflubs

Yes, "involves" water, not caused by water as you claimed, dummy.

But in the case of the Johnstown flood, it was not CAUSED by lots of water. It was directly caused by capitalism.

In contrast, socialist Hoover Dam has never caused a flood despite the fact it "involves" lots of water and has for decades.


Squirm, johnny. It's hilarious, as always.

[johnforbes]

Yes, floods are caused by water.

Without water, you don't have a flood.

Instead, you have a dry spot.

Clowntroller is squirming, but even with his jellyfish spine he cannot wriggle out of this.

[Clownkicker]

johnny, I realize you failed logic in college, but this is so simple even you should get it.

The Johnstown Flood was CAUSED by a failed dam. Before the dam failed the water was just a harmless lake. It would have remained a harmless lake if capitalists hadn't refused to maintain the dam, even upon the pleading of government officials. An alleged lawyer like yourself should know that negligence allows you to sue the people derelict in their responsibility when their negligence CAUSES a flood that leads to death and destruction.

Just to make it clear to an imbecile such as yourself, you must understand that you cannot sue a lake because the water didn't CAUSE the flood. PEOPLE caused the flood. It wasn't an "act of God." It was avoidable because it was an act of people.

Squirm, counselor, squirm.

Or you can go piss away your life suing a lake for causing a flood rather than admit you're wrong.

[johnforbes]

One of the more intersting early books about Vietnam was Fire in the Lake (1972). The author argued that the US didn't understand that Vietnam had long struggled to keep its independence (e.g., from China, France, etc). She also made the critical point that Vietnamese believed in the "mandate of heaven."

That aside, let us proceed to note that Clowntoker must have flunked science.

That lake had potential energy.

You can take a wheelbarrow load of corrupt politicians and businessmen and still not get a flood without water.

A flood = a lot of water.

[Clownkicker]

A flood = a lot of water in an uncontrolled release when capitalists fail to maintain a capitalist-owned dam and it fails, the result being that a lot of people the capitalists hold in contempt die needlessly.

There, fixed it for you, dummy. Why johnforbes is still defending this despicable behavior is beyond me.

But what hasn't changed is that water held behind maintained dams still doesn't cause floods.

[johnforbes]

Blaming a damned dam is a dastardly diversion.

Undiverted water causes a flood.

Water is politically neutral, and it doesn't care whether humans favor Karl Marx or Adam Smith.