Journalist at Academy Awards: Reporters ‘groaned’ at Michelle Obama stunt

By 99 Comments 1,186 views

Twitchy:

Hope and change?

Read more

Filed under Uncategorized

Curt served in the Marine Corps for four years and has been a law enforcement officer in Los Angeles for the last 24 years.

99 Responses to “Journalist at Academy Awards: Reporters ‘groaned’ at Michelle Obama stunt”

  1. 52

    Richard Wheeler

    Tom I kinda thought Aye’s description of Ret05 as a stoopid lying bigoted racist hypocrite was exceptionally insightful.
    What do you think Bees?

  2. 54

    ilovebeeswarzone

    Richard Wheeler
    you’re playing the HYENA GANG GAME AGAIN.
    you ask what I think,
    I THINK YOU SHOULD GET OF MY FRIEND’S BACK,
    AND STIFU, BRING THE OTHER HYENAS

  3. 56

    ilovebeeswarzone

    Richard Wheeler
    you figure that out by yourself, no you are calling them
    you join in to eat a carcasse, and it’s choking you

  4. 58

    retire05

    @Richard Wheeler:

    Tom I kinda thought Aye’s description of Ret05 as a stoopid lying bigoted racist hypocrite was exceptionally insightful.

    Yet, you still refuse to answer my questions I have asked twice now. Do I need to repeat them a third time? Or can we just assume you want to avoid them?

  5. 59

    Richard Wheeler

    Reto5 When you give a clear yea or nay to my one rather simple question re MONETARY assistance I’ll do my best to answer your many queries. Thanks

  6. 60

    retire05

    @Richard Wheeler:

    When you give a clear yea or nay to my one rather simple question re MONETARY assistance I’ll do my best to answer your many queries. Thanks

    Direct, or indirect monetary assistance? You see, my not having to hire personal security utilizing the services of local law enforcement via my taxes, is indirect monetary assistance.

    If you’re basing that response on what you think Aye has (that I took thousands of dollars in either state or federal assistance for my former business) you are really banking on a loser.

    So just be upfront and answer the damn questions.

  7. 61

    Richard Wheeler

    Reto5 Let’s make this crystal clear. To my question –Have you ever received taxpayer dollars for your business via a grant program?–your answer is 1)yes 2)no 3)none of my business.
    Meantime I assure you I’ll work on the 6 questions you asked of me in #39.

    Semper Fi

  8. 62

    retire05

    @Richard Wheeler:

    To my question –Have you ever received taxpayer dollars for your business via a grant program?–

    The answer, in a word, is NO.

    When I started my business, it was started with a $3,000.00 investment in equipment, and a $1,000.00 investment in material supplies, in my dining room. The money was used from our savings. Taxes were filed as a simple DBA on our personal income tax filings. It was a pretty simple operation: earnings from products, minus cost of material and expenses along with depreciation on equipment, equals taxable income. The first couple of years, I was eligible to take a deduction for a portion of my home and utilities, but chose not to. My phone deductions, although I could have taken a portion of the base bill, were only for those long distance calls that I made that were business related. I had to keep a record for each call, and who it was to. I was allowed the deduction for the inventory tax I had to pay to my county. Back then, you could take a deduction for your time spent on record keeping. I did not. There was a reason for that; those are the very items that will trigger an IRS audit, and I didn’t want to have to devote time to explaining to the IRS how I reached my figures. The first five years we were simply a “mom and pop” operation, but I did finally hire pattern makers in Dallas and assemblers in a small town near Houston.

    I prided myself that every product created was made totally in the U.S.A, and even marked that on the products, from the materials used to the labor required assembly. Most of my workers were contract level housewifes that could work part time and still supplement their family income. None of them were illegal immigrants. But it was a good deal for the ladies as they worked their own hours and my production requirements were reasonable.

    With the advent of Clinton’s agreements with China, it became more and more difficult to find materials made in the United States. The Carolina mills were closed, and those jobs were sent to China. Eventually, in my business, it became even more difficult to compete with cheap, Chinese labor and cheap, foreign made supplies. In 2003, mainly to a bout with ill health, I sold my brand name, and inventory, and was done with it.

    So you have been told more of my personal business than you have a right to know.

    Now, what specifically do you think I benefitted from when it comes to tax payer largess?

  9. 63

    Aye

    editor

    @retire05:

    You’re just claiming something that you would have no way of knowing about; my former business (as I am no longer in business and have not been since before I came to FA)

    No way of knowing about it, eh? You think I’m not aware of the apparel business? Do you think that people outside of Bastrop have no access to information?

    Do you really think that in 2001 the Texas Dept of Agriculture would divvy out +/- $385,000 in taxpayer dollars (grant money) and there would be no press release? Really? If so, you’re far more clueless than I had previously imagined.

    That’s quite a sweet deal you took advantage of, eh? Getting paid in Texas taxpayer dollars to promote your own business.

    Once again, I am prompted to ask: When a person receives tens of thousands in taxpayer dollars for their business, is that person benefiting from “taxpayer largesse”?

    So basically, all you know about me is what I have written here and your opinion of that?

    Oh no, my knowledge is not related to just that narrow scope. Not by a long shot. What is released onto the Interwebz is out there forever.

    I wonder if you’ll answer the direct question posed to you by Rich above.

  10. 64

    Richard Wheeler

    Reto5 HONESTLY I’m not interested in your personal business just as you should not be interested in mine. However you made a false accusation against me and have never righted it.
    AFTER reviewing Aye’s #63 what is your answer to my question in #61?

  11. 65

    retire05

    @Aye:

    Do you really think that in 2001 the Texas Dept of Agriculture would divvy out +/- $385,000 in taxpayer dollars (grant money) and there would be no press release? Really? If so, you’re far more clueless than I had previously imagined.

    If you think you have something, put up or shut up.

  12. 66

    Aye

    editor

    What was/were the name(s) of your business(es)?

    If you’re confident in your position that you didn’t accept taxpayer dollars, surely you will have no objection to answering that question.

  13. 67

    retire05

    @Aye:

    What was/were the name(s) of your business(es)?

    If you’re confident in your position that you didn’t accept taxpayer dollars, surely you will have no objection to answering that question.

    Actually, I do have an objection to giving you information you obviously don’t have. If you had anything, being the evil, spiteful, degenerate that you are, you would have already provided it.

  14. 68

    Aye

    editor

    Actually, I do have an objection to giving you information you obviously don’t have.

    You’re so delusional that, at this point, you still think I don’t know the answer? Really?

    When a person receives tens of thousands in taxpayer dollars for their business, is that person benefiting from “taxpayer largesse”?

    If you had nothing to hide, you’d have been eager to answer that question way back when it was posed the first time.

    …evil, spiteful, degenerate…

    Oh, dear…the paragon of virtue is name calling again. Tsk…tsk.

    I’m curious…can you back any up any of those pejoratives with, you know, actual facts?

    Or, are they simply the worthless opinions of an interminably stoopid lying bigoted racist hypocrite? And before you ask, yes, I can cite your words to support everything I’ve said there.

    One last thing: Before you continue in denial mode, remember that the press release may or may not have been the only card I had in my hand.

  15. 69

    ilovebeeswarzone

    MITT ROMNEY AND ANN TOMORROW AT FOX,
    LOOK WHAT WE MISS, LOOK WHAT IS IN IT’S PLACE
    THREATS OF THE WORSE KIND BY THIS PRESIDENT
    TO SCARE THE GOOD PEOPLE,
    FOR SPITE AND REVENGE, HE WILL NOT ALLOWE THE PEOPLE TO FEEL GOOD, TO FIND WORK, TO BE PROUD OF BEING AMERICANS,
    HE BRING DISGUST AND DESTRUCTIVES THOUGHTS TO THE PEOPLE AND THE DEMOCRATES REPEAT AFTER HIM THE SAME THREATS

  16. 70

    retire05

    @Aye:

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    Oh, dear…the paragon of virtue is name calling again.

    Or, are they simply the worthless opinions of an interminably stoopid lying bigoted racist hypocrite? And before you ask, yes, I can cite your words to support everything I’ve said there.

    You know, Aye, your fixation on me is becoming pathological. Really, it is. You should get a hobby, or something. And you obviously don’t know how Texas Department of Agriculture matching funds work, or you would not be so cocky. Nor do you understand that any amount listed is the maximum amount available, as long as the member sticks to the approved grant regulations and requirement.

    Before you go into denial mode, remember that the press release may or may not have been the only card I had in my hand.

    Deal them.

    But remember, you are beginning to tread on LEGALLY QUESTIONABLE ground here.

  17. 71

    ilovebeeswarzone

    retire05
    don’t fall in the trap,
    don’t give more info,
    it will be use to destroy you.
    get out of here,
    there are other posts

  18. 72

    retire05

    @ilovebeeswarzone:

    Bees, the bottom line is that Aye has become pathologically fixated on me. If that is how they want to run FA, fine. I have told Aye more than once to simply have Curt email me and tell me to leave this website, and I will.

    But can there be any doubt now what an evil, ABSOLUTELY EVIL, person Aye is? I doubt that even Richard wants to deal in this kind of personal attacks.

  19. 73

    ilovebeeswarzone

    AYE
    YOU ARE SHOWING AN EVIL SIDE OF YOU, TRY TO CONTROL YOUR WORDS
    AND CONTROL YOUR HATE AND ATTACKS,
    ON A CONSERVATIVE, ATTACK BY LIBTARDS

  20. 74

    ilovebeeswarzone

    retire05
    if CURT WANTED YOU TO LEAVE ,
    HE WOULD HAVE DONE SO BY NOW,
    I DON’T WANT YOU TO GO,
    I WANT YOU TO STOP THE EVIL BACK AND FORT DIALOG,
    THAT’S HOW WE LOST TWO OTHER BEFORE WHICH WHERE GIVING A LOT
    TO FLOPPING ACES,
    MIKE AMERICA IS ONE OF THEM. AND THE LIB RICHARD WHEELER WAS IN THE PARTICIPATING GAME ,
    TOM WAS NOT HERE AT THE TIME BUT HE IS ANOTHER LIBTARD OUT TO PARTICIPATING
    IN THE ATTACK NOW,
    YOUR DEFENSIVES WORDS ARE WORKING AGAINST YOU THEY ARE FEEDING YOUR ANGER, YOU JUST HAVE TO SWITCH TO ANOTHER POST
    THEY ALREADY SCREWED UP 3 POSTS

  21. 75

    Aye

    editor

    And you obviously don’t know how Texas Department of Agriculture matching funds work, or you would not be so cocky. Nor do you understand that any amount listed is the maximum amount available, as long as the member sticks to the approved grant regulations and requirement.

    Actually I understand really well how it works: Those “matching funds” are taxpayer dollars as allotted by the Texas Legislature.

    All this time, you’ve been claiming Rich was mooching off the taxpayer when, lo and behold, you’re the one who is actually guilty.

    You’re nothing more than a flaming hypocrite.

    But remember, you are beginning to tread on LEGALLY QUESTIONABLE ground here.

    On what basis, precisely? Everything I’ve posted is publicly available information.

    Google. All it takes is Google.

    But can there be any doubt now what an evil, ABSOLUTELY EVIL, person Aye is?

    Evil because I dare tell the truth? Evil because I dare call you out on your dishonesty and hypocrisy?

    Do, please, spare me your pomposity. And your not so thinly veiled and unimpressive threats.

    This is not my first time at the rodeo.

  22. 76

    ilovebeeswarzone

    THE REPUBLICANS SENT A BILL TO PREVENT THE CUT TO BE LIKE OBAMA SAID,
    THE DEMOCRATES IN THE SENATE REFUSE TO PASS IT,
    THEY ARE THE BAD GUYS AND THERE IS NO MISTAKE ABOUT IT,

  23. 77

    retire05

    @Aye:

    Actually I understand really well how it works: Those “matching funds” are taxpayer dollars as allotted by the Texas Legislature.

    So why don’t you tell us all how those grants work? Why don’t you explain what is in the contract in order for any Texas business to receive those grants? Perhaps you can Google one of the contracts that have been agreed to between a business and the TxDoA?

    Everything I’ve posted is publicly available information.

    And how many people that frequent FA are willing to go to the extremes as you are to delve into someone’s personal affairs? Do I know who Richard is? Most certainly. He makes no mystery of who he is. Would I out his personal information (residence, address, et al)? Most certainly not. How many times did I warn Larry against doing that to himself?

    This is not my first time at the rodeo.

    Obviously, you were the one the kids were riding in the mutton busting event.

    You’re nothing more than a flaming hypocrite.

    Your opinion of me. My opinion of you is not nearly that flattering.

  24. 79

    retire05

    @Aye:

    Everything I’ve posted is publicly available information.

    Just one problem with that, Aye.

    When you sign up to post here at FA, you pick a moniker and submit your email address. Only those who run this blog would know what name was attached to that email address, not others who come here and post. You obviously took the name off my email address, and started your Google seaching, knowing that I live in Texas and roughly what area of Texas I am in.

    You put in a lot of time trying to find out anything about me you could, going to a news release from 12 years ago, thinking you had me cornered. How sick are you? To spend that much time on one person you hate is pathological.

    Is this what FA has turned into? Anyone who posts here, that you feel demands your wrath, will be subjected to having their personal information revealed?

    People post here at FA using monikers for a reason. It allows them to say what they want, without crackpots, like you, tracking them down for nefarious reasons. But since you have access to email names, no one is any longer safe from you and your nefarious goals.

  25. 80

    Richard Wheeler

    Retire05 It seems to me that supposed anonymity does not give one the right to slander, Just as it does not give one the right to perform an illegal act.
    By posting my name I am placing certain reigns upon myself.
    I wsa taught to act and speak as if someone was watching.
    You’ve got to expect that ANYTHING you say or do on the internet could come back to bite you.Look at the cops grabbing suspects computers first thing.
    IMO because one has strong political beliefs does not give the absolute right to slander another person who has divergent beliefs.
    It’s a problem with the country–slandering BHO OR W,Michelle or Sarah—-what purpose??Anonymity is for the deceased.

    As for name calling. If you’re gonna dish it out prepare to get it back.

    Semper Fi

  26. 81

    retire05

    @Richard Wheeler:

    Retire05 It seems to me that supposed anonymity does not give one the right to slander, Just as it does not give one the right to perform an illegal act.

    If you don’t want your actions critiqued, don’t reveal them.

    By posting my name I am placing certain reigns upon myself.

    You’ve got to expect that ANYTHING you say or do on the internet could come back to bite you

    When a blog allows you the use of a moniker, and doesn’t require you to post under your real name, you can assume that you have a certain amount of anonymity. Obviously, you support a author listed on this blog, who has access to poster’s email addresses, outing the identity of anyone he wants to. I could easy find you, Richard, abnd post your address, phone number and any other information about you available on the internet here at FA. I don’t think that would be right. I would have no guarantee that someone a little off kilter would not take that information and use it to harm you, and it would be a clear violation (IMHO) of your right to what ever amount of privacy you desire.

    And by doing so, you show that you have faith that you will not be harrassed by some nutcase. I don’t suggest you go over to HuffingtonPost/DailyKos and start expressing conservative values using your own name. You would not be the first person threatened by nutcases there.

    Look at the cops grabbing suspects computers first thing.

    What was the purpose of that little addemdum? Are you inferring I am a criminal?

    Anonymity is for the deceased.

    Actually, no. Once you are deceased all bets are off when it comes to privacy.

    IMO because one has strong political beliefs does not give the absolute right to slander another person who has divergent beliefs

    Yet you are perfectly content to allow Aye to do that to me.

    As for name calling. If you’re gonna dish it out prepare to get it back.

    Although Aye will deny it, I didn’t draw first blood.

  27. 82

    Aye

    editor

    Look, the terms of the matching funds agreements and the hoops and hurdles you have to maneuver to get the payouts are irrelevant bunny trails that don’t matter in terms of the conversation we are having.

    What matters is that those funds are tax dollars allotted by the legislature and distributed by the Ag Dept to applicants. And every one of the recipients of those dollars is benefiting from “taxpayer largesse.” That’s what matters. And that’s all that matters.

    You went to great pains to accuse Rich of benefiting from “taxpayer largesse” without one shred of proof that it was true. Even when repeatedly presented with source material that destroyed your position you continued to argue on and on that he was guilty.

    Rather than simply drop it and issue the long overdue apology, you chose to double down.

    How is persistently ignoring facts and continuing to falsely accuse someone of something a Conservative principle or standard?

    How is hypocrisy a Conservative principle or standard?

    I doubt you’ll have any answers to either of those questions, but I can assure you that if that’s what it means to be a Conservative, then I certainly want no part of it.

    Everything I’ve posted is publicly available information.

    Just one problem with that, Aye.

    When you sign up to post here at FA, you pick a moniker and submit your email address. Only those who run this blog would know what name was attached to that email address, not others who come here and post. You obviously took the name off my email address, and started your Google seaching, knowing that I live in Texas and roughly what area of Texas I am in.

    Oh, please. Put away your poor pitiful me victim mentality. I didn’t use any portion of your email address to find anything because I didn’t need to.

    You have peppered the Interwebz with your own information. Bleating about privacy after publishing your own information is pathetic.

    Everything that happens to you is the fault of someone else isn’t it? You’re beginning to sound like Barack Obama.

    Toughen up buttercup.

    If you don’t want people to know things about you, don’t post it on the Interwebz for everyone to see. I didn’t have to guess where you live, you posted it. I didn’t have to search for anything. Google is chock slap full of information that you posted and it took me less than one minute to find that press release.

    Through our conversation, you told me over and over again to post the press release.

    Now you’re all fluffed up at me for your self-inflicted wound? Amusing.

    IMO because one has strong political beliefs does not give the absolute right to slander another person who has divergent beliefs

    Yet you are perfectly content to allow Aye to do that to me.

    Again with the victim mentality?

    Do, please, show all of us where I have “slander[ed]” you. Be specific.

    But first you need to understand the definition of the word.

  28. 83

    Richard Wheeler

    Ret05 Again you politicize. Nutcases at Huffpro or D.K. no worse than those at F.A. Good people here,good people there.
    My point about cops grabbing computers. They know it’s all there for discovery,No anonymity.
    You misspoke about my refi and after being shown the truth still continued to flail away. Need I remind you of the derogatory names you spewed at me.
    You think you’re tough, and in a VERY un ladylike way seem to enjoy the crass back and forth, Do you consider yourself a lady?
    Bottom line–You jumped into this with eyes wide– chips will fall where they may. Truth will out. It always does.

    Semper Fi

  29. 84

    retire05

    @Aye:

    Look, the terms of the matching funds agreements and the hoops and hurdles you have to maneuver to get the payouts are irrelevant bunny trails that don’t matter in terms of the conversation we are having.

    Actually, since you don’t know because you have never signed the agreement with the TxDoA, and obviously have not been able to find the contract that is required, there are certain elements that must be met before any funds are paid to a grantee. i.e. if you are a jelly producer, and you agree to attend certain trade shows where you sell your jelly, but don’t actually participate in those trade shows because the trade show had already contracted with another jelly manufacturer, or for whatever reason, you are not eligible for the matching funds that were granted to you. A granting of matching funds is no guarantee they will be handed out if not all the ts are crossed and the is dotted.

    You have peppered the Interwebz with your own information. Bleating about privacy after you published your own information is pathetic.

    You, and the other authors here that are listed in the above link, are the only ones that would have access to my name via my email address. For you to try to pass off the lie that you knew my name from other means is pure bullshit, and you know it.

    You truly are a bastard, Aye.

    So, why don’t you provide us with your actual, legal name instead of just posting as Aye?

  30. 85

    retire05

    @Richard Wheeler:

    Do you consider yourself a lady?

    Do you consider yourself a gentleman as you support the disgusting actions of Aye?

    Let me ask you one more question (which I doubt you will answer): if you posted here using a moniker to protect your identity, how appreciative would you be if Aye outed your name and the town you live in?

  31. 87

    Richard Wheeler

    Reto5 I’ve never posted using a moniker so the question is moot—-assume people are watching and know all about you.
    Aye’s actions were in response to yours. I learned long ago, the hard way, AYE doesn’t bring a knife to a gunfight.

  32. 88

    retire05

    @Richard Wheeler:

    I’ve never posted using a moniker so the question is moot—-assume people are watching and know all about you.

    No, it is not moot. Do you agree that anyone, anyone posting here in FA using a moniker to conceal their real identity, should have the expectation that identity should be protected? Do you think that Aye, who has taken it upon himself to out my identity, should give us his? Otherwise, why does he post using a moniker and not his real name?

    I learned long ago, the hard way, AYE doesn’t bring a knife to a gunfight.

    No, he is more the kind that attacks you from behind so that he has all the leverage.

    Unless Aye posts his real identity, I am through with both of you.

  33. 89

    ilovebeeswarzone

    Richard Wheeler
    I don’t think you are well equipt to throw a stone,
    you gave some quite vicious comments to protect your side,
    in a subtle way , and mix in a noodle soup to go untouch,
    so don’t accuse of what you are guilty of yourself,

  34. 90

    MataHarley

    premium_subscriber

    Just a word to the wise about anyone concerned about privacy on the Internet. You don’t need real names, as your moniker can be just as real. Especially when there is ample info out there that ties your moniker to your real name. Ergo, if privacy is your goal, you may need to be creative or discerning about your moniker.

    i.e. if you use a regular moniker, and you have a “profile” somewhere attached to that moniker with extra private information – first or last names, city, town, likes, dislikes, etc – it’s just one more piece to a puzzle that can be solved with quick, easy Internet tools. You’d be surprised at how much people volunteer when they think they are anonymous. … which tends to be a problem because anonymity breeds a freedom to drop any social civility. A common problem with faceless names behind keyboards on both sides of the aisle.

    Google’s not my first choices of search engines, but for you Google faithful – and if you want to check up on how you may have left yourself open – all you have to do is search +yourmoniker +profile.

    If you’ve left a profile somewhere/anywhere, with some extra personal information, that identity can be easily tracked by adding more data made available from the profile you created. The Internet search tools are amazing. Each element of additional identity you add reveals more. And unfortunately, for the blissfully comfortable and unaware, this often includes organizational group mailings that end up being displayed on the Internet, complete with real names and email addresses. Often this is done because they are unaware that their organization’s communications, with their personal information, end up on the web.

    People would be surprised at how easily you can discover information in only a matter of minutes. It does not require abuse of some secret, privileged access. So it’s always wise that if you don’t want to be uncovered, then equally wise and limited use of personal information on the Internet is advised.

    I will also suggest that you occasionally search your own real name or moniker to see what might be going on as it relates to you. Rush has a regular search set up that anything that has his name in it, he knows about via an search alert. I know I’m always amazed at some of the things people say about me, of which I was unaware. And typical to Internet (lack of) manners, little of it is kind.

    The last piece of advice is if you’re not in everyone’s face all the time, accusing others of false deeds and maligning their character…. all the while expecting immunity for yourself… you are less likely to find yourself the target of a 5-10 minute search out of curiosity.

    The Internet is a wonderful thing. But if it’s anonymity you seek, the frugal use of private information that ties with your moniker/real name, including group mailing lists you may be on, is the ticket.

  35. 91

    Aye

    editor

    Again, you wish to cloud the issues we’re discussing with extraneous matters.

    None of that is relevant.

    The only that is germane to our discussion is the simple, irrefutable, undeniable fact that those grant dollars are derived from the taxpayer. You don’t want to address that because you have no counterargument.

    You, and the other authors here that are listed in the above link, are the only ones that would have access to my name via my email address. For you to try to pass off the lie that you knew my name from other means is pure bullshit, and you know it.

    Really? You’re blissfully unaware of the vast amounts of information that Google contains about you? Information that you posted. Information that YOU released into the wild. Information that doesn’t require an email address for discovery.

    Hopelessly clueless you are.

    Go ahead and wallow in your ignorance while you accuse me of whatever will make you feel better. Be my guest. As always, I can support my position with facts, something that you’re persistently unable to accomplish.

    I don’t give a furry rat’s ass about what your lying hypocritical bigoted self thinks to the contrary.

  36. 92

    ilovebeeswarzone

    MataHarley
    hi,
    thank you for the very important information,
    I did look once about two years ago, and I did not like to read out some of my words
    mix with an add for lippo-suction intervention so close it seem to blend in my words,
    I gave up and never tried again,
    there is nothing we can do to have it erase,
    bye

  37. 93

    retire05

    @MataHarley:

    The last piece of advice is if you’re not in everyone’s face all the time, accusing others of false deeds and maligning their character…. all the while expecting immunity for yourself… you are less likely to find yourself the target of a 5-10 minute search out of curiosity.

    Then why do you and Aye seek anonymity through the use of a moniker here at FA?

    But, thanks anyway for the advise. I don’t use Google because they turn information about you over to the White House. Just a quick perusal of Google showed me at least five others who use the same moniker I use here.

    I DO appreciate the information, Mata.

    But it still doesn’t make what Aye did right. No matter what, he had no right to out my identity.

  38. 94

    ilovebeeswarzone

    FEBRUARY’S GONE,
    WELCOME TO MARCH, MAY YOU BE GOOD, GENTIL AND KIND ON US HUMAN,
    GOOGLE DON’T FORGET THIS ONE,
    AND TRY TO DELETE THE OLD NOT THREATENING FELONIES,
    FOR THE SAKE OF THOSE AMERICAN WE HAVE ON OUR BLOG,
    SAYING THEIR DESPAIR OF FINDING A JOB BECAUSE GOOGLE HAS THEIR OLD LABEL EVEN THAT THE FELONY WAS PAID DEARLY PAINFULLY, AND THEY DESERVE THEIR LIFE AND PRIVACY BACK

  39. 95

    MataHarley

    premium_subscriber

    @retire05, I figured you might appreciate the information. It’s always a good idea to keep tabs on both your real name, plus your moniker. I always laugh because there’s a German stripper/porn star who also uses my moniker. Oh well… could be worse, right?

    As for the debate between you and Aye, he did not “out” your identity. He posted to an article with a list of 24 recipients of TX grant funds. He did not specify which, if any, were you. It was a matter of whether you wanted to verify that you accepted the matching funds.

    He did not need, or necessarily use, any author privileges to do so since, as he points out, any savvy Internet user can get to that information on their own. So my answer to you about being “outed” is that:

    1: You are not outed unless someone else wants to spend 5-10 minutes looking up your moniker, and

    2: You can’t blame the thief when he steals your treasure after you’ve given him the map.

    But I would suggest that perhaps paying attention to monikers, profiles, and chatting with any organizations you are a member of about privacy information on the Internet is in dire need of your attention. And I mean that sincerely.

    As for my personal choice of moniker/privacy? Well, I’ve been using and working exclusively on computers in my various careers since 1980… including beta testing in that time. So I’ve known about keeping profiles, monikers, vulnerabilities, and social media data with personal info linked to my name, to a dull roar for a long time. I like to keep my business and personal life separate. Primarily because clientele need not be making judgements about my service based on my politics. And also because when you lived in Oregon and California, you are a red speck in a sea of blue.

    However if someone needs to find out who I am, and succeeds, I deal with it. Because that’s the price of using the Internet… wisely or unwisely. However I also try not to cross the lines of personal accusations.

  40. 96

    retire05

    @MataHarley:

    I have tried to reply to you a couple of time, quoting you. But there seems to be a word in your last post that blocks me.

    You said:

    As for the debate between you and Aye, he did not “out” your identity. He posted to an article with a list of 24 recipients of TX grant funds. He did not specify which, if any, were you. It was a matter of whether you wanted to verify that you accepted the matching funds.

    Bull. Aye knew exactly what he was doing, and so does anyone else reading his post.

    You and I have gone our rounds before, tooth and toenail. But never once did I think you would go that far, and I am sure you knew I wouldn’t. My debate was with Richard, and Aye injected himself into the mix. Why? Does he feel that Richard is such a pathetic man that he can’t handle his own arguments? I doubt that would describe Richard.

    And how obsessed with someone do you have to be to search through pages and pages of Google results to find a 12 year old press release? And then think you have all the facts when, in actuality, you don’t. For what? To play big man on campus? To show what a bully he is? What is next? My address and phone number? My credit history? The names of my kids and where they live? Swatting like has been done to a number of conservative blogers?

    Aye is unhinged and frankly, he is dangerous. He is willing to spend time trying to dig up dirt on someone that wasn’t even arguing with him. How damn pathological is that?

    But everyone be warned. There are no rules here. If Aye decides you’re on his hit list, beware. He will have absolutely no problem revealing your identity, or anything else about you. That alone, makes him dangerous to anyone who decides to participate on this blog.

  41. 97

    MataHarley

    premium_subscriber

    retire: Bull. Aye knew exactly what he was doing, and so does anyone else reading his post.

    “Anyone else reading his post”??? Get serious. They had odds of 1 out of 24 of being right. Unless, of course, they possess the simple skills I pointed out above, and actually invested the time in bothering to find out who are you. Frankly, I think you overestimate the amount of people who would care myself. But hey… let’s ask. If “anyone else” knows who on that list is retire, and knows that all by Aye’s post alone, let ’em speak up now – but without revealing which on the list is you…. just as Aye did.

    But then that brings us back to the original question Aye was asking, doesn’t it? Did you, or did you not, take the matching grant funds? And if you did, is that not taxpayer largesse.. the very same “crime” that evokes your disdain, and what you are accusing rich of?

    My debate was with Richard, and Aye injected himself into the mix. Why? Does he feel that Richard is such a pathetic man that he can’t handle his own arguments? I doubt that would describe Richard.

    Actually, retire, I saw this personal assault on rich originally back in early December. You’ve come in repeating that same accusation at various times since then… usually when you just want to add an extra insult to your comments to him. I hesitate to call the way you speak to either rich or Greg “debate”. Requires the willing suspension of disbelief, so they say. LOL

    Since you first made that remark, I’ve half wanted to respond to set the record straight because I know your “guilt complex” may deter some who don’t want to suck on the taxpayers teat, and prevent them from considering this alternative. Yet with this program, they aren’t a taxpayer drag and it helps out all involved… both borrower and banker. But ya know, I already knew what would happen if I did set the record straight. And sho’nuff… it has. You still won’t accept your error in facts.

    So what you were having with rich wasn’t a “debate” that Aye came in on… it was the next in a long line of personal jabs and accusations over a period of two months – and all based on erroneous information. It’s just after all this time, no one has bothered to correct you, and I guess some are afraid to challenge you because of the predictable reaction.

    Frankly, I wouldn’t be here at all except I got sick of reading it. It’s a pretty ugly thing you’ve been doing.

    And how obsessed with someone do you have to be to search through pages and pages of Google results to find a 12 year old press release?

    Perhaps it takes you “pages and pages” and time to find such things. Not so much for others. As I said, after three or four searches, if provided personal information that links to their moniker profile, you can often get to someone’s name, address, phone number or emails. I’ll repeat, you cannot blame the thief who stole your treasure chest when you handed him the map to it’s location.

    Aye is unhinged and frankly, he is dangerous. He is willing to spend time trying to dig up dirt on someone that wasn’t even arguing with him. How damn pathological is that?

    Interesting choice of adjective there. “Unhinged” is the same description that one of The Corner’s commenters used for you during the al Awlaki/assassination discussions. Shall we assume you two have more in common than not? :0) I’d say “unhinged” is a relative perspective based on a moment in time.

    That aside, there’s been a running argument that you like to toss out accusations without proof, as you’ve done since early December with rich on his personal refinance. You cannot deny, with any credibility, that you have accused him of being a sponge on the taxpayers money. You were, and still are, wrong. However, when pushed back, you took a moral high road, and claimed you never took “taxpayer” funds.

    Well… it seems that Aye fact checked you. And your ensuing comments seem to indicate, tacitly and coyly, that you are, indeed, one of those 24 people who received TX grant funds. But now you’re more upset that he’s found that out… so you’re changing the discussion to one of being a victim of privacy invasion.

    Well, we’ve already pointed out that the privacy you think you have isn’t all that. And I suspect you’ve done a bit of self checking and figured that out yourself. So that just leads us back to the original discussion. Are you, in fact, just as “guilty” as the same “crime” you accuse rich of?

    So here’s the bottom line, retire. Why don’t you just admit you were in error on his financial program and apologize, and also admit that sometimes having a business grant (for legit and money making propositions) can actually be a good thing for you, and for the State’s economy at large? No harm… no foul. Actually, I doubt that many on this forum consider business grants a bad thing.

    Most also wouldn’t criticize two private parties – a bank and a borrower – mutually agreeing to renegotiate their terms and contract outside of taxpayer bailouts. It’s very anti-conservative to meddle with private contracts between two mutually agreeing private parties. And if those “small c Constitutionalists”, as you say you are, find meddling in these private contracts acceptable, then I guess I’m not one.

    And while I’m clearing the air, you have also resented being “ganged” up on by multiple people when your information is factually wrong. You seem to think this is all about running you off, and you keep insisting we should tell Curt you should leave… ???? That’s not only on this thread, but as I pointed out, you also did that before in Aug 2011 when you you left in a huff.

    Yet you don’t give it a second thought, joining in and ganging up on “Greggie” or rich, do you?

    Most of us don’t believe in censorship or banning. Nor would we even suggest such a thing to Curt. Well, one author liked to but he left. The rest of us like diverse voices, and generally hope for more civility than is demonstrated around here of late.

    All I can say is that you have received only a small amount of what you have doled out to others on a regular diet. There’s a way to alter that. Research before you speak. Admit when you are wrong. And apologize for the false accusations. Then it will not escalate into the simple few minutes of fact checking.

  42. 98

    retire05

    @MataHarley:

    Did you, or did you not, take the matching grant funds?

    NO.

    The grant was awarded, but those grants are awarded for expenses that are almost a year in advance. Out of state opportunities were presented to me after that, and so the grant of matching funds did not apply. Was I a member of the Go Texan program? You betcha. It allows you to use the Go Texan logo on your products which is valuable in this state. But being a member, and being allowed the use of the Go Texan logo, doesn’t mean that the TxDoA will pay for those labels a company uses where the logo is placed. Also, the paper work connected to the grant was overbearing. Since I did not have a bookkeeper employed, and whould have had to hire a CPA, the cost to me would have wound up being greater than the benefits. I was recruited by TxDoA, and a friend had been a recipient of the Go Texas grants before and sang its praises BUT he had a larger operation and had a full time office staff that could handle the paperwork required. I did not have that luxury. So for those reasons, along with others, I did not access the program. Have you ever applied for a credit card that when you got it, and read the fine print, you decided to not use it? If you say you never have, that would require the willing suspension of disbelief, as well.

    Now, the question is; how long before Aye hacks into my bank account to see if I’m being truthful? Think he is above doing that? I don’t.

    Interesting choice of adjective there. “Unhinged” is the same description that one of The Corner’s commenters used for you during the al Awlaki/assassination discussions.

    So I see you and Aye are partners in research. Que surprise.

    Most also wouldn’t criticize two private parties – a bank and a borrower – mutually agreeing to renegotiate their terms and contract outside of taxpayer bailouts. It’s very anti-conservative to meddle with private contracts between two mutually agreeing private parties. And if those “small c Constitutionalists”, as you say you are, find meddling in these private contracts acceptable, then I guess I’m not one.Most also wouldn’t criticize two private parties – a bank and a borrower – mutually agreeing to renegotiate their terms and contract outside of taxpayer bailouts. It’s very anti-conservative to meddle with private contracts between two mutually agreeing private parties. And if those “small c Constitutionalists”, as you say you are, find meddling in these private contracts acceptable, then I guess I’m not one.

    Are you saying, point blank, that there were no government incentives to the lenders for reducing the amount of the principals for those FHA loans? None? No monetary incentives paid to the lender for the reduction of the amount of principal owed on those loans when they were marked down? Is that your claim?

    and generally hope for more civility than is demonstrated around here of late.

    Well, if you consider Aye to be civil, then we have different concepts of civil. You obviously didn’t have a problem when Richard called me a “bitch”, but golly gee, if I call him a “leech” that is just way out of bounds for you and Aye.

  43. 99

    Curt

    administrator

    This thread has gone way out of control and is now closed. I do not condone any release of private information and any release of that information is removed .