On Thu, 4 Oct 2018 12:48:40 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:

On 10/4/18 12:43 PM, justan wrote:
Keyser Soze Wrote in message:
On 10/4/18 12:16 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 4 Oct 2018 11:52:23 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:

On 10/4/18 11:03 AM, wrote:

* I don't have any problems with atheism. It certainly is more logical
than religious beliefs.

Your atheism is as offensive to most people as religion is to you and
your cohorts certainly make plenty of public displays on public
property about it during your protests.
It has become a religion as much as any other.

I also reject the idea that you attending some tertiary institution
for a few years five decades ago makes you any smarter than me., You
have not seemed to learn much since.


I've never said I was smarter than you. You're regressing into your
projections *again*.

You go out of your way to try to insult me just about every day.

To what protests of mine are you referring?

The people with signs and other props on public property protesting
just about anything remotely considered religious.



1. Likewise, but I've never claimed to be "smarter" than you. Stop
projecting.

2. Those aren't protests of mine. The last "protest" I attended was one
"favoring" the candidacy of Sarah Palin, and that was only to look at
the misspelled signs.




Not so. Remember the pink hat you wore and probably still wear.
What was that occasion?


I wasn't protesting. I was supporting women.

Uh Huh. Nice diversion. It was an anti Trump protest, no matter what
you rationalize away.
The only woman you were really supporting was Hillary and the fact
that you never accepted her loss.
Look at the bright side. In 25 months you can do it all again.

On Thu, 4 Oct 2018 09:50:07 -0700 (PDT), Its Me
wrote:

On Thursday, October 4, 2018 at 12:48:43 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote:

I wasn't protesting. I was supporting women.

That's a change. You usually expect women to support you.

That's funny no matter who you are. ;-)

On 10/4/18 1:13 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 4 Oct 2018 12:48:40 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:

On 10/4/18 12:43 PM, justan wrote:
Keyser Soze Wrote in message:
On 10/4/18 12:16 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 4 Oct 2018 11:52:23 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:

On 10/4/18 11:03 AM, wrote:

* I don't have any problems with atheism. It certainly is more logical
than religious beliefs.

Your atheism is as offensive to most people as religion is to you and
your cohorts certainly make plenty of public displays on public
property about it during your protests.
It has become a religion as much as any other.

I also reject the idea that you attending some tertiary institution
for a few years five decades ago makes you any smarter than me., You
have not seemed to learn much since.


I've never said I was smarter than you. You're regressing into your
projections *again*.

You go out of your way to try to insult me just about every day.

To what protests of mine are you referring?

The people with signs and other props on public property protesting
just about anything remotely considered religious.



1. Likewise, but I've never claimed to be "smarter" than you. Stop
projecting.

2. Those aren't protests of mine. The last "protest" I attended was one
"favoring" the candidacy of Sarah Palin, and that was only to look at
the misspelled signs.




Not so. Remember the pink hat you wore and probably still wear.
What was that occasion?


I wasn't protesting. I was supporting women.

Uh Huh. Nice diversion. It was an anti Trump protest, no matter what
you rationalize away.
The only woman you were really supporting was Hillary and the fact
that you never accepted her loss.
Look at the bright side. In 25 months you can do it all again.


Your imagining what others are thinking just never ends. It's absurd.

On 10/4/2018 12:32 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 10/4/18 12:16 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 4 Oct 2018 11:52:23 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:

On 10/4/18 11:03 AM, wrote:

* I don't have any problems with atheism. It certainly is more logical
than religious beliefs.

Your atheism is as offensive to most people as religion is to you and
your cohorts certainly make plenty of public displays on public
property about it during your protests.
It has become a religion as much as any other.

I also reject the idea that you attending some tertiary institution
for a few years five decades ago makes you any smarter than me., You
have not seemed to learn much since.


I've never said I was smarter than you. You're regressing into your
projections *again*.

You go out of your way to try to insult me just about every day.

To what protests of mine are you referring?

The people with signs and other props on public property protesting
just about anything remotely considered religious.



1. Likewise, but I've never claimed to be "smarter" than you. Stop
projecting.

2. Those aren't protests of mine. The last "protest" I attended was one
"favoring" the candidacy of Sarah Palin, and that was only to look at
the misspelled signs.



and her legs.

On Thu, 4 Oct 2018 09:50:07 -0700 (PDT), Its Me
wrote:

On Thursday, October 4, 2018 at 12:48:43 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote:

I wasn't protesting. I was supporting women.


That's a change. You usually expect women to support you.



LOL!

On 10/4/18 1:43 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/4/2018 12:32 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 10/4/18 12:16 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 4 Oct 2018 11:52:23 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:

On 10/4/18 11:03 AM, wrote:

* I don't have any problems with atheism. It certainly is more
logical
than religious beliefs.

Your atheism is as offensive to most people as religion is to you and
your cohorts certainly make plenty of public displays on public
property about it during your protests.
It has become a religion as much as any other.

I also reject the idea that you attending some tertiary institution
for a few years five decades ago makes you any smarter than me., You
have not seemed to learn much since.


I've never said I was smarter than you. You're regressing into your
projections *again*.

You go out of your way to try to insult me just about every day.

To what protests of mine are you referring?

The people with signs and other props on public property protesting
just about anything remotely considered religious.



1. Likewise, but I've never claimed to be "smarter" than you. Stop
projecting.

2. Those aren't protests of mine. The last "protest" I attended was
one "favoring" the candidacy of Sarah Palin, and that was only to look
at the misspelled signs.



and her legs.



I never for a New York minute thought Palin was physically attractive.

Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/4/2018 11:03 AM, wrote:
On Thu, 4 Oct 2018 08:18:25 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:

On 10/3/18 9:24 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 3 Oct 2018 20:37:15 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:

On 10/3/18 7:59 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 03 Oct 2018 16:40:51 -0400, John H.
wrote:

On Wed, 03 Oct 2018 11:08:55 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 03 Oct 2018 07:12:21 -0400, John H.
wrote:

On Tue, 2 Oct 2018 20:11:38 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:

On 10/2/18 6:34 PM, justan wrote:
To determine what happens or doesn't happen on public property.



President Trump participated in dubious tax schemes during the 1990s,
including instances of outright fraud, that greatly increased the
fortune he received from his parents, an investigation by The New York
Times has found.

Mr. Trump won the presidency proclaiming himself a self-made
billionaire, and he has long insisted that his father, the legendary New
York City builder Fred C. Trump, provided almost no financial help.

But The Times’s investigation, based on a vast trove of confidential tax
returns and financial records, reveals that Mr. Trump received the
equivalent today of at least $413 million from his father’s real estate
empire, starting when he was a toddler and continuing to this day.

Much of this money came to Mr. Trump because he helped his parents dodge
taxes. He and his siblings set up a sham corporation to disguise
millions of dollars in gifts from their parents, records and interviews
show. Records indicate that Mr. Trump helped his father take improper
tax deductions worth millions more. He also helped formulate a strategy
to undervalue his parents’ real estate holdings by hundreds of millions
of dollars on tax returns, sharply reducing the tax bill when those
properties were transferred to him and his siblings.

These maneuvers met with little resistance from the Internal Revenue
Service, The Times found. The president’s parents, Fred and Mary Trump,
transferred well over $1 billion in wealth to their children, which
could have produced a tax bill of at least $550 million under the 55
percent tax rate then imposed on gifts and inheritances.

The Trumps paid a total of $52.2 million, or about 5 percent, tax
records show.

Shame on them for following the law. Gosh, I circumvent paying taxes by
contributing to charity.
Shame on me for taking the deduction!

Harry would say you are establishing religion.

I'll admit some goes to religion, but most goes elsewhere.

The reality is religious organizations as a rule return more of their
contributions to the charity they support than the normal 501(C)(3)
that we hear about (Red Cross, United Way etc)
Their "directors" are not making 6 figure salaries.
Folks like Harry would rather promote egregious greed than admit
someone was promoting God


And there you go, offering up another example of one the reasons why I
don't think it worthwhile to engage in "debate" with you. You have no
idea what I would "rather promote."

I suspect churches spend more on promoting and paying themselves, their
superstitions, their staffs, and their building funds than they do on
pure charitable donations. Realistically, they consider themselves their
own best charitable donation. We have a surprisingly large number of
what might be called "mega-churches" around here, churches with fairly
new or brand new huge fortresses of buildings, with large staffs, highly
paid ministers, assistants, cars, even airplanes for the ministers. It
takes a lot of money to support that sort of largess. It is unclear what
real charities...helping the poor, those in need of shelter, medical
care, the necessities of life, as it were...these organizations support.
One thing most of them do, though, is pay for "missions" to search and
bring in converts. Just the other day, I drove past a fundie church
whose minister and some of its acolytes who were busy setting up their
anti-abortion display to attract attention during the upcoming
elections. I'm not aware of what that church does to support the
unwanted children who result from their efforts.

And, once again, though you never seem to "get it," I don't care what
churches do, so long as they keep their superstitions to themselves and
don't try to force in any way their beliefs on others who believe
differently or not at all.

Nice diversion into your atheism

And once again, you are confused by your lack of serious, formal
education. I am highly skeptical about the existence of a superior being
that goes beyond the imagination and superstition of humans. That makes
me agnostic, not an atheist.* I am, however, anti-religious. Religion is
based entirely upon superstition and passed-along folk tales. And, once
again, though you refuse to believe it...I don't care what religions do
in their churches with their crop of believers. I only care when they
attempt to push those beliefs onto society, onto those who believe
differently, and on those who don't believe at all.



* I don't have any problems with atheism. It certainly is more logical
than religious beliefs.

Your atheism is as offensive to most people as religion is to you and
your cohorts certainly make plenty of public displays on public
property about it during your protests.
It has become a religion as much as any other.

I also reject the idea that you attending some tertiary institution
for a few years five decades ago makes you any smarter than me., You
have not seemed to learn much since.



The world is full of stupid people who paid their tuition for a college
degree.




Go talk to the college graduate barista at Starbucks.

John H. wrote:
On Wed, 03 Oct 2018 20:34:56 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 3 Oct 2018 19:51:18 -0400, Alex wrote:

John H. wrote:
On Tue, 2 Oct 2018 20:11:38 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:

On 10/2/18 6:34 PM, justan wrote:
To determine what happens or doesn't happen on public property.


President Trump participated in dubious tax schemes during the 1990s,
including instances of outright fraud, that greatly increased the
fortune he received from his parents, an investigation by The New York
Times has found.

Mr. Trump won the presidency proclaiming himself a self-made
billionaire, and he has long insisted that his father, the legendary New
York City builder Fred C. Trump, provided almost no financial help.

But The TimesÂ’s investigation, based on a vast trove of confidential tax
returns and financial records, reveals that Mr. Trump received the
equivalent today of at least $413 million from his fatherÂ’s real estate
empire, starting when he was a toddler and continuing to this day.

Much of this money came to Mr. Trump because he helped his parents dodge
taxes. He and his siblings set up a sham corporation to disguise
millions of dollars in gifts from their parents, records and interviews
show. Records indicate that Mr. Trump helped his father take improper
tax deductions worth millions more. He also helped formulate a strategy
to undervalue his parentsÂ’ real estate holdings by hundreds of millions
of dollars on tax returns, sharply reducing the tax bill when those
properties were transferred to him and his siblings.

These maneuvers met with little resistance from the Internal Revenue
Service, The Times found. The presidentÂ’s parents, Fred and Mary Trump,
transferred well over $1 billion in wealth to their children, which
could have produced a tax bill of at least $550 million under the 55
percent tax rate then imposed on gifts and inheritances.

The Trumps paid a total of $52.2 million, or about 5 percent, tax
records show.
Shame on them for following the law. Gosh, I circumvent paying taxes
by contributing to charity.
Shame on me for taking the deduction!

Ditto. $7K last year.
I have taken the standard deduction for at least 20 years, probably
more like 24 when I paid off the mortgage on the condo. Every time the
IRS has had a problem with my return, they ended up giving me money. I
didn't claim enough.

I haven't taken the standard deduction in about 30 years. This year may
be the first. We'll see.


Since I own my house, and my income is pretty decent, I take the standard
deduction, as the medical costs do not reach the threshold.

On Thu, 4 Oct 2018 13:24:29 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:

On 10/4/18 1:13 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 4 Oct 2018 12:48:40 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:

On 10/4/18 12:43 PM, justan wrote:
Keyser Soze Wrote in message:
On 10/4/18 12:16 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 4 Oct 2018 11:52:23 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:

On 10/4/18 11:03 AM, wrote:

* I don't have any problems with atheism. It certainly is more logical
than religious beliefs.

Your atheism is as offensive to most people as religion is to you and
your cohorts certainly make plenty of public displays on public
property about it during your protests.
It has become a religion as much as any other.

I also reject the idea that you attending some tertiary institution
for a few years five decades ago makes you any smarter than me., You
have not seemed to learn much since.


I've never said I was smarter than you. You're regressing into your
projections *again*.

You go out of your way to try to insult me just about every day.

To what protests of mine are you referring?

The people with signs and other props on public property protesting
just about anything remotely considered religious.



1. Likewise, but I've never claimed to be "smarter" than you. Stop
projecting.

2. Those aren't protests of mine. The last "protest" I attended was one
"favoring" the candidacy of Sarah Palin, and that was only to look at
the misspelled signs.




Not so. Remember the pink hat you wore and probably still wear.
What was that occasion?


I wasn't protesting. I was supporting women.

Uh Huh. Nice diversion. It was an anti Trump protest, no matter what
you rationalize away.
The only woman you were really supporting was Hillary and the fact
that you never accepted her loss.
Look at the bright side. In 25 months you can do it all again.


Your imagining what others are thinking just never ends. It's absurd.

This only had to do with what you just said and what you did. You said
you were not protesting yet you showed up at an anti trump protest and
even put on the pussy hat. (assuming that wasn't a lie)

If you watched a minute or two of the protest on TV it was certainly
clear what the protesters were thinking. Perhaps you went there by
mistake but your reporting of it wasn't confusing at all. It was
simply an anti trump tirade, like most of what you write here if you
can twist the conversation that way, even in the most convoluted
manner.

On 10/4/18 4:25 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 4 Oct 2018 13:24:29 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:

On 10/4/18 1:13 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 4 Oct 2018 12:48:40 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:

On 10/4/18 12:43 PM, justan wrote:
Keyser Soze Wrote in message:
On 10/4/18 12:16 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 4 Oct 2018 11:52:23 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:

On 10/4/18 11:03 AM, wrote:

* I don't have any problems with atheism. It certainly is more logical
than religious beliefs.

Your atheism is as offensive to most people as religion is to you and
your cohorts certainly make plenty of public displays on public
property about it during your protests.
It has become a religion as much as any other.

I also reject the idea that you attending some tertiary institution
for a few years five decades ago makes you any smarter than me., You
have not seemed to learn much since.


I've never said I was smarter than you. You're regressing into your
projections *again*.

You go out of your way to try to insult me just about every day.

To what protests of mine are you referring?

The people with signs and other props on public property protesting
just about anything remotely considered religious.



1. Likewise, but I've never claimed to be "smarter" than you. Stop
projecting.

2. Those aren't protests of mine. The last "protest" I attended was one
"favoring" the candidacy of Sarah Palin, and that was only to look at
the misspelled signs.




Not so. Remember the pink hat you wore and probably still wear.
What was that occasion?


I wasn't protesting. I was supporting women.

Uh Huh. Nice diversion. It was an anti Trump protest, no matter what
you rationalize away.
The only woman you were really supporting was Hillary and the fact
that you never accepted her loss.
Look at the bright side. In 25 months you can do it all again.


Your imagining what others are thinking just never ends. It's absurd.

This only had to do with what you just said and what you did. You said
you were not protesting yet you showed up at an anti trump protest and
even put on the pussy hat. (assuming that wasn't a lie)

I showed up to support my female friends and women in general.