That's fine that they are; we just don't want a president who will outsource government overseas as well, since that's all he knows how to do.

Comments from shooter on a troll website:

shooter242
June 11, 2012 at 6:54 am

I’d like to encourage more trollery on left wing sites. Specifically pushback on common memes such as identified by Jonah Goldberg as unchallenged cliches. It can actually work, and it can actually change the course of debate.

For instance, I always challenge “the rich take too much of the pie” meme. There is no pie, no one decides who gets what, and the “pie” is a measure of contributions to a total. Ergo the rich don’t take they contribute. It’s been gratifyingly effective.

Try it you’ll like it. Don’t curse and keep the personal insults to a bare minimum, don’t allow moving goal posts or distractions. Ignore trollish responders, and be four times more civil. They hate that.

Need I say more?

http://moelane.com/2012/06/09/troll-hunting-101/

Shooter, I didn't know that you considered that socialist hellhole (the Netherlands) to be "business friendly with cheap labor." Because that's where my prior job went, along with the jobs of a bunch of my co-workers.

What we saw was that every business cycle, the layoffs were in the USA because it's much harder and more expensive to lay off people in Europe. US labor was somewhat more expensive (less expensive in direct labor, but more expensive once you add in the cost of health insurance), but more productive. However, after each layoff the US teams were too small to be effective so the new hires were in the Netherlands.

Bottom line (and this was the official Company analysis): the famous flexibility of US labor primarily works to make US staff the easiest to get rid of when business is bad, and the high cost of US health care makes it cheaper to hire people in countries with a working healthcare system.

For this, the Republican response is ... to keep the healthcare train wreck we have and make it easier to fire US workers.

Thank you, oncearepublican

Shooter is clearly not clever or imaginative enough to create another username.

Terrible trolling.

We're dealing with an intellectual giant here.

Excellent job, oncearepublican. Hahahahahaha...

I noticed our confused basketball fan didn't make it back to the thread he was outed on yesterday. I thought our village idiot would lay low for at least a few more days.

This boy's been beaten more than a rented mule.

Everybody might be interested in looking how that "efficient foreign" argument went for our confused basketball fan the other day.

Start here:

http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/06/25/12398066-corporate-profits-soaring-under-oppressive-socialism?threadId=3450330&commentId=67378628#c67376784

It's a bit of a long read, but get to at least here:

http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/06/25/12398066-corporate-profits-soaring-under-oppressive-socialism?threadId=3450330&commentId=67378628#c67392019

DC, can I assume your company wasn't US based?

Why? He's running for President to maximize the profits of his shareholders -- his donors. They want to know he'll stomp on the little guy to cut taxes for the billionaires.

This is the winning issue for Obama, if he can ignore the **#^%(@)#s like Corey Booker who would rather whore themselves to the rich than tell the truth.

So you'd rather vote for someone that hasn't moved the needle on unemployment? Killing jobs like the ones to build the Keystone pipeline (jobs that can't be outsourced) tell you all you need to know about your employment prospects, if you vote for Obama.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/wonkbook-the-real-unemployment-rate-is-11-percent/2011/12/12/gIQAuctPpO_blog.html

Careful shooter your right wing troll slip is really showing...oh, nevermind. You are just a troll....

@Shooter, I'd rather vote for someone who has regained the millions of jobs lost during the Bush Recession, than for the guy from the party (GOP) that obstructed and voted against almost every single piece of job creation legislation, and which still refuses to pass the President's jobs plan which would put millions of Americans back to work right now - and why is the GOP holding it up? - because the President would rather not destroy the environment in the name of creating 6,000 temporary jobs. However, the same 6,000 folks who would have those temporary jobs could still have a chance at a job IF the GOP stopped holding up infrastructure funding - which they won't do, because a recovering economy - in the GOP's strange world - is bad for their political chances.

So true Mike. And Dems need to stay on message.

With this outsourcing revelation, it will be hard for the corporate Dems to make a stink about the Bain attacks now.

Mike, you didn't notice that the auto companies actually did go bankrupt? Declaring bankruptcy doesn't always mean going out of business. Romney was correct.

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2010/04/21/automakers-show-progress-after-losses-in-bankruptcy/

@Shooter, how many times does the same correction have to be issued to your statement on this topic?

Romney's version of a bankruptcy plan for the auto industry involved the only thing he knows how to do - an infusion of private capital. There was no private capital available to the auto industry - Bain Capital itself declined to participate in any deals that involved rescuing the auto industry.

We are also now well aware that Bain Capital structured its deals in such a way that the auto industry going bankrupt and thousands losing their jobs could still have resulted in Bain Capital walking away with millions in profit - so, even if Romney was "right" about private capital being the only way to rescue the industry, his way could have still resulted in no one benefiting besides him and his investors.

Lastly, if Romney's advice was actually followed - why did he call it "tragic" when Pres. Obama moved forward to rescue the auto industry if indeed Romney was so certain his own idea had been taken and followed?

I'm sorry, how does all that change the fact of a bankruptcy? It doesn't. You're quibbling about the terms, not the action.

Romney's plan was dead in the water from the word "go." His plan was private capital infusion + bankruptcy. Without the private capital, his plan equalled thousands of jobs sunk and no life raft. In other words, the death of the American auto industry.

So the DIP money came from the public, it's still a bankruptcy.

Romney's plan did not include "public" money + bankruptcy; Obama's did. Obama was right; Romney was dead wrong.

Sorry June, that isn't going to fly. Obama put the automakers into bankruptcy. Just as Romney suggested.

Romney said bankruptcy which means out of business. He could have advocated a reorganization which is exactly what Obama did with the companies. There is a difference between bankruptcy and reorganization.

Again, Shooter, if that's the case, why then would Romney call it "tragic" when the President went forward to rescue the auto industry if Pres. Obama's plan were the same as Romney's idea?

From one of the players who was there through it all, here's how it went down - and Romney was dead wrong through it all:

I Was There -- Why Romney Is Still Wrong on Michigan's Auto Industry
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gary-peters/romney-wrong-auto-industry-bailout_b_1276664.html

Gad. There are lots of different versions of bankruptcy, doing a reorg is just one of them. In GM's case it was a chapter 11. Maybe you'll believe MSNBC.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31030038/ns/business-autos/t/humbled-gm-files-bankruptcy-protection/#.T-uOOfWwX-s

That's an excellent point, Shooter - and Romney's version of bankruptcy was completely wrong-headed.

June, GM filed for bankruptcy, shed it's debt, wiped out the shareholders and reorganized. If you don't want to call that a bankruptcy, what are you left with... "nationalization"? If you'd rather go that route I can offer up all sorts of Hugo Chavez associations. Govt motors, etc.

Our primary village idiot Shooter and an assistant village idiot RobDob have already had their asses handed to them on this topic. You can review them having their butt surgeries here:

http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/06/05/12069437-romney-still-stumbling-on-auto-rescue

Shooter, when Part B (bankruptcy) of your plan is dependent on Part A (private capital), and there is no Part A forthcoming, that's what's known as a FAIL.

Did Romney's plan include government intervention and an expedited bankruptcy - no. That is why he cannot take any credit for Pres. Obama's success.

June,

I noticed years ago that trolls typically repeat the same false assertions over and over and over again no matter how many times they are disproven/debunked. Not only will they tell any self-serving lie they think they can get away with, they obviously love to lie. They are aggressively malicious.

I glad to see you finally admit that what Obama did was a bankruptcy. Thank you.

For nostalgic purposes, review yours and assistant village idiot RobDob's butt surgeries:

http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/06/05/12069437-romney-still-stumbling-on-auto-rescue

Shooter - you obviously missed a couple of my posts if you're just now saying "finally." The point remains that Romney's bankruptcy plan was dead from the get-go because it lacked the buttress of private capital.

Yes, indeed, @EntropyRules, but I sometimes feel we let too much of this stuff go uncorrected and unchallenged in the name of "it's just a troll."

But every one of those points have already been made here:

http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/06/05/12069437-romney-still-stumbling-on-auto-rescue

And he knows it.

Yes, DWIA - indeed. That's why my first post asked how many times we need to cover this same ground.

Ah, myfault. I was tired and guess I got a little lazy and didn't read everything closely enough.

I think this particular troll needs to go. He's been outed enough and his objective is for everybody to see with oncearepublcan's find he showed us above. Here's the link again if somebody missed it:

http://moelane.com/2012/06/09/troll-hunting-101/comment-page-1/#comment-191137

Understood! :)

Oh yes, and you are absolutely correct. Let them get away with nothing. Absolutely nothing. Beat them and beat them badly. And DO NOT be nice about it.

This may have appeared on another thread, but here is shooter indulging in his usual onanistic trollery on another site:

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/08/grassroots-protester-actually-gop-official.php

Anyone who wants to copy my post above when shooter tries to take over another blog, please do so!!

Yeah, I've got that one, too. I've collected quite a bit of information on him. I understand him pretty well. There's plenty about him that's easy to find. Don't use it all at once, though. Let it drip out. Your find was absolutely terrific, oncearepublican!

Amazing what you find when you go searching for ways to get rid of trolls! I did find out that it's not just blogs that have the problem with these trolls, it is online gamers too - hence IrishPat. Want to bet shooter is a "gamer" troll too?

He is. I already know that.

Now that I wasn't sure of, but good work finding that!!! Whole new world I'm finding out there!!

One thing that's really funny is how he gets absolutely PUMMELED after his posts. And yet from that find of yours he makes it out to his fellow wingnuts that he enjoys great success. Hahahahahahahahaha...

That's our Shooter: changing hearts and minds with penetrating insight and eloquence!

What a waste.

Disgusted,

Getting pummeled is exactly what he thinks of as "success"! From what I've read about trolls, it is attention they crave and they don't really care what kind of attention. Do you think shooter really believes what he posts? From what I've found, most trolls really don't have any beliefs - they just say whatever it is that people will respond to.

On this set of blogs, people believe in reason and there is always SOMEONE who thinks they can reason with him - which is what he loves because then they will spend inordinate amount of time trying to "convince" him (i.e., give him attention) when he really doesn't even care about what he posts! If this were a right wing blog, he'd be a liberal!

It is a shame!!!

I was with ya till the "If this were a right wing blog, he'd be a liberal!" I actually think his worldview IS the failed wingnut worldview. Now, given that, he/they have a problem: reality isn't kind to it. They can NOT accept that. That's what faith-based people do.

So they rationalize any damned way they can and that's why you see the Party of Stupid denying climate change with the flimiest of excuses, it's why you see Limbaugh deny that health care takes up 17% of the U.S. economy and has worse outcomes than other advanced countries, it why you see them deny CBO, BLS, OMB, Fed, etc data, it's why they don't even believe supply-side economists telling them it's a demand problem, not a supply problem, it's why they won't acknowledge austerity is making things worse, and on and on and on.

This is simply their inability to accept the world does not work the way they've been told it works. What stooges like Shooter hopes to accomplish on forums like this is to dream up irrelevant points and questions to make everybody work so that if they don't satisfy him he can conclude a victory and rationalize his wrong-headed, failed worldview. And when he doesn't win, he just, like I said elsewhere, reaches down between his legs, grabs a fresh gob, and flings yet more of it against the wall for someone to clean up. It's never ending for him because he NEVER wins unless people just lose patience or run out of energy with his bullshhit. But there's always more where that came from and if he runs dry, he just goes with reruns (which we've seen with the auto bailout nonsense).

And one more thing: it's about victory much more so than about being right. They are tribal, they are fanatics, true believers without reflection, loyalists, team players. They are on Team Republican. There is no Team America. They couldn't give a damn if they were wrong about everything objective point as long as they fooled people into giving them political victories.

And that is the problem America and the world faces. It actually very, very dangerous, and we're staring down the barrel with these fools.

And when I said PUMMELED I didn't mean just people disagreeing with him; I meant they beat the stuffing out of him logically.

Well, you notice that he really can't do a good job of "defending" his "position" (he is always repeating himself) so either he is really stupid or he really doesn't have any great belief in it. But then I've seen that in a lot of Tea Party and extreme right wingnuts, so maybe you are right!!

Right now most these wingnuts have such a hatred of Obama, not because of what he's done, but because of his color, that they are intent on selling their souls to the devil and destroying their way of life simply because they can't imagine a world where ALL people have something to offer! And don't you think that the Koch brothers and others intent on fleecing this country haven't noticed!! Now that is the TRUE shame!!

I didn't realize my posts could generate so many others. My final observation for shooter is that Romney is a businessman and he knows the difference between a bankruptcy and a reorganization. Romney said let them go bankrupt because he knew there was no private money to bail them out and the sale of the assets of the companies would return some monies to investors which is his primary concern and not the employees. As much as shooter would like to split hairs on bankruptcy and reorganization, it doesn't fly because Romney is a sophisticated and well educated business man. He knows exactly what he intended when he used the word bankruptcy. There is nothing in the editorial to suggest he intended or was thinking about a reorganization.

As others like to say, you're entitled to your opinions, not your own facts. So Mike, I presume you saw my cite that GM went into Chap 11 bankruptcy, also known as a reorg. This is how it works in the real world, as Romney suggested.

In a managed bankruptcy, the federal government would propel newly competitive and viable automakers - Romney in NYT

Romney gets what he prescribes (no auto bailout) in NYT editorial

=> liquidation of American auto industry,

=> no American auto industry.

End of discussion.

I don't think there can be any doubt that Shooter is a hardcore devotee of the execrable Ayn Rand. There is a certain mentality that is inexorably attracted to her egocentric greed, callousness, and cruelty. All of the trolls on this site demonstrate that the political struggle in the US is, absolutely, categorically, and unequivocally an us or them situation, and it is those on the right that have made it so.

He is.

Shooter's own post proves my point. Romney said a "new and viable" which means a sale of the assets to a new automaker, not a reorganization. I assume Shooter knows what the word "new" means. A reorganization is not a new company. A managed bankruptcy means sale of the assets and distribution of the money in accordance with bankruptcy law. As I previously stated, he is splitting hairs because technically a reorganization is under the bankruptcy code, but is not referred to by lawyers or business people as a "bankruptcy."

He's desperately trying for a "win," no matter how superficial. I actually hope the Romney campaign is as stupid as our village idiot and takes that dumba$$ literal "he said there needed to be a bankruptcy" argument to the country to minimize the damage of his failed Nov. 2008 prescription. I don't believe the American public's stupidity can be overestimated, but I don't think they're THAT dumb.

Think how desperate this assnapkin is to try to fool people with that crap and get himself a "win." It's simultaneously hilarious and pathetic.

Romney is trying to make the same argument Shooter is using, but the average person is not going to care about the nuance. When people hear the word "bankruptcy" they understand what it means, not some technical legal definition nor will they care about this technicality. The average person also understands the word "reorganization" and that is not what Romney said or the term he used.

Yeah, I know he is, and that's where the village idiot is getting his trolling "plan" but I actually hope the Lyin' Sack of Mitt really believes he can fool people with it. I just can't imagine too many people stupid enough to buy it. Then again, this rise of wingnut absolute disregard for accepted science, empirical evidence, and reasoning surprised even myself. I thought I'd seen everything with the stoogery of the Bush Administration, but the last two years have off-the-charts STUPID.

Still, almost nobody's stupid enough to buy this dumbassery, even if they take the give Romney's NYT an extreme benefit of the doubt and give the current "argument" the literal treatment they're trying. Just ain't gonna work. It's just too stupid.

Exactly this. And I truly hope this is not the end of Romney's attempts to crush the story, because the harder he pushes back, the more the story will stick. It's a lose-lose situation for him, really, and I hope that holds true of the election in November, too.

Those on the right have a gargantuan sense of entitlement.