READER COMMENTS ON
"Tom Feeney's 9/11 Conspiracy Theory: 'Clint Curtis Says I Knew About Attack Before it Happened'"
(45 Responses so far...)
COMMENT #1 [Permalink]
said on 9/29/2006 @ 12:23 pm PT...
Think about it...what do Republicans hate the most? Whistleblowers! Hence, Feeney's embarrassing (false) attacks on Clint. Clint's attacks about Feeney? Let's keep in mind, they are TRUE and BEFORE CLINT RAN FOR CONGRESS!!!
Did Feeney falsely attack Clint BEFORE Clint ran for congress??? So, Clint suddenly became crazy AFTER he announced he was running for congress?
IE...Clint would still not be crazy...IF he didn't run for congress!!!
COMMENT #2 [Permalink]
said on 9/29/2006 @ 12:26 pm PT...
I think a debate would answer a lot...
Tom Feeney: Stop smearing through "others" and directly debate Clint Curtis!!!
Maybe Clint is running for congress against Feeney BECAUSE he witnessed so much of Feeney's corruption as a representative of Florida citizens, and he wants to unseat a crook! I doubt if Clint would even be running for congress if his representatives were on the up-and-up.
COMMENT #3 [Permalink]
said on 9/29/2006 @ 1:02 pm PT...
I also think a debate would answer a lot. Clint Curtis should challenge Feeney to a debate on camera.
COMMENT #4 [Permalink]
said on 9/29/2006 @ 1:21 pm PT...
so.... the quote they use for "evidence" says Feeney talked about generating FEAR, a well-known Repug tactic, and mentions nothing about 9/11 except the timing: the events of 9/11 triggered a recollection of a Feeney discussion on the use of fear as a political tactic.
those "kids" need to take remedial reading comprehension classes.
heckuva job, Feendy!
COMMENT #5 [Permalink]
said on 9/29/2006 @ 1:22 pm PT...
Dan - You are right in that Clint is running for congress only because he had otherwise little recourse to expose the allegations he made years ago (by and large ignored by law enforcement and media --- other than us) about Feeney. I'm quite certain Clint Curtis would not be running today were it not specifically for his hope to bring accountability to Feeney.
COMMENT #6 [Permalink]
said on 9/29/2006 @ 3:07 pm PT...
Talk about grasping at straws!
Bless his lil teeny weeny meany Feeney heart.
COMMENT #7 [Permalink]
said on 9/29/2006 @ 3:36 pm PT...
I wonder if Fweeney has a young page-boy getting E-Mails too ?...hmmm
COMMENT #8 [Permalink]
said on 9/29/2006 @ 4:01 pm PT...
Feeney Feeney Fo yuk foo
My apologies Floridiot, couldn't help myself!
COMMENT #9 [Permalink]
said on 9/29/2006 @ 4:13 pm PT...
BREAKING NEWS here in district # 24...rumors are that Feeney has said he WILL debate Clint Curtis on these issues!! Here is what is surprising...he does want to debate the vote rigging, the spy ring allegations and many of the other allegations that Clint Curtis has made!!! Go get him Clint...he's walked into your trap!!! If Feeney wants to talk about Spy rings and intimidation and vote rigging then I know you will come out the winner!!! Make sure you hold his feet to the fire. Also, let us know if you read this that it's true....are the rumors true???
COMMENT #10 [Permalink]
said on 9/29/2006 @ 4:41 pm PT...
Fiendy has deleted some of my more colorful comments off his site as well. I think maybe I hurt his feelings. The truth hurts - at least for Fiendy. I just checked the calendar on Clint's website - there is a debate scheduled on WMFE TV for 10/18 at 7:00PM. I'm going to be glued to my TV!
COMMENT #11 [Permalink]
said on 9/29/2006 @ 5:54 pm PT...
David Francis #10
I went back to the Saturday, September 23, 2006 comments at Feeney's blog.
There were 3 comments there from Brad F. which I had seen and seemed to be from Brad himself.
They have all been deleted by the moderator.
I guess they can't stand the truth.
COMMENT #12 [Permalink]
said on 9/29/2006 @ 5:55 pm PT...
Emma and David
Keep us up to date on the debate.
COMMENT #13 [Permalink]
said on 9/30/2006 @ 1:08 am PT...
We need a "special" relationship between Feeney and Foley
(if you get my drift) Then we'll be cookin' with gas
COMMENT #14 [Permalink]
said on 9/30/2006 @ 6:45 am PT...
To date the rumors are not true. I have however received a certified letter from Tom Feeney's campaign stating that he will not debate me and he has sent the same letter to two newspapers with which I have spoken.
We will keep up the fight and any contributions anyone can send will be very helpful in our efforts to fight his money machine.
So far polling shows us up by about 10 points so Feeney may be getting frantic.
Hats off to Brad F. for all of his hard work.
COMMENT #15 [Permalink]
said on 9/30/2006 @ 6:56 am PT...
Feeney: "Yes, I'll debate Clint Curtis...but could we not talk about the spy ring, Florida Dept. of Transportation, Ray Lemme, DIEBOLD, ES&S, Jeb Bush, Terri Shiavo, Yang Enterprises, the polygraph test, state contracts, overbilling the FL Dept. of Transportation by $300k, the FL Inspector General's office report released in 2005, Hai Lin "Henry" Nee, Hellfire anti-tank missile chips, my campaign headquarters located inside the YEI building located at 1420 Alafaya Trail, Suite 103, Oviedo, FL 32765(Ph: 407.366.2212), the Yang's party/reception for me in 2003...thank you...."
COMMENT #16 [Permalink]
said on 9/30/2006 @ 6:59 am PT...
Well I guess I heard wrong. I was told by a reporter that he saw a letter saying he WOULD debate you on the items in your book. I'll call the reporter and ask him again. I should have known it was too good to be true.
COMMENT #17 [Permalink]
said on 9/30/2006 @ 7:01 am PT...
Feeney: "Yes, we can talk about how I used 'paintbrush' to put a tin-foil hat on Clint Curtis on my website. Next question?"
COMMENT #18 [Permalink]
said on 9/30/2006 @ 8:05 am PT...
Big Dan, working undercover for Brad Blog, has obtained exclusive footage @ Feeney's HQ's @ YEI building located at 1420 Alafaya Trail, Suite 103, Oviedo, FL 32765(Ph: 407.366.2212)
COMMENT #19 [Permalink]
The Answer Man
said on 9/30/2006 @ 1:46 pm PT...
Just like Radio Shack says, "you've got questions, we've got answers." Let's just see if they are posted and STAY.
• Will he take a polygraph test as Curtis did?
Would you take a lie detector test every time some whack job made ridiculous allegations about you? I’m guessing a resounding NO.
• Will he debate Curtis face to face?
Time will only tell.
• Why has he continued to protect Yang Enterprises, Inc. (YEI), the firm who procured state contracts while he worked as their general counsel and registered lobbyist even while serving as Florida's Speaker of the House?
Protect them? In what way, Brad? You mean like a magical force field around their building? Is he Tony Soprano or something?
• What is his explanation for YEI having been found to have overbilled the FL Dept. of Transportation by $300k on a contract that Feeney oversaw when he worked for the company?
Being a general counsel is a FAR stretch that he “worked for the company.” Brad, I believe a general counsel is a lawyer you keep on retainer, in the event you need them. They’re not involved in day to day operations.
• If Curtis is so crazy, how come he knew enough about that overbilling and reported it to the FL Inspector General's office in 2001, leading to a confirming report from the FL Inspector General's office released in 2005?
If Curtis is NOT crazy, why didn’t he report vote rigging then or in 2002? I guess he’s just forgetful, right?
• What is his explanation for YEI employee, Hai Lin "Henry" Nee, the illegal Chinese alien and close family friend who would later plead guilty to Federal charges after being bused for attempting to send Hellfire anti-tank missile chips to Communist China?
Does he owe anyone one? Did he hire him? Was he the HR Manager? Again, Brad, you seem to associate the role of general counsel for “I see and hear every little thing that ever happens at the company”. I don’t know how some of these other attorneys do it, being a general counsel for multiple companies … how do they stay on top of stuff like George calling in sick too much?
• How did Curtis know about Nee in order to make his complaint to FL officials about him back in 2001 if the above details weren't publicly known until 2004 and 2005?
Well, what can I say, I’m not all knowing, however, wasn’t Curtis claiming Nee was wire tapping or something, as opposed to listing the wrong value for something he mailed (oh, I mean sending hell fire whatchamacalits”)
• Is Curtis so "crazy" that he's also mysteriously clairvoyent?
See answer above
• How come Feeney — though he claims to have broken ties with the Yang's in 2002 — still has his Florida campaign headquarters located smack-dab inside the YEI building located at 1420 Alafaya Trail, Suite 103, Oviedo, FL 32765 (Ph: 407.366.2212)?
What exactly do you mean by “ties” Brad? Were the Yangs and Feeney “tied up” to one another? I’m thinking more like he no longer served as general counsel and lobbyist. He rents an office at the same building that houses YEI. Is that a crime? No. Is it juicy gossip for your blog? Absolutely. That’s probably you’re smoking gun right there.
• How come Feeney was thrown a private party/reception by the Yang's in 2003?
Because they wanted to do so. Man, that was the easiest answer.
• How come he won't even speak about any of these matters to reporters?
I hear him nonstop talking here to “mainstream” media about this, not out of work actors/bloggers who are probably bankrolled by daddy.
• How come Feeney is the only un-indicted congressman left in the U.S. House to have gone on a golf junket to St. Andrews, Scotland with Jack Abramoff on the now-disgraced uber-lobbyist's dime?
Brad, are you able to use your noggin at all? They saved the best for last. Buh dum dum. But seriously folks, could it be, maybe, that because Feeney did nothing to be indicted for? Wow, another easy one. The guy obviously screwed up on this one, in regards to the trip, and I’ve read where he’s said that it was a huge mistake. However, he didn’t trade the trip for favors like others.
• For that matter, how come he's long been swapping both spit and money with the jailed and/or indicted Congressmen DeLay, Ney or Cunningham?
Brad, the guy is loyal, what can I say. Now I ask you, if they’re swapping spit, what are you and Curtis doing, because it seems you each have your heads so far up the other’s xxxxx. (since this is a family blog, I’ll leave it to your imagination).
• How come he's never returned any of that money received even after sentencing and/or guilty pleas?
Hate to ask a question to a question but what money and who’s sentencing and guilty pleas?
• How come he threatened to sue a Florida newspaper who reported on Curtis' congressional testimony?
Ummm, because it was and is libelous.
• How come YEI sent a virtually identical threat letter to the paper, signed by Feeney's old law partner even though the old law partner was in the middle of a Mediterranean cruise at the time?
Don’t know, don’t care. What an idiotic question. I would assume they sent the letter because they, too, were being libeled. I hope he enjoyed the cruise though.
• How come neither he nor YEI ever sued the paper?
Well, Brad, do you know what a threat is? This would be MUCH easier if I didn’t have to teach you basic English, but here goes.
threat / –noun 1. a declaration of an intention or determination to inflict punishment, injury, etc., in retaliation for, or conditionally upon, some action or course; menace.
So Brad, there was an “intention” to “inflict punishment” in “retaliation” of a “menace”. The role of menace is being played by Clint Curtis, and you too Brad, if you want.
• How come neither he nor YEI have ever sued Curtis for all of those "libelous" and "crazy" statements that Feeney claims he's made?
Brad, please read my post about Curtis’ bankruptcy. Then you do the math. Hopefully your math skills are better than your vocabulary skills.
• Oh…and how come the other two people (beside Feeney and Curtis) in the alleged meeting where Curtis claims he was asked by Feeney to create a vote-rigging software prototype refuse to talk about the meeting as well?
Quote from Wired.com article…
“But a man who identified himself as Mike Cohen, Yang's executive assistant at the time whom Curtis said was in the meeting, told Wired News the meeting never occurred. Cohen said Curtis was "100 percent" wrong and that Cohen didn't attend such a meeting. He added he knew nothing of any meeting on the topic that occurred without him.”
What, are your feelings hurt they didn’t talk to you, too? I’m sure you’d be “fair and balanced.”
• How come one of them, Mike Cohen, Mrs. Yang's executive secretary and YEI's media spokesman was suddenly moved (and, thus buried) in a YEI job over at NASA after these allegations first became public here on The BRAD BLOG?
My goodness, the poor guy was buried? I hope he received a proper Jewish burial. The power of the Brad Blog, you can’t stop it, you can only hope to contain it, because of course there is a cause-effect going on here, I mean, because Brad says so.
Hey, I think this is the longest comment ever. Do I get a prize Brad? Also, can I put in a plug or give a shout out, since you get thousands of hits per hour?
COMMENT #20 [Permalink]
said on 9/30/2006 @ 3:32 pm PT...
Now I am really, really confused. I guess I should just e-mail Clint direct but since he responded to me here maybe he'll read this as well. I just talked again to the reporter and he insists that Feeney DID agree to debate. The funny thing is that he ONLY wants to debate the issues in Clint's book. The reporter said that the tone of the letter (written by the campaign manager) was such that they DO WISH TO ADDRESS THE ISSUES that Clint has brought up!!! Maybe there is more than one letter??? If so, then Clint needs to seize the moment and accept....this may be the only chance he gets to expose the spying, the murder, the vote fraud, etc.....
COMMENT #21 [Permalink]
said on 9/30/2006 @ 4:36 pm PT...
The Answer Man said:
Hey, I think this is the longest comment ever. Do I get a prize Brad? Also, can I put in a plug or give a shout out, since you get thousands of hits per hour?
You are welcome to say whatever you like, as long as it's not purposeful disinformation. You, of course, working for the Feeney campaign, may even be allowed to post disinfo if you like (as some of your answers above contained) since I'm more than happy to let folks judge your comments as they see fit.
Unfortunately, on your campaign smear site, apparently you don't want your readers to decide for themselves, and thus, you've had to delete my Comments wherein I pointed folks to documents and public records so that they could judge for themselves.
Aside from your silly and desperate attempts to twist words into something that works for you (anything, but the truth in order to smear your opponent), it seems you're working hard to keep people from deciding for themselves.
If I were you, I guess I would too.
You'll be stunned to learn, however, that intellectually honest folks are able to see through that. I don't suppose, however, your target voter is the intellectually honest, unfortunately.
COMMENT #22 [Permalink]
The Answer Man
said on 9/30/2006 @ 5:20 pm PT...
I respect that you left my post up, however, I would like to know what I wrote that is "purposeful disinformation". That's right, there is none. Hey, if I had made wild accusations as Curtis does, I too would've deleted me, but I didn't. You see, that's why everyone, especially the mainstream media, "deletes" Curtis. Call me long winded, but don't call me a liar. Everything I said was on the up-and-up and FACTUAL. No unfound accusations, whether or not they were in an affidavit or passed a lie detector test. Was it with a bit of an acid tongue? Maybe. But if you're going to dish it out, you'd better be able to take it.
Face it, Brad, Curtis isn't the superhero you think he is, but unfortunately for you, you have too much invested in him to jump ship. What you should have done, if you had an ounce of sense, was back Andy Michaud in the primary. Something tells me that guy is as clean as a whistle, while your horse has more dirt on him than Pigpen from Charlie Brown.
Brad, and all your friends, please give me a good reason why Curtis should represent the 24th when it's documented that he stole software from 2 employers (he can talk his way out of one, but NO WAY 2 times), was fired from FDOT, AND defrauded creditors over $200,000. Say what you will, but you can't put all this on Feeney's shoulders, especially the debt and the first software theft. The reason why Feeney won't give you the time of day I'm sure is because you would never give him a fair shake. Do me a favor, since you are trying to show you're fair, post Curtis' bankruptcy documents. It is a public document. Just ask Curtis to give you a copy; I'm sure he'd oblige. Maybe then, when you actually start to acknowledge Curtis for what he is, you may get more people to talk to you. As you said it, let people decide for themselves. Or if not, just keep posting stuff about Feeney being named the top 20 something and continue repeating all of Curtis' lies. The choice is yours.
Oh, one more thing. I read the other blog, and the only posts they took down were your plugs of your website. Otherwise, I think it's fair game on that side, too.
COMMENT #23 [Permalink]
said on 9/30/2006 @ 7:37 pm PT...
Answer man, Why won't your guy debate our guy in public if everything is so heavily weighed on his godly republican side?
COMMENT #24 [Permalink]
said on 10/1/2006 @ 2:35 am PT...
The Answer Man #19
"Just like Radio Shack says, "you've got questions, we've got answers."
That's just a slogan. I love Radio Shack, but they'll hire anyone that can move a cell phone. They hardly ever have any answers on anything to do with electronics or anything else!
In other words. that's the perfect slogan for your lengthy rant.
COMMENT #25 [Permalink]
said on 10/1/2006 @ 6:56 am PT...
Nah, its simple
Which Corporate lobby does all the money come from to pay "The Answer Man", his web site, sound bite ads and everything else
Is he (Answer Man) a graduate of the Leadership Instiute ?
Maybe some money from the black recesses of Wang, Casino Boats or FDOT toll collections ?
Lemme know if I'm close
If not I think I know, butthead
Fweeney will win, but not by this silly shit ClintCrazy website
Can anyone say paperless electronic voting ?
COMMENT #26 [Permalink]
The Answer Man
said on 10/1/2006 @ 10:54 am PT...
Can't someone contribute to a blog and not be accused of taking money from a lobby. You people speak. So can I. Who's paying you guys? I know it's not Clint Curtis. He doesn't even pay his debts, which is why he filed bankruptcy. So Floridiot, keep trying.
Larry, forgive my attempt at humor. I'm so sorry you've had bad experiences. Maybe you should take that up with their corporate office, because, I could care less.
Other than bad mouthing my post as a whole, please challenge any individual point. I'd be happy to oblige you.
You all keep backing the software stealing, credit card defrauding liar. I guess he's running for Congress because no one would actually hire him for a real job. Did he get fired from the Dollar Store? I'm not sure if they had software to steal, since everything sells for just a dollar, so maybe he cut out. Anyway, I digress. Curtis couldn't get a real job because he is unable to produce a work reference from someone who wouldn't kill his chances at a job. Let's look at the history, shall we....
Electrical Resources, Inc. --- Stole software
Yang Enterprises --- Stole software
FDOT --- FIRED!
Dollar Store --- "Clint was a model worker. He put the candy in the right place and the candles and the books and the party favors, too. *Oh, and he didn't steal our software either*." --- *I can not confirm that last statement... should we give him the benefit of the doubt?
Maybe ask his attorney for a reference. No, not a good idea, Curtis is suing him for malpractice.
Oh, but people, he accused Tom Feeney of trying to rig the vote, so he's really a great guy. Don't take so many other peoples' word for it.
COMMENT #27 [Permalink]
said on 10/1/2006 @ 1:11 pm PT...
So, "Answer Man".... I'm curious about your status. There has been quite a few stories lately of Republican operatives and campaign staffers getting caught trolling around on liberal blogs posing as regular people instead of being truthful about their presence.
So I'll just ask you directly:
Are you paid or otherwise compensated by Feeney, his campaign, or the many groups working to support Republican candidates?
COMMENT #28 [Permalink]
said on 10/1/2006 @ 1:12 pm PT...
Isn't Tom Feeney breaking laws or at least ethics by running around calling someone "crazy" in his mailings of his official campaign ads and postings of his official campaign websites?
COMMENT #29 [Permalink]
The Answer Man
said on 10/1/2006 @ 1:30 pm PT...
First, I hope that you don't think that democrats don't do the same thing on conservative blogs. Second, I don't really think it's relevant. Everything I've said is fact. I'm not making up stories here. If you know someone willing to compensate me though, I could always use an extra buck since I this is currently an unpaid position. Plus, not to toot my own horn, but I think I'm kind of good at this, wouldn't you agree, Brad?
And yankhadenuf, have you looked at Curtis' site and blog lately. I guess it's okay for him to say what he says there? Like momma always said, it takes 2 to tango.
COMMENT #30 [Permalink]
said on 10/1/2006 @ 1:52 pm PT...
Answer Man, Show proof of what Curtis says that isn't true. We're listening. Yank
COMMENT #31 [Permalink]
said on 10/1/2006 @ 2:05 pm PT...
Sorry, Answer Man, it's hard to tell from your post --- is your answer to my simple, direct question 'yes' or 'no'?
COMMENT #32 [Permalink]
said on 10/1/2006 @ 4:06 pm PT...
I guess he's a volunteer: "I could always use an extra buck since I this is currently an unpaid position"
COMMENT #33 [Permalink]
The Answer Man
said on 10/1/2006 @ 4:50 pm PT...
Well, I could say "I worked for Tom Feeney and I know Tom Feeney," but someone has already taken that line. And if you repeat a Clint Curtis statement about Feeney, you're lying twice.
My answer is NO. Like I said though, does it really matter? I'll still take a buck though, but please don't take that as from Feeney. I'm sure you don't believe a word I say though, ironic since you believe evertying that falls out of Curtis' mouth.
For a Yank, you sure aren't very big on our judicial system or how it works. I believe the prosecution has to prove something beyond reasonable doubt. In this scenario, prosecutor Curtis has NO proof of knowing or working with Feeney, so why does Feeney need to provide proof of something that doesn't exist? You'd think Curtis, from all his meetings, including when he helped Feeney with the math to draw up the district, as he has claimed of late, would have something, anything, like a memento or something of his time when he "worked" with Tom Feeney. Sorry, Toots, but a signed piece of paper and a lie detector test doesn't cut the mustard, well at least for normal thinking people like me, but obviously not YOU!
Glad you are so supportive of a guy who twice stole software from his his previous employers and defrauded creditors for over $200,000. Oh, and I'm not talking stealing a copy of Microsoft Word. Oh no, this is the software that the company developed and marketed, their lifeblood if you will. Great choice you all made. Did I mention his credit card fraud? Maybe your buddy Brad will show that too you. I'd say that is proof enough.
By the way, still waiting to go head to head on any of my answers, or if you prefer, to debate the usefulness of Radio Shack associates.
COMMENT #34 [Permalink]
said on 10/1/2006 @ 10:33 pm PT...
Silly Answer Man:
Since you seem to know what's been deleted at Feeney's shameful and embarrasing campaign smear blogsite, I guess you are working for them. How else would you know what was deleted?
As to the grave you keep digging for yourself (liability-wise) you are welcome to keep digging. The no-disinfo rule is temporarily suspended (for you only) so you can keep going at it!
Of course, down there in Winter Park, you guys know exactly which parts of your statements above are and aren't true. As much as you know it when you post it on your smear site.
But don't let me stop you!
Anyway...I'm happy to publish an unedited interview with Mr. Feeney (or you, if you're able to overcome your cowardice and use your real name, as both Curtis and myself do when talking about these serious matters) any time. I believe that's more than fair. I always am.
(P.S. You may want to clarify your libelous statements about those "two cases of "stolen software" here. Just for your own legal benefit. But that's up to you.)
COMMENT #35 [Permalink]
The Answer Man
said on 10/2/2006 @ 6:16 am PT...
When I went on the site, there were posts that stated something to the effect of removed by Admin, followed by a post by the Admin, which stated why they removed your posts. Can you believe how I was able to put these to things together and come up with that? I should be a P.I. or on CSI or something.
Libelous? Now, you've got me on the floor laughing. Let's see now. Curtis accuses Feeney of vote rigging and a million of other things in his book. Oh, and also trashed Yang Enterprises and its employees, too. So this is not libelous? Curtis is now a "public figure". The Yang employees are not. I think something in the legal books states that it's much easier to libel a private citizen than a public one. Flash forward to now, when I state how Curtis' 2 previous employers have sued him for intellectual property theft, and this is libelous? No, Brad. This is "reporting" on actual facts, statements from both companies. I hope this "clarifies" it for you. Wow Brad, you sure follow your agenda quite well, enough so to completely disregard the truth.
Fair? Sure Brad, you're fair all right, about as fair as in Salem, Mass., when they put someone on trial for being a witch. I believe they'd burn them at the stake. If they burned to death, they were not a witch. If they didn't burn to death, they were a witch. Let's apply that to being a liar. Well, I'm sure you could try that on Feeney and the poor guy would burn. I'm curious though to what would happen to Curtis if you did the same? He'd probably stay as cool as the other side of the pillow.
Hey, if I start providing dis-info, please ban me. No skin off my back. We all know that if you do, it's unwarranted. Oh, and how about that lovely bankruptcy, Brad? Is that dis-info too? Funny how you never want to address this nor what you plan to get out of this if Curtis wins.
Have you been to Winter Park? It's quite lovely. Cobblestone streets lined with 100 year old oak trees. Cheerio!
COMMENT #36 [Permalink]
said on 10/2/2006 @ 6:30 am PT...
I was too hard on Radio Shack employees and I'm embarrassed. They do seem to have an unusually high turn- over there. I wish they weren't forced to shove cell phones down our throats. That's probably why they quit!
COMMENT #37 [Permalink]
The Answer Man
said on 10/2/2006 @ 8:16 pm PT...
I'm sure they'll forgive you at Radio Shack. But why must they know my phone number when I make a purchase?
The person you need to scrutinize is Curtis. Don't turn a blind eye on Curtis' previous misgivings (intellectual property/software theft) nor his credit card fraud. It's not fair to lump Feeney in with Foley; in fact, it's WRONG! I don't know what Feeney knows about Foley, I would hope nothing until now. I have consistently asked Brad to post Curtis' massive bankruptcy documents on this site and he will never even acknowledge me. Do you not think it wrong to defraud banks and companies of money to the tune of over $200,000, then simply claim bankruptcy and thumb your nose up at them? I don't. And the fact that Brad will not report on this also smells bad. He will not answer the simple question of what he stands to gain from a Curtis win. I guess if he's smart, he'll say nothing so as not to be caught up in a lie. Curtis doesn't seem to mind doing so though.
COMMENT #38 [Permalink]
said on 10/2/2006 @ 8:21 pm PT...
Dear The Answer Man,
A) It's really tough being a republican these day, eh? Boo hoo.
B) Your slanderous unsubstantiated tripe is quite unimpressive.
C) If Clint stole that software, Why isn't he in jail?
D) You're not funny
and last of all
E) Shut the hell up with the rampant swill you've been spewing up all over, pudding for brains
COMMENT #39 [Permalink]
said on 10/2/2006 @ 11:51 pm PT...
The Answer Man:
The reputation of the Republican party preceeds them. Why should I believe anything someone who listens to Rush and Hannity say? Sorry, but I just can't!
What in Gods green earth could Curtis have to gain by exposing Feeney's vote rigging deal and then going into court under oath to verify it? What could he possibly gain?
COMMENT #40 [Permalink]
said on 10/3/2006 @ 2:58 am PT...
Answer Man Says (in the stunningly similar "logic" used when posting "facts" over at Feeney's smear site):
Libelous? Now, you've got me on the floor laughing. Let's see now. Curtis accuses Feeney of vote rigging and a million of other things in his book.
Do you have any information to suggest that Curtis knowingly lied about anything he has alleged? If so, please let me know.
In the meantime, you, both here and on Feeney's smear site continue to post what you know is out and out untruths. The thread above, reveals just one of them. As you responded disingenously to my comment by changing your charges out of convenience by saying:
Flash forward to now, when I state how Curtis' 2 previous employers have sued him for intellectual property theft, and this is libelous?
Nope. What's libelous is what you actually said before you realize you were exposed as a liar here.
What you said, in this comment, was:
Let's look at the history, shall we….
Electrical Resources, Inc. — Stole software
Yang Enterprises — Stole software
As your later mitigating comment points out, you know quite well that you were lying. That sir, would be libel.
You may wish to be more careful in your ensuing comments. But it's up to you.
Oh, and what do I "stand to gain" from Curtis winning? Nothing much. Other than getting one step closer to exposing the truth about those who would game our democracy and, hopefully, seeing another corrupt, anti-American congressman get the hell out of my government.
COMMENT #41 [Permalink]
said on 10/3/2006 @ 5:25 pm PT...
Am I going crazy??? Where is the post I made last night PROVING that Feeney accepted the debate??? Brad, this is Clint's chance!!! I've heard he's backing off and claiming he never said he'd debate. I think I can get another copy of the letter but getting anything from these people that puts Feeney on the spot isn't easy. If I'd known it would erased from here I would have kept a copy!!!
COMMENT #42 [Permalink]
The Answer Man
said on 10/3/2006 @ 6:14 pm PT...
Did I EVER say I listened to Hannity or Rush. I HATE Rush, because all he does is spread the same type of hate that you can read about here. And I don't listen to Hannity for that matter.
Okay, let's talk proof....
You want proof from Feeney for something that didn't happen. Let's look at something that did happen, allegedly. I want proof that Curtis's dogs were killed. I want police reports, I want pictures, and I want a necropsy done on each, even if it means digging them up. Was one really poisoned and the other shot? Other than him saying his dogs were killed, I never saw proof, just you all sympathizing with him --- translation --- believing any lie he puts forth. I want to see dead dog pictures, because, by god, if you can post Ray Lemme's pictures in Hustler, we can certainly handle seeing two dead dogs, IF that actually happened. The only dog I ever heard of that was shot was Old Yeller, so 2 dead dogs is a bit tough to swallow, although for this guy, I guess if he didn't say his 20 dogs were killed, 2 is more realistic.
Do you have any proof of anything I said (software theft, credit card fraud) DID NOT happen? I got news for you big boy, there's a lot more there about Curtis than there is Feeney. I'd say 2 former employers and I don't know how many creditors stand up stronger than a lying affidavit and B.S. lie detector test.
If you are sooooooo into exposing truth, why don't you expose Curtis for what he is. Show everyone his laundry list of debtors, Brad. You can't even bring yourself to say it, can you? I used to have an ounce of respect for you because of all your other work, but you throw out any credibility by backing Clint Curtis, and not only backing him, mind you, but defending him to the death. I don't know what happened in your childhood to bring about these feelings for Tom Feeney and/or the Republicans, but it must have been quite the trauma. You are an extremist, no different than extremist muslims who spit hate and lies. You go out of your way to ruin people, for what reason, I don't know, but it needs to stop. Oh, I know it won't because you probably don't have anything better to do. Kind of like Curtis, just flailing in the wind, trying to gain off of your destruction of good folk.
You call Feeney a "corrupt, anti-American congressman". Nice non-libelous statement. I'm through with you, Brad. You can have your stupid hate group blog site back, you piece of crap.
COMMENT #43 [Permalink]
said on 10/3/2006 @ 7:12 pm PT...
Hah hah hah hahahaha!
"Blah blah blah. Curtis has debt. Blah blah blah. What about that debt, Brad, chicken. Blah blah blah. There was like so much debt that Curtis had. Blah blah blah..."
*all the mounds of evidence located right here on this site*
COMMENT #44 [Permalink]
said on 10/4/2006 @ 5:09 am PT...
There's a good reason why "The Answer Man" doesn't use his real name like I do. My phone number is even listed in Salt Lake and I love talking one on one with payed or unpaid truth-killers at home or on the streets with my "Impeach Bush" sign because it's easier then trying to shoot barn doors from 50 ft. and a hell of a lot of fun!
If you ever do decide to come back, Mr. Man, please add your identity and gain some credibility.
PS - There's only one listing in the phone book spelled the way I do. I'm not going to tell you whether I have caller ID or not though because I want you to be nervous when you call. Also, there's a good chance you might not be able to get through because I'm usually on-line trying to figure out HOW THE HELL TO SAVE MY DEMOCRACY OR REPUBLIC OR WHATEVER THE HELL YOU TRAITORS FOR MONEY WANT TO CALL IT! (if you're not making any money, that's even more pathetic)!
So give me a call you COWARD!
COMMENT #45 [Permalink]
said on 11/27/2006 @ 4:39 pm PT...
The corrupt current president of the USA caused 9/11, ever wonder why F-16s were orderd not to attack the hijacked planes? Why?, because BushJrco needed a good reason to invade Iraq, which would bring "democracy" (it should be noted that Republicans would much prefer a monarchy with the oil Companies close to the top) to the Middle East. With that step done, other Middle Eastren countries would be indebted to the "United" States of America and lower their oil prices. Who made the high prices, the oil getters or the US tarifs?