 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Toyota / Toyota Cars / December 2008{OT} 75% say don't let the door hit you in the a.s
> As President George W. Bush gets ready to leave the White House in three-and-a-half weeks, and a new national poll suggests that three out of four Americans feel his departure is coming not a moment too soon. > http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/12/26/cnn-poll-three-out-of-four-ameri cans-glad-to-see-bush-go/ > > As President George W. Bush gets ready to leave the White House in > > three-and-a-half weeks, and a new national poll suggests that three > > out of four Americans feel his departure is coming not a moment too > > soon. http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/12/26/cnn-poll-three-out-of-four-ameri cans-glad-to-see-bush-go/ You say that now. We'll see in 3-4 years how Bush will be viewed when people get a dose of Obama and the Democrat Congress.  Signature"His absence is good company." ~ Scottish saying >> > As President George W. Bush gets ready to leave the White House in >> > three-and-a-half weeks, and a new national poll suggests that three [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > You say that now. We'll see in 3-4 years how Bush will be viewed when > people get a dose of Obama and the Democrat Congress. Even if Obama's political performance somehow turned out to be 100% identical to Bush's, he'll be better just because he doesn't offend young kids by butchering the English language. I know language doesn't matter in your family and probably in the entire region where you grew up, but it matters to other people. >>>> As President George W. Bush gets ready to leave the White House in >>>> three-and-a-half weeks, and a new national poll suggests that three >>>> out of four Americans feel his departure is coming not a moment too >>>> soon. >>>> >> http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/12/26/cnn-poll-three-out-of-four-ameri cans-glad-to-see-bush-go/ You >> say that now. We'll see in 3-4 years how Bush will be viewed when >> people get a dose of Obama and the Democrat Congress. > > Even if Obama's political performance somehow turned out to be 100% > identical to Bush's, he'll be better just because he doesn't offend young > kids by butchering the English language. That's hilarious considering the butchery I hear almost daily from young people. >>>>> As President George W. Bush gets ready to leave the White House in >>>>> three-and-a-half weeks, and a new national poll suggests that three [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > That's hilarious considering the butchery I hear almost daily from young > people. So? Are you saying no young people would've voted for something like Bush if there'd been such a candidate? >>>>>> As President George W. Bush gets ready to leave the White House in >>>>>> three-and-a-half weeks, and a new national poll suggests that three >>>>>> out of four Americans feel his departure is coming not a moment too >>>>>> soon. >>>>>> >>>> http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/12/26/cnn-poll-three-out-of-four-ameri cans-glad-to-see-bush-go/ You say >>>> that now. We'll see in 3-4 years how Bush will be viewed when >>>> people get a dose of Obama and the Democrat Congress. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > So? Are you saying no young people would've voted for something like Bush if > there'd been such a candidate? How in the hell does your "mind" work? By what stretch does Bush have anything to do with the grammar I hear from young people? Where did I say that no young person would've voted for Bush if there'd been such a candidate? You have got to be suffering from exposure to estrogenics. You think more like some women than some women I've known. Here's the simple answer, Joe. You said Obama "...doesn't offend young kids by butchering the English language." I merely replied that your assertion was ridiculous because most young people butcher the language quite well enough to need no "inspiration". That's it. Now, if you want to turn this into a fifty-post thread to satisfy your fetish for getting your a.s handed to you again, I'm afraid I just don't want to put out the effort. As a child, I got quickly got tired of playing with a bug in a jar. >>>>>>> As President George W. Bush gets ready to leave the White House in >>>>>>> three-and-a-half weeks, and a new national poll suggests that three [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > assertion was ridiculous because most young people butcher the language > quite well enough to need no "inspiration". OK. From whom do you think young people learn good or bad language skills? In other words, who are their examples? Who validates the way they speak? 1) Everybody 2) Nobody 3) Some people 4) Other answer of your choice >>>>>>>> As President George W. Bush gets ready to leave the White House in >>>>>>>> three-and-a-half weeks, and a new national poll suggests that three >>>>>>>> out of four Americans feel his departure is coming not a moment too >>>>>>>> soon. >>>>>>>> >>>>>> http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/12/26/cnn-poll-three-out-of-four-ameri cans-glad-to-see-bush-go/ You say that >>>>>> now. We'll see in 3-4 years how Bush will be viewed when >>>>>> people get a dose of Obama and the Democrat Congress. [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > 3) Some people > 4) Other answer of your choice Time to change the premise again, Joe? Flog yourself. I'm done. >>>>> On 2008-12-27 07:53:30 -0800, "JoeSpareBedroom" >>>>> <dishborealis@yahoo.com> [quoted text clipped - 57 lines] > > Time to change the premise again, Joe? Flog yourself. I'm done. No, you're not "done". You're running away from a question whose answer will make you look silly. This is no surprise, though. >>>>>> On 2008-12-27 07:53:30 -0800, "JoeSpareBedroom" >>>>>> <dishborealis@yahoo.com> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/12/26/cnn-poll-three-out-of-four-ameri cans-glad-to-see-bush-go/ You say that now. >>>>>>>> We'll see in 3-4 years how Bush will be viewed when >>>>>>>> people get a dose of Obama and the Democrat Congress. [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] > No, you're not "done". You're running away from a question whose answer will > make you look silly. This is no surprise, though. Really funny coming from someone who I've made look silly time and time again. This has already been accomplished within this thread alone, Joe. Have a good day. >>>>> On 2008-12-27 09:16:02 -0800, "JoeSpareBedroom" >>>>> <dishborealis@yahoo.com> [quoted text clipped - 76 lines] > > Have a good day. The point, you dummy, is that EVERYONE sets an example for kids, and whether kids pay attention to WHAT a politician says is not as important as the fact that they hear HOW he/she says it. Kids learn from everything around them. So, they see a sign saying "All Tire's On Sale Today" (and other apostrophe disasters), and the result is the plague of apostrophe-disabled idiots we see these days. Here's a craigslist ad from someone who probably thinks George Bush spoke reel gud: "i am lerning guitar and would be cool to find a person that is lerning bass and wants to pratice togeather a few nights a week, can be hosted at my house, mabey eventually write some songs, and if it works out and we pratice alot mabey we can form a band..i am into new rock like breaking benjamin 3 days grace and punk like blink 182, greenday.im in my early 20's" >>>>>> On 2008-12-27 09:16:02 -0800, "JoeSpareBedroom" >>>>>> <dishborealis@yahoo.com> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/12/26/cnn-poll-three-out-of-four-ameri cans-glad-to-see-bush-go/ You say that now. We'll >>>>>>>>>> see in 3-4 years how Bush will be viewed when >>>>>>>>>> people get a dose of Obama and the Democrat Congress. [quoted text clipped - 66 lines] > alot mabey we can form a band..i am into new rock like breaking benjamin 3 > days grace and punk like blink 182, greenday.im in my early 20's" I couldn't have asked for a better example to prove MY point and disproving yours. The "writer" would hardly be "offended" (your assertion) by Bush-speak, you blithering idiot. >>>>> On 2008-12-27 11:49:16 -0800, "JoeSpareBedroom" >>>>> <dishborealis@yahoo.com> [quoted text clipped - 121 lines] > The "writer" would hardly be "offended" (your assertion) by Bush-speak, > you blithering idiot. But kids who are trying to learn would definitely be offended, shocked and disgusted. I've seen it. You haven't, though, because apparently, the youngsters in your family never noticed Bush's problems. > >>>> As President George W. Bush gets ready to leave the White House in > >>>> three-and-a-half weeks, and a new national poll suggests that three [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > That's hilarious considering the butchery I hear almost daily from > young people. Dufus, they don't know any better yet. >> On 2008-12-27 07:53:30 -0800, "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborea...@yahoo.com> > said: [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > Dufus, they don't know any better yet. Dufus, that's why I pointed that out to Mr. Thick Skull. Were you born this big of an a.shole, or just attain it via constant practice? You present yourself a bitter, angry, nasty, vile old fart of 80 years. Carry on. >>> On 2008-12-27 07:53:30 -0800, "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborea...@yahoo.com> >> said: [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > > Carry on. Do you think it's acceptable for the highest ranking official in the country to set a bad example for kids by speaking as badly as they do? > On 2008-12-27 11:40:25 -0800, "edspyhil...@yahoo.com" > <edspyhil...@yahoo.com> said: [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > > Carry on. I caught assholeism from you rightwingnuts. >> On 2008-12-27 11:40:25 -0800, "edspyhil...@yahoo.com" >> <edspyhil...@yahoo.com> said: [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > > I caught assholeism from you rightwingnuts. Ah, so you are ADMITTING that you are, indeed, an a.shole. On >>> On 2008-12-27 11:40:25 -0800, "edspyhil...@yahoo.com" >>> <edspyhil...@yahoo.com> said: [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > > Ah, so you are ADMITTING that you are, indeed, an a.shole. With projection issues. > > <edspyhil...@yahoo.com> wrote in message > >news:4c4aa010-bf88-4e24-a011-ecb9f6bbc6a7@f40g2000pri.googlegroups.com... [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] > > With projection issues. Projection? You've finally learned something from the liberal/ progressive posters here. Bravo! Now you need to tend to your heart and soul before they atrophy and putrefy from republican dogma. >> > <edspyhil...@yahoo.com> wrote in message >> >news:4c4aa010-bf88-4e24-a011-ecb9f6bbc6a7@f40g2000pri.googlegroups.com... [quoted text clipped - 54 lines] > progressive posters here. Bravo! Now you need to tend to your heart > and soul before they atrophy and putrefy from republican dogma. If *I* were YOU, I'd be more concerned about my anal sphincters atrophying from the constant diddling by my BF. > <edspyhil...@yahoo.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 61 lines] > If *I* were YOU, I'd be more concerned about my anal sphincters atrophying > from the constant diddling by my BF. There you go again... >>>> I caught assholeism from you rightwingnuts. >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > progressive posters here. Bravo! Now you need to tend to your heart > and soul before they atrophy and putrefy from republican dogma. Blah-blah-blah. You're suffering from that pseudo-intellectual oral diarrhea again. > On 2008-12-27 19:24:31 -0800, "edspyhil...@yahoo.com" > <edspyhil...@yahoo.com> said: [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Blah-blah-blah. You're suffering from that pseudo-intellectual oral > diarrhea again. We are at least lighting the path from the dark side. > <edspyhil...@yahoo.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] > > Ah, so you are ADMITTING that you are, indeed, an a.shole. No, reading impaired dolt, I accused you of being a virulent, contagious a.shole. >>> > As President George W. Bush gets ready to leave the White House in >>> > three-and-a-half weeks, and a new national poll suggests that three [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > your family and probably in the entire region where you grew up, but it > matters to other people. If Obama turned out to be 100% like Bush, that'd be an improvement over the expectations. > >>> As President George W. Bush gets ready to leave the White House in > >>> three-and-a-half weeks, and a new national poll suggests that > three >>> out of four Americans feel his departure is coming not a > moment too >>> soon. http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/12/26/cnn-poll-three-out-of-four-ameri cans-glad-to-see-bush-go/ > > You say that now. We'll see in 3-4 years how Bush will be viewed > > when people get a dose of Obama and the Democrat Congress. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > doesn't matter in your family and probably in the entire region where > you grew up, but it matters to other people. Is that all you care about? Does it not matter to you there haven't been any terrorist attacks in America since 9/11? >> >>> As President George W. Bush gets ready to leave the White House in >> >>> three-and-a-half weeks, and a new national poll suggests that [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Is that all you care about? You are having a logic crash. > Does it not matter to you there haven't > been any terrorist attacks in America since 9/11? The same results would've been forthcoming regardless of who was president. > The same results would've been forthcoming regardless of who was > president. That is not true. Well, there's no way to know for sure, but it is just as wrong (maybe more wrong) to say that President X would have had the same result as President W. The only way you would be correct is if you looked at the accomplishment -- lack of another attack -- in a vacuum. What you constantly tell us is that you do indeed look at life in a vacuum, but life does not play itself out in a vaccum which is why you are wrong more often than not. >> The same results would've been forthcoming regardless of who was >> president. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > life does not play itself out in a vaccum which is why you are wrong more > often than not. You need to get back to school, boy. An event like 9/11 dictates what needs to be done in response, and any president who stands in the way of the response would quickly be relegated to a closet while the grownups (military, intelligence services) figured things out. >>> The same results would've been forthcoming regardless of who was >>> president. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > the response would quickly be relegated to a closet while the grownups > (military, intelligence services) figured things out. I see. Attacking our embassy and holding the staff hostage for 400+ days does not require a response. (Carter) Attacking the WTC in 1993 with explosives does not require a response. (Clinton) Attacking a US Military barracks building and killing hundreds of soldiers in their sleep does not require a response. (Clinton) Attacking a US Navy warship in a foreign port does not require a response. (Clinton) Attacking Ameircan Embassies in Africa -- two on the same day -- does not require a response. (Clinton) WAIT! I made a mistake. Clinton did respond once by sending in a cruise missile to a training session at one of the desert training camps. I think I have to go with the response of Bush (both of them) and Reagan over the response of Carter and Clinton. You're an idiot. In today's current events, my guess is you think that Hamas is walkiing the higher moral path. >>>> The same results would've been forthcoming regardless of who was >>>> president. [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > > You're an idiot. All the events above generated responses. You didn't read about them. I did. Get to the library, boy. > In today's current events, my guess is you think that Hamas is walkiing > the higher moral path. That's an absurd thing to say, and it is also evidence that you have been watching football today. >>>>> The same results would've been forthcoming regardless of who was >>>>> president. [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > All the events above generated responses. You didn't read about them. I > did. Get to the library, boy. Not enough of a response to prevent the next attack. Therefore, no response. Iran gave back the hostages a few days before Reagan was inaugurated, and they did nothing to us during his two terms. We were repeatedly attacked under Clinton, and attacked only once under GWB (and not at all under GHWB). No attacks under Bush 1 and Reagan -- and the attack that started under Carter ended when Reagan was elected -- and one attack under Bush 2. At least 4 attacks under Clinton. Those that would attack us know strength and weakness. They _expected_ weakness under GWB (you can go back and listen to their own statements after 9/11 to understand this) but got strength instead. Your liberal whining has undermined the strength, indeed those that attacked us expected your whining and got the Marines instead. >>>>>> The same results would've been forthcoming regardless of who was >>>>>> president. [quoted text clipped - 55 lines] > Your liberal whining has undermined the strength, indeed those that > attacked us expected your whining and got the Marines instead. Get to the library, BOY. In your town, the library is defined as a place where skanky teens gather to smoke cigarettes out back & sell dope. See if you can change that and make it a place of learning. > Get to the library, BOY. In your town, the library is defined as a place > where skanky teens gather to smoke cigarettes out back & sell dope. See if > you can change that and make it a place of learning. Moron! The issue is not whether or not there was a response, the issue is whether or not the response was adequate enough to prevent a subsequent attack. The facts say that any of the Clinton responses were not enough. The _expectation_ is that an Obama response will be lacking too. Of course, the Obama response could turn out to surprise all of us, but somehow I think he will rise to the occasion more like Clinton did than as Bush did. Having said that, your liberal whining has done more to undermine the position of the USA than pretty much anything else. The world sees us -- because of you -- as a bunch of sissies that cry because sand gets kicked in our face. >> Get to the library, BOY. In your town, the library is defined as a place >> where skanky teens gather to smoke cigarettes out back & sell dope. See [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > because of you -- as a bunch of sissies that cry because sand gets kicked > in our face. 1) I'm not a liberal. Maybe you and dbu can get together and find evidence, in my posts, that I'm a liberal. 2) In your spare time, when you're not blowing your dog, see if you can find your public library. >>> Get to the library, BOY. In your town, the library is defined as a place >>> where skanky teens gather to smoke cigarettes out back & sell dope. See [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > 2) In your spare time, when you're not blowing your dog, see if you can > find your public library. If it WALKS like a LIEbrawl, TALKS like a LIEbrawl and bullshits like a LIEBRAWL, chances are...... IT'S a f.cking LIEBRAWL!!!!!!!!! > 2) In your spare time, when you're not blowing your dog, see if you can > find your public library. I have to stop banging your mom and sisters first. What makes you say stupid sh.t like that? Wait! I know, you are a stupid a.s. >> 2) In your spare time, when you're not blowing your dog, see if you can >> find your public library. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > What makes you say stupid sh.t like that? Wait! I know, you are a stupid > a.s. I say things like that because based on your posts, I know for a fact that during the times when you could be expanding your mind, you are: 1) Blowing your dog 2) Watching football or 3) Participating in some other activity which allows you to forget the fact that when people stop learning, they become rocks. > ...when people stop learning, they become rocks. In that case, you bring a whole new definition to being "stoned", Joe. >> ...when people stop learning, they become rocks. > > In that case, you bring a whole new definition to being "stoned", Joe. Remember that you haven't been around long enough to be able to spot patterns here. Even after you have been around long enough, you won't be able to spot patterns. >>> ...when people stop learning, they become rocks. >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > patterns here. Even after you have been around long enough, you won't be > able to spot patterns. Strike three. You're out. Corner time...again. > I say things like that because based on your posts, I know for a fact that > during the times when you could be expanding your mind, you are: Take your personal attacks back into the closet. There is no use for them here. You are both stupid AND rude. I try and try to help you understand reality, and all I get is stupidity and rudeness in return. Yoiu have never ever even once actually expressed any fact or fiction that can be rebutted. All you do is assert that you are widely read but offer up no citation as to anything you have actually read. With every turn, you take a liberal position, but when anybody says you are a liberal, you deny your liberalism. It's as if you are ashamed. Man up a.shole, we all know what you are. >> I say things like that because based on your posts, I know for a fact >> that during the times when you could be expanding your mind, you are: [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > are a liberal, you deny your liberalism. It's as if you are ashamed. Man > up a.shole, we all know what you are. I love the way you MUST cling to simple labels, like "liberal". You'd drown without simple labels. >>> I say things like that because based on your posts, I know for a fact >>> that during the times when you could be expanding your mind, you are: [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > I love the way you MUST cling to simple labels, like "liberal". You'd drown > without simple labels. Pretty funny coming from the guy who resorts to insulting people with bigotry. >>> I say things like that because based on your posts, I know for a fact >>> that during the times when you could be expanding your mind, you are: [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > I love the way you MUST cling to simple labels, like "liberal". You'd > drown without simple labels. Yeah, right. Again, nothing to offer of any substance. You just proved my point. > > I say things like that because based on your posts, I know for a fact that > > during the times when you could be expanding your mind, you are: [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > a liberal, you deny your liberalism. It's as if you are ashamed. Man up > a.shole, we all know what you are. Well you label the other guy's politics then you are frustrated when they don't accept your label. See the pattern yet? On Dec 30, 1:07 pm, "Jeff Strickland" <cr...@verizon.net> wrote: > "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborea...@yahoo.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > a liberal, you deny your liberalism. It's as if you are ashamed. Man up > a.shole, we all know what you are. Well you label the other guy's politics then you are frustrated when they don't accept your label. See the pattern yet? ============ Quite a few of my posts are not a response to the politics involved, but to erroneous conclusions drawn from the information presented. Reading comprehension, in other words. Even so, kiddies like Shmuckland label me a liberal, which proves that he'll slap that label on anyone who simply disagrees with him. > On Dec 30, 1:07 pm, "Jeff Strickland" <cr...@verizon.net> wrote: >> "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborea...@yahoo.com> wrote in message [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > liberal, which proves that he'll slap that label on anyone who simply > disagrees with him. It's got nothing to do with disagreeing with me. I'm up to the challenge of supporting my position with the facts as I know them. I can disagree with lots of people for a very long time without ever sinking to the level of, getting off your mothere and sisters before I can do anything else. It is very difficult to find any serious response from you that has any measure of support for your position. You, on the other hand, trot out sh.t like me giving my dog a blow job and more, when you can't support your position. Me thinks the problem with people that disagree rests in your court, not mine. On Dec 30, 1:07 pm, "Jeff Strickland" <cr...@verizon.net> wrote: > "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborea...@yahoo.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > a liberal, you deny your liberalism. It's as if you are ashamed. Man up > a.shole, we all know what you are. Well you label the other guy's politics then you are frustrated when they don't accept your label. See the pattern yet? <JS> It's not my label that I applied. I see nothing but liberalism and Blame America First coming from JoeNoBrainer. He denies that he's a liberal or a Blame-America-Firster, but that does nothing to change what I see. The only logical conclusion is that he's ashamed of the position he puts forth. Which brings us full circle. </JS> > On Dec 30, 1:07 pm, "Jeff Strickland" <cr...@verizon.net> wrote: >> "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborea...@yahoo.com> wrote in message [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > > </JS> From you, I have never seen anything indicating that you realize we have made mistakes. If you disagree, name three. If you can't name three, you will have proven once again that you read nothing, and that you spend your life in front of the TV watching sports. >> On Dec 30, 1:07 pm, "Jeff Strickland" <cr...@verizon.net> wrote: >>> "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborea...@yahoo.com> wrote in message [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > will have proven once again that you read nothing, and that you spend your > life in front of the TV watching sports. We've (the USA under Bush) made LOTS of mistakes. Iraq is a huge mistake, but not the mistake you make it out to be. We were right to go there, we needed to go there, Saddam needed to be taken out because HE alone had the chance to explain the disposition of the WMD that the entire world knew he had at one time -- the lack of an explaination of the disposition leave sane people thinking he must still have them. Going to Iraq is not a problem for me. The inability to get out of Iraq is a problem. The mistake of Iraq was that we thought that freedom would be embraced, the reality seems to be that it is damn near shunned. We shoulda known that, and by all accounts we've been blind-sided. But, going there (Iraq) is not a problem, the problem is the failure to adequately plan the peace. The blame for this falls on Iraqis, not the Bush Administration. There have been many problems. You _repeatedly_ and _constantly_ trot out the party line -- Bush is an idiot and a war criminal. This tells me that YOU are the one that fails to comprehend all that he reads. >>> On Dec 30, 1:07 pm, "Jeff Strickland" <cr...@verizon.net> wrote: >>>> "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborea...@yahoo.com> wrote in message [quoted text clipped - 63 lines] > the party line -- Bush is an idiot and a war criminal. This tells me that > YOU are the one that fails to comprehend all that he reads. I never said Bush was a war criminal. You have been drinking. > I never said Bush was a war criminal. You have been drinking. No. I've been working your sister. You're an idiot. >I see nothing but liberalism and Blame America First coming from >JoeNoBrainer. Then you could be a radical. >>>>>> The same results would've been forthcoming regardless of who was >>>>>> president. [quoted text clipped - 55 lines] > Your liberal whining has undermined the strength, indeed those that > attacked us expected your whining and got the Marines instead. LIEbrawl whining and bitching gladdens the hearts of various terrorists. Their own propaganda machines just LOVE it when citizens of democracies attack THEIR OWN GOVERNMENTS, usually ignoring the many atrocities that the TERRORISTS/BARBARIANS continue to do, e.g. strapping bombs to women and children. > >> > As President George W. Bush gets ready to leave the White House in > >> > three-and-a-half weeks, and a new national poll suggests that three [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > identical to Bush's, he'll be better just because he doesn't offend young > kids by butchering the English language. Like young kids know proper English. > I know language doesn't matter in > your family and probably in the entire region where you grew up, but it > matters to other people. Which young kids pay attention to politics? On Dec 27, 7:53 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborea...@yahoo.com> wrote: > "badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolfer...@gmail.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > identical to Bush's, he'll be better just because he doesn't offend young > kids by butchering the English language. Like young kids know proper English. =========== At age 12, my kid's language was better than "Is our children learning?" If your kids weren't that way at that age, it's your fault and you're an idiot. =========== > I know language doesn't matter in > your family and probably in the entire region where you grew up, but it > matters to other people. Which young kids pay attention to politics? ==================== You never saw me say young kids paid attention to politics. > On Dec 27, 7:53 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborea...@yahoo.com> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > At age 12, my kid's language was better than "Is our children learning?" If > your kids weren't that way at that age, it's your fault and you're an idiot. You need to put a comma before "and." If you're going to criticize others' English, get your grammar right. > =========== > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > You never saw me say young kids paid attention to politics. You said that his performance would be better if he didn't offend young kids by butchering the English language. How can young kids be offended if they don't pay attention to politics? It is a logical conclusion from your statement that kids pay attention to politics. Jeff >> On Dec 27, 7:53 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborea...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > You need to put a comma before "and." If you're going to criticize > others' English, get your grammar right. Correct. >> ========== >> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > offended if they don't pay attention to politics? It is a logical > conclusion from your statement that kids pay attention to politics. Also correct. On Dec 27, 11:35 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborea...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > "badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolfer...@gmail.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > your kids weren't that way at that age, it's your fault and you're an > idiot. You need to put a comma before "and." If you're going to criticize others' English, get your grammar right. > =========== > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > You never saw me say young kids paid attention to politics. You said that his performance would be better if he didn't offend young kids by butchering the English language. How can young kids be offended if they don't pay attention to politics? It is a logical conclusion from your statement that kids pay attention to politics. Jeff =================== Actually, this last bit is pretty easy, IMO: one can hear sound bites/see video clips on the nightly news - which the parents are watching & the kid's within hearing &/or viewing distance, and notice gaffes (difficult not to, with GWB's infamous ones!); yet not pay specific attention to politics in general. Cathy On Dec 27, 11:35 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborea...@yahoo.com> wrote: > "Jeff" <jeff....@gmail.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > your kids weren't that way at that age, it's your fault and you're an > idiot. You need to put a comma before "and." If you're going to criticize others' English, get your grammar right. > =========== > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > You never saw me say young kids paid attention to politics. You said that his performance would be better if he didn't offend young kids by butchering the English language. How can young kids be offended if they don't pay attention to politics? It is a logical conclusion from your statement that kids pay attention to politics. Jeff =========== No, it's not a logical conclusion. Kids listen to the language without always understanding what a politician is talking about. The poor language skills still stand out. >>> > As President George W. Bush gets ready to leave the White House in >>> > three-and-a-half weeks, and a new national poll suggests that three [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > your family and probably in the entire region where you grew up, but it > matters to other people. You haven't read many Craigslist ads have you? LOL >>>> > As President George W. Bush gets ready to leave the White House in >>>> > three-and-a-half weeks, and a new national poll suggests that three [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > You haven't read many Craigslist ads have you? LOL Actually, I read them daily. LOL. You idiot. On Dec 27, 9:20 am, "badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolfer...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > As President George W. Bush gets ready to leave the White House in > > > three-and-a-half weeks, and a new national poll suggests that three [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > -- > "His absence is good company." ~ Scottish saying A dolt. >> > As President George W. Bush gets ready to leave the White House in >> > three-and-a-half weeks, and a new national poll suggests that three [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > You say that now. We'll see in 3-4 years how Bush will be viewed when > people get a dose of Obama and the Democrat Congress. Gee, I had hoped this was a thread about JSB. . . . Sir Charles the Curmudgeon > >> > As President George W. Bush gets ready to leave the White House in > >> > three-and-a-half weeks, and a new national poll suggests that three [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Sir Charles the Curmudgeon Sir Charles? Really now. You were sired by marauding Visigoths in a stinking stable. >> >> > As President George W. Bush gets ready to leave the White House in >> >> > three-and-a-half weeks, and a new national poll suggests that three [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > Sir Charles? Really now. You were sired by marauding Visigoths in a > stinking stable. You LIEbrawls seem to be very uptight about anything to do with stables. Having NO moral code might have something to do with that, no doubt. > <edspyhil...@yahoo.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > You LIEbrawls seem to be very uptight about anything to do with stables. > Having NO moral code might have something to do with that, no doubt. Don't you have multiplication tables homework to do? Don't you have a date with a moose cow? I'm assuming it's a cow. >>> >> > As President George W. Bush gets ready to leave the White House in >>> >> > three-and-a-half weeks, and a new national poll suggests that three [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > You LIEbrawls seem to be very uptight about anything to do with stables. > Having NO moral code might have something to do with that, no doubt. Well, I have to admit he's partly right. One of my ancestors is Rolf Ragnvaldsson also known as Rollo, a Viking that just happened to conquer Normandy) and I'm also supposed to be related to Leif Erikson (the historical figure, not the actor.) And William the Conqueror is in my family tree 6 times (illigitimate son of Robert Duke of Normandy and a tanner's daughter, so they could have been fooling around in a stable....) If he thinks my FATHER was a Visigoth, however, he's got another thing coming. My dad was 1/8th French Canadian, 1/8th Irish, 1/4 German, and 1/2 Southern. And he shouldn't insult my mother, either. Just because she was born in the Big House and grew up on a farm. I may have to defend my parent's honor since both of them are now far beyond this vail of tears. I know an angel came to get Mom just before she died, so Ed Syphillis needs to take up his insults with God, not me, about my mother. Ed Syphillis, just another sick LIEberal mind. Don't let the door hit ya where the Good Lord split ya. Sir Charles the Curmudgeon > > <edspyhil...@yahoo.com> wrote in message > >news:b292b1e0-6680-4933-8404-0d7cd367df33@r40g2000yqj.googlegroups.com... [quoted text clipped - 46 lines] > > Sir Charles the Curmudgeon If it makes you feel good to have a family tree with royalty, stay with it. It all might hold you up until you can locate your own inner self esteem. >>> > As President George W. Bush gets ready to leave the White House in >>> > three-and-a-half weeks, and a new national poll suggests that three [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Sir Charles the Curmudgeon You need to tell your doctor that you blame all your problems on everyone else. He needs to explain to you that certain side effects of diabetes are YOUR problem and only YOUR problem. They have nothing to do with liberals, communists, non-Christians, or women over X age, whatever the f.ck number you're assigning to X lately. If the same poll was asked of Congress, the number would be much higher, I believe the number would be closer to 95% ... Having said that, any poll that CNN does is likely to draw more liberal Democrats as respondants than conservative Republicans. So, take the exact polling figures with a grain of salt. Clearly, had Fox News run the same poll, the results would give a different figure, but the overall idea would be the same. >> As President George W. Bush gets ready to leave the White House in >> three-and-a-half weeks, and a new national poll suggests that three out >> of four Americans feel his departure is coming not a moment too soon. >> http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/12/26/cnn-poll-three-out-of-four-ameri cans-glad-to-see-bush-go/ |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.