Actually it is a real word used to describe a specific IQ range isn't it?
Sam.
Nope. It has not been used professionally since the 1970's. Even then it was
frowned up on. Downs Syndrome is OK, Mentally Handicapped is OK,
Developmentally Delayed is OK. All of these phrase describe particular
even then it was retarded wasn't it? I do think moron has an
actual definition relating it to a specific IQ range, but that's an
aside. I'm sure Larry has looked at the DSM more recently that I have
though.
On 8/15/07, Larry Lyons [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually it is a real word used to
see that's the problem with setting filters -- you wind up seeing the
stuff anyway. Ok, apparently I have used the word once in my life. I
had forgotten this discussion, mercifully.
Howevr, it isn't used as an epithet. It's in the same context as every
time I have used the word nigger... as an
Will you jsut STFU and let this thread die you idiot?
On 8/15/07, Dana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
see that's the problem with setting filters -- you wind up seeing the
stuff anyway. Ok, apparently I have used the word once in my life. I
had forgotten this discussion, mercifully.
Howevr, it
?
I'd suggest we start a different thread if you want to discuss this
though. This thread should die. Hypothesis 0 -- you mean PhD's?
D
On 8/15/07, Larry Lyons [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Larry, I don't really want to revisit this, but your own link said otherwise.
Dana
I know. It was one
Larry, I don't really want to revisit this, but your own link said otherwise.
Dana
I know. It was one of those days where you want to tear the head off the world
and spit in the hole. There are days when phb's can be blindly astonishing in
their pointy haired bossness.
?
I'd suggest we start a different thread if you want to discuss this
though. This thread should die. Hypothesis 0 -- you mean PhD's?
D
pointy haired bosses I can handle PhD's they are mostly reasonable, if you have
the data and results to back up what you're saying. No amount of
oh duh. Must brush up on my Dilbert ;P
On 8/15/07, Larry Lyons [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
?
I'd suggest we start a different thread if you want to discuss this
though. This thread should die. Hypothesis 0 -- you mean PhD's?
D
pointy haired bosses I can handle PhD's they are mostly
I like to hear about and consider differing views on subjects, but only when
they are well reasoned and intelligently put.
On 13/08/07, G Money [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Slightly annoying static?
Sam gives voice to viewpoints that are shared by an awful lot of people in
this
Thats a pretty decent summary of my feelings, Sam is a brick wall that I
would rather walk past than beat my head against.
On 13/08/07, Dana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
perhaps, Brian, but life is too short to reason with him. I have spent
entire weeks trying to talk sense to Sam. Net result --
The Prime Minister mentioned was in power at the same time as Eisenhower if
it helps to put the quote in some sort of historical context. Presumably we
can now judge American media companies on how they reacted to Eisenhower?
On 13/08/07, Dana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
you are? ::blink:: if you
For clarity I meant to type I did NOT say he was a retard, but he was
implying I was. Now that that's out of the way, are you one of those
PC morons? Woops, I just offended your entire group.
If I said he had a low IQ wouldn't that be an insult to everyone with a low IQ?
If I said he was ugly
Not at all.
Those words were never acceptable, however, I did notice you throw out
the k*ke word every chance you get.
See retard has been an acceptable shortening for mental retardation
until the last 10 or so years. The reason it's not acceptable anymore
because people call other people retards
This thread should die.
-Original Message-
From: Sam [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2007 10:15 AM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Here Comes The History
Not at all.
Those words were never acceptable, however, I did notice you throw out
the k*ke word every chance you
three days ago...
On 8/14/07, Loathe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This thread should die.
-Original Message-
From: Sam [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2007 10:15 AM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Here Comes The History
Not at all.
Those words were never acceptable
tBone wrote:
This thread should die.
It's as if Nazis that worship Hitler have invaded the thread. Oops!
Did I say Hitler? There I go again. I keep saying Hitler ... DOH!
~|
Enterprise web applications, build robust,
On 8/14/07, Gruss Gott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
tBone wrote:
This thread should die.
It's as if Nazis that worship Hitler have invaded the thread. Oops!
Did I say Hitler? There I go again. I keep saying Hitler ... DOH!
Godwin's law specifically states that you can't intentionally
why is it an insult to say someone is acting like a black man?
If I said he was acting like a black man then that would be an insult.
Dana
--
Emancipate yourselves from mental slavery; None but ourselves can free
our minds
- Bob Marley
God you're such a rule nazi.
-Original Message-
From: Charlie Griefer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2007 10:45 AM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Here Comes The History
On 8/14/07, Gruss Gott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
tBone wrote:
This thread should die.
It's
It's like if I said he was being a Dana, eventually the term Dana
would be an insult.
Die thread, die!
On 8/14/07, Dana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
why is it an insult to say someone is acting like a black man?
If I said he was acting like a black man then that would be an insult.
Dana
you're just flowing with insults aren't you. But you still have not
said what you think is wrong with acting like a black man.
On 8/14/07, Sam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's like if I said he was being a Dana, eventually the term Dana
would be an insult.
Die thread, die!
On 8/14/07, Dana
personally, i think its FUCKED UP to coin anything
about ACTING LIKE A BLACK MAN
how exactly does a BLACK MAN act?
just wondering.
guess, im going to go to lunch and act like white man?
tw
On 8/14/07, Dana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
you're just flowing with insults aren't you. But you still
Dana wrote:
you're just flowing with insults aren't you. But you still have not
said what you think is wrong with acting like a black man.
It's stereotypical and possible racist. Why? Because black man
refers to huge group of people, probably about 6% of our population.
To say that someone
Tony wrote:
how exactly does a BLACK MAN act?
Hey Weegs? Stop acting like a woman.
~|
Check out the new features and enhancements in the
latest product release - download the What's New PDF now
, 2007 11:48 AM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Here Comes The History
personally, i think its FUCKED UP to coin anything
about ACTING LIKE A BLACK MAN
how exactly does a BLACK MAN act?
just wondering.
guess, im going to go to lunch and act like white man?
tw
On 8/14/07, Dana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
Thank you.
On 8/14/07, Gruss Gott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dana wrote:
you're just flowing with insults aren't you. But you still have not
said what you think is wrong with acting like a black man.
It's stereotypical and possible racist. Why? Because black man
refers to huge group
For clarity I meant to type I did NOT say he was a retard, but he was
implying I was.
That's an excellent clarification, but nowhere did i imply anything of
the sort, and I defy you to point out how you draw the inference.
Now that that's out of the way, are you one of those
PC morons?
this would be my point
On 8/14/07, Tony [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
personally, i think its FUCKED UP to coin anything
about ACTING LIKE A BLACK MAN
how exactly does a BLACK MAN act?
just wondering.
guess, im going to go to lunch and act like white man?
tw
On 8/14/07, Dana [EMAIL
11:48 AM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Here Comes The History
personally, i think its FUCKED UP to coin anything
about ACTING LIKE A BLACK MAN
how exactly does a BLACK MAN act?
just wondering.
guess, im going to go to lunch and act like white man?
tw
On 8/14/07, Dana [EMAIL PROTECTED
I thought GG explained it well.
I'll try again. By saying you're acting like a black man, a white man
or even Jew is intended as an insult. I've heard Jew used as
derogatory word many times but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be used.
Years ago if you called a mentally challenged person a retard it
um, no it doesn't have the same meaning at all. It's the conflating of
the two terms that is racist, in fact.
::sigh:: why do i bother.
On 8/14/07, Sam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I thought GG explained it well.
I'll try again. By saying you're acting like a black man, a white man
or even Jew is
You're welcome to remain lost and confused but don't call me racist.
On 8/14/07, Dana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
um, no it doesn't have the same meaning at all. It's the conflating of
the two terms that is racist, in fact.
::sigh:: why do i bother.
say either to me, in front of a group of black people
and i guarantee you the same result.
On 8/14/07, Dana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
um, no it doesn't have the same meaning at all. It's the conflating of
the two terms that is racist, in fact.
::sigh:: why do i bother.
On 8/14/07, Sam [EMAIL
when you say acting like sure. Then you have the implication that
black men act in some specific way and also there is something wrong
with that. But nigger does not have the same meaning as black man,
sorry. It's the implication that it does that is racist.
And Sam, if the shoe fits
Dana
Are you playing with me or do you really not get it?
The word retard was used so often in a derogatory way that it became
offensive even when used legitimately.
I'm not saying black man is a derogatory term, but if you use it in
that context often enough it will be viewed as such.
Try this, if
Sam.
There is no legitimate use for the word retard.
I am done here.
Dana
On 8/14/07, Sam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Are you playing with me or do you really not get it?
The word retard was used so often in a derogatory way that it became
offensive even when used legitimately.
I'm not
there is no legitimate use for the notion of acting like a black person
none.
On 8/14/07, Dana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sam.
There is no legitimate use for the word retard.
I am done here.
Dana
On 8/14/07, Sam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Are you playing with me or do you really not get
Not at all.
Those words were never acceptable, however, I did notice you throw out
the k*ke word every chance you get.
Just as much as the word retard was thrown out. My use of those edited words
was as a comparison. I was saying it was as bad calling someone a retard as to
use other words.
I agree. That is why I took issue with the sentence, Tony.
Dana
On 8/14/07, Tony [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
there is no legitimate use for the notion of acting like a black person
none.
On 8/14/07, Dana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sam.
There is no legitimate use for the word retard.
I
WTF do you call this?
well gosh Dana, *all* media is lib'ral isn't it? Except of course for EIB!
see, you're showing your lib'ral bias!
Ev'ry good American knows that EIB is!
That Fox be to the left of EIB shows that Fox, too, is a bastion of
lib'ral ee-vil!!
He was mocking people that
You two should hang out together. I'm done here too.
On 8/14/07, Tony [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
there is no legitimate use for the notion of acting like a black person
none.
On 8/14/07, Dana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sam.
There is no legitimate use for the word retard.
I am done
Not at all.
Those words were never acceptable, however, I did notice you throw out
the k*ke word every chance you get.
Really? lets see, aside from this discussion how often have I used that word?
Lets count, ;you have the cf community search just above this discussion. Do a
search , how often
You're right and I apologize.
It was Dana.
On 8/14/07, Larry Lyons [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Really? lets see, aside from this discussion how often have I used that word?
Lets count, ;you have the cf community search just above this discussion. Do
a search , how often did I say that word
Sam
How fucking dare you. I guess there's no doubt now whether you're a
man or a troll.
For the record I have never used the word in my life, let alone here.
Setting a rule now. Sam -- trash.
Bye.
On 8/14/07, Sam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You're right and I apologize.
It was Dana.
On
Actually it is a real word used to describe a specific IQ range isn't it?
-Original Message-
From: Dana [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2007 2:41 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Here Comes The History
Sam.
There is no legitimate use for the word retard.
I am done
http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/thread.cfm/threadid:18538
On 8/14/07, Dana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sam
How fucking dare you. I guess there's no doubt now whether you're a
man or a troll.
For the record I have never used the word in my life, let alone here.
Setting a rule
Dayum, D used the F-Bomb
-Original Message-
From: Dana [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2007 9:38 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Here Comes The History
Sam
How fucking dare you. I guess there's no doubt now whether you're a
man or a troll.
For the record I have
Sorry, here:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/thread.cfm/threadid:18538#172789
On 8/14/07, Sam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/thread.cfm/threadid:18538
On 8/14/07, Dana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sam
How fucking dare you. I guess
That's pretty lame. You had to go back to 2005 where it was used
completely out of context to what you were referring to?
Sometimes people get carried away on mailing lists and at those times,
especially when it's pointed out I find an 'oops!, sowwies' and a
muffin usually works.
On 8/14/07, Sam
I can't be bothered to be honest Sam, you lost any credibility here a good
while back. Carry on with your flawed reasoning, post all the biased links
or out of context quotes you want, I really can't be bothered any more.
When you were arguing that the US health care system was superior to the UK
That's gibberish. Do you want to gather your thoughts and try again?
On 8/13/07, Wayne Putterill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I can't be bothered to be honest Sam, you lost any credibility here a good
while back. Carry on with your flawed reasoning, post all the biased links
or out of context
You implied insurance companies are justifiably raising your premiums
due to the link between global warming and hurricanes even though no
science exists there. I was pointing out that you needed a refund
because there where no hurricanes last year. While if it was tied to
gw we would have had
But your argument was he's changing science, now you're upset because
you think teaching abstinence to kids is a fundamentalist thing.
That's the making of another thread that I'm not interested in.
On 8/11/07, Larry Lyons [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So in your opinion this administration is
It's a grant, you ask for money to teach this and follow it's
guidelines you get the money. It doesn't have anything to do with the
current teachings unless you want to use the money to fund the current
sex-ed classes. Then you'd be limited.
On 8/10/07, Dana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
really? Do
Sam wrote:
You implied insurance companies are justifiably raising your premiums
due to the link between global warming and hurricanes even though no
science exists there. I was pointing out that you needed a refund
because there where no hurricanes last year. While if it was tied to
gw we
Nope - you are the equivalent of slightly annoying static on this list, just
a noise without any meaningful content and as such you're just not worth
bothering about. When I see your name on a post I will just think of that
eagle on the Muppet show and pass on with a smile on my face.
On
The first US surgeon general appointed by President Bush accused the
administration of political interference and muzzling him on key issues like
embryonic stem cell research.
fwiw here is Cardoso's testimony before the house oversight committee on the
editing of the world health report:
Thank you oh great Oracle, your wisdom mystifies me. Just witnessing
your exhaustive attempt to translate those genius thoughts into text
gives me goose bumps.
Rest now, you'll need your strength.
On 8/13/07, Wayne Putterill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nope - you are the equivalent of slightly
I'm lost. You're justifying paying for an theory? How much insurance
are you willing to pay against the space invasion?
On 8/13/07, Gruss Gott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sam wrote:
You implied insurance companies are justifiably raising your premiums
due to the link between global warming and
Slightly annoying static?
Sam gives voice to viewpoints that are shared by an awful lot of people in
this country.ignoring him or dismissing him outright because those views
differ from yours, doesn't seem to me to be a very constructive course of
action.
Your stubborn refusal to even
Sam wrote:
I'm lost. You're justifying paying for an theory? How much insurance
are you willing to pay against the space invasion?
This has nothing to do with me; it's us - you, me, and every home
owner in America that's not self-insured. Here's how *your* home
owner's insurance rate is
Amazing, so I'm only ever right when I agree with one of your never
changing point of views? Why can't everyone just see things the way
you do?
There's no liberal conspiracy :)
Confessions of a BBC liberal
The BBC has finally come clean about its bias, says a former editor,
who wrote Yes,
gMoney wrote:
Your stubborn refusal to even recognize other viewpoints seems awfully
similar to behavior that we commonly criticize Sam and his ilk of doing.
+100, if you disagree say why, but reasonable people can disagree even
if you think he's unreasonable. He probably thinks the same of
No, because you're taking normal weather patterns and attributing it
to GW. Our insurance goes up because we know there will be hurricanes.
We don't pay extra because we know they'll be more intense or
frequent. If we do we're getting ripped off.
On 8/13/07, Gruss Gott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ok so... I am being reasonable. What does this have to do with anything, Sam?
On 8/13/07, Sam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Amazing, so I'm only ever right when I agree with one of your never
changing point of views? Why can't everyone just see things the way
you do?
There's no liberal conspiracy
perhaps, Brian, but life is too short to reason with him. I have spent
entire weeks trying to talk sense to Sam. Net result -- Sam's mind is
unchanged and I have a few more grey hairs. May as well put my
energies to effective use. I can't speak for Wayne, but those are my
thoughts.
Every so often
You said:
that is that he persists in seeing liberal conspiracies
because that is what his listening tells him to look for.
So I showed you that the BBC, which I know you respect as a totally
unbiased news entity, admits they are liberally biased.
On 8/13/07, Dana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ok
I don't know that anyone is totally unbiased. The BBC does do news
though, which Rupert Murdoch does not. I do find it interesting tha
tyou had to go outside the United States to find something it wasn't
laughable to call liberal. Assuming this isn't... haven't had a chance
to look at this yet.
Now you want to compare Fox News to the BBC. What a joke.
ABC, NBC, CBS? Bring it on :)
On 8/13/07, Dana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't know that anyone is totally unbiased. The BBC does do news
though, which Rupert Murdoch does not. I do find it interesting tha
tyou had to go outside the
There's no mention of stem cells.
I see your point but still don't agree. This is not an attempt to
silence or dispute science. This has to do with setting foreign policy
and the AG does not have the last say. If it were a suggestion to the
policy makers it would be helpful. This is a call to
Sam wrote:
No, because you're taking normal weather patterns and attributing it
to GW.
I'm not saying that at all - I'm saying that the insurance industry is
factoring in the *risk* of GW changing weather in an adverse way.
That's it. It's not me saying anything about the weather.
The point
well, I am talking about Fox News and you are talking about the BBC.
So you're saying something is wrong with the comparison now?
On 8/13/07, Sam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Now you want to compare Fox News to the BBC. What a joke.
ABC, NBC, CBS? Bring it on :)
On 8/13/07, Dana [EMAIL
Changing the point is always a good way to sneak around the issue.
So are you now saying Fox News is part of the vast-right-wing conspiracy?
On 8/13/07, Dana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
well, I am talking about Fox News and you are talking about the BBC.
So you're saying something is wrong with
But your argument was he's changing science, now you're upset because
you think teaching abstinence to kids is a fundamentalist thing.
That's the making of another thread that I'm not interested in.
NO I'm pissed because of the administration is twisting science to fit their
ideology.
are you seriously claiming its part of the liberal media?
On 8/13/07, Sam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Changing the point is always a good way to sneak around the issue.
--
Emancipate yourselves from mental slavery; None but ourselves can free
our minds
- Bob Marley
perhaps, Brian, but life is too short to reason with him. I have spent
entire weeks trying to talk sense to Sam. Net result -- Sam's mind is
unchanged and I have a few more grey hairs. May as well put my
energies to effective use. I can't speak for Wayne, but those are my
thoughts.
Every so often
are you seriously claiming its part of the liberal media?
well gosh Dana, *all* media is lib'ral isn't it? Except of course for EIB!
--
will
If my life weren't funny, it would just be true;
and that would just be unacceptable.
- Carrie Fisher
hehe. Do I want to know what EIB is?
On 8/13/07, William Bowen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
are you seriously claiming its part of the liberal media?
well gosh Dana, *all* media is lib'ral isn't it? Except of course for EIB!
--
will
If my life weren't funny, it would just be true;
and that
Larry, I don't really want to revisit this, but your own link said otherwise.
Dana
On 8/13/07, Larry Lyons [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
perhaps, Brian, but life is too short to reason with him. I have spent
entire weeks trying to talk sense to Sam. Net result -- Sam's mind is
unchanged and I have
erm... preliminary research indicates that no, no, I don't... I need
to go have a nice cup of tea now...
On 8/13/07, Dana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
hehe. Do I want to know what EIB is?
On 8/13/07, William Bowen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
are you seriously claiming its part of the liberal
Is its' the BBC, Foxnews or the other three networks I mentioned?
On 8/13/07, Dana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
are you seriously claiming its part of the liberal media?
On 8/13/07, Sam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Changing the point is always a good way to sneak around the issue.
There's no mention of stem cells.
I see your point but still don't agree. This is not an attempt to
silence or dispute science. This has to do with setting foreign policy
and the AG does not have the last say. If it were a suggestion to the
policy makers it would be helpful. This is a call to
hehe. Do I want to know what EIB is?
see, you're showing your lib'ral bias!
Ev'ry good American knows that EIB is!
That Fox be to the left of EIB shows that Fox, too, is a bastion of
lib'ral ee-vil!!
--
will
If my life weren't funny, it would just be true;
and that would just be
What ideological agenda? Show me.
On 8/13/07, Larry Lyons [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There's no mention of stem cells.
I see your point but still don't agree. This is not an attempt to
silence or dispute science. This has to do with setting foreign policy
and the AG does not have the last
Instead of talking like a retard, why not discuss the BBC's admitted bias?
On 8/13/07, William Bowen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
hehe. Do I want to know what EIB is?
see, you're showing your lib'ral bias!
Ev'ry good American knows that EIB is!
That Fox be to the left of EIB shows that Fox,
What ideological agenda? Show me.
At time why do I even bother.
Surely you cannot be that clueless. For once I'm astounded by the utter depth
of your cluelessness. The Mariannas trench is a mere scratch compared to your
cluelessness. You are rapidly becoming the black hole of cluelessness
Instead of talking like a retard
Little testy today are we Sam? Take a little poke at the home teams
and one flies off the handle.
I make a joke at the expense of EIB and Fox and now I am to be
pilloried because I don't address the BBC's bias?
Oh and yes, I read the article at the link. The
you are? ::blink:: if you say so. By the way, the comments at the end
of the article seem to indicate that the author is talking about the
fairly distant past. But I dunno. I don't know this author, or his
show, or that much about the BBC's inner workings for that matter. All
I know is that they
I did say you were a retard, I said you were talking like one, and
attributing it to me.
It does nothing to help the thread, if you want to participate please
do but not by mocking me.
It proves the Main Stream Media is biased to the left. Dana may play
it down now but years ago the BBC was the
you are? ::blink:: if you say so.
Oh, who can really tell...
:-P
--
will
If my life weren't funny, it would just be true;
and that would just be unacceptable.
- Carrie Fisher
~|
Get the answers you are looking for on the
Why do you? You never actually answer anything properly; you just keep
changing the subject. It is rather annoying.
On 8/13/07, Larry Lyons [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What ideological agenda? Show me.
At time why do I even bother.
Surely you cannot be that clueless. For once I'm astounded
I did say you were a retard, I said you were talking like one,
The inference was mine, then?
and attributing it to me.
I attributed nothing to you, *that* inference was *yours.*
It does nothing to help the thread, if you want to participate please
do but not by mocking me.
It proves the
I did say you were a retard, I said you were talking like one, and
attributing it to me.
It does nothing to help the thread, if you want to participate please
do but not by mocking me.
retard that's a very nasty phrase. Right up there with n***er or k*ke or other
hate speach. I used to work
For clarity I meant to type I did NOT say he was a retard, but he was
implying I was. Now that that's out of the way, are you one of those
PC morons? Woops, I just offended your entire group.
If I said he had a low IQ wouldn't that be an insult to everyone with a low IQ?
If I said he was ugly
So in your opinion this administration is wasting its money telling
kids to abstain from sex. Fine, but we're talking about Bush changing
science. The abstinence only program is in addition to the safe sex
program not instead of.
No what I'm saying is that abstinence only programs are not
Sam wrote:
How many hurricanes did we have last year?
How many run-away dump trucks drove through your house? Yet you still
have home insurance ... You must be deluded by the drive-by media.
Since nobody can prove that anything catastrophic is going to happen
your house, and since nothing
Developer
SSTWebworks
4405 Oakshyre Way
Raleigh, NC. 27616
(703) 220-2835
http://www.sstwebworks.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/sstwebworks
-Original Message-
From: Dana [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, August 10, 2007 10:38 AM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Here Comes
he seems to delight in proving that so and so is morally
reprehensible. Since I don't know or care who most of the people he is
talking about are, I find these snickering little comments pretty
irrelevant.
My position is simple. I oppose Desert Rock (a local example) because
of what it will do to
Right.
On 8/10/07, G Money [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hey I love this analogy!!!
The ultra conservative weirdos will say that you have over-hyped the size of
the truck, and that you can't even prove that it's really in our lane...and
therefore they will take NO action to get out of the way.
This discussion isn't going anywhere because none of us are even discussing
the same thing.
Sam keeps pointing out that the hysteria surrounding GW is probably trumped
up.and the rest of us pretty much agree.
Then we argue that the science seems sound and you can't deny that GW IS
occurring.
1 - 100 of 218 matches
Mail list logo
