Very nice! Anytime I point a camera at a hawk around here, it takes off behind the trees.
James Parrish wrote:
Congrats, you really did it almost. I think you held it for 4 minutes.
Stop hiding behind the make up, and get a real life, with some real humor. Noticed you avoiding the Ben-d-over the speaker of the house joke!
Are we a bit sensative or did we lose what-ever humor was never there to begin with. Or, maybe your political Zipper is down and now everyone knows what we are now! LOL!
Goober, the joke wasn't about the speaker. Make one up about him and post it, and we'll read it.
Oh, and I doubt that you've actually LOL'd or told a joke in quite a long time -- too much anger, too emotionally repressed. And besides, they've done a study on the comments of people who feel the need to use "LOL" to show that what they've texted was actually funny, and it's been determined that it now stands for "Leftwing Obnoxious Loser" (you might want to keep that in mind -- if it doesn't make you angry, of course...).
I'll let the kids at the hospital know you like my makeup.
BTW, don't bother replying. Your drivel has become repetitive and, as alluded to above, obnoxious, and not worth my time reading.
James Parrish wrote:
Well, at least you look like you sound! No, I'm in my 70's and now live in my own home, NOT mom's house!
Only moved back to take care of mom until she died from Demencha.
Is that funny enough for your silly tea party impaired reality humor?
Or are you and the cool-Aid kid smoken that tea you love so much.
70 years old and all this anger -- gee, you must be a real hoot to party with...
And, BTW -- you misspelled dementia.
James Parrish wrote:
So that is Humor? Sounds like more tea party tea pee!
Oh Yeah, I see the speaker of the house is in trouble with the Tea party & the Republican Light Right. They all want to fire him, and watch him cry!
NOW THAT's Funny!
Are you laughing now Hmmmm!
I know his picture shows a gray-haired man in his 50's or 60's, but I'd swear from his ascerbic reply to a joke that he's a 20 or 30 something still living with his momma, and playing video games on a couch in the basement. Definitely humor-impaired.
larrywilk wrote:
First thing I noticed was the abbreviation for thousand -G? I was taught it was "K". Does this mean that we were wrong all these years?
As for taxation, it is reasonable to expect someone earning money to pay taxes. I do, why shouldn't they?
G for "Grand" -- originated around Al Capone's time... maybe...
The amount of truth in a post like yours is inversely proportional to the time it take for the liberal progressives on this site to reply with an ad hominem attack, misdirection, and/or obfuscation, i.e. short time -- lots of truth. The longer it takes, it's either because they're confused, or your viewpoint approaches theirs.
Absolutely awe inspiring. I get chills from the sound of the engines. Can't wait until ya'll come to Alabama again.
After 3 days of looking at snow and icy roads here in Alabama, I'm jealous. Very jealous.
silver wrote:
Sorry but I have to tailor my replies to the mentality of the people that I am responding to.
No, the fact you used ad hominem means you realize you have NO argument, NO facts, and/or NO issues. It's nothing more than an admission of failure.
silver wrote:
I wouldn't even answer such nonsense. These are not issues, they are just crap thought up by a conservative right wing nut case.
Well, it took him 2 replies, but he finally got around the liberal progressives favorite form of argumentative rebuttal when they have no substantive facts or issues -- the ad hominem attack. Usually found with the tandem attempts of misdirection and obfuscation.
georgevedwards wrote:
Glad to see someone point out some positives, I am sick and tired of people nitpicking Obama after the Bush's actions have all but guaranteed our eventual bankruptcy (trillions for wars) and the destruction of the world in general (ignorance of man made pollution and climate change). I think there is a saying somewhere about "And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?" Oh yes-Jesus: the Sermon on the Mount.
Gee, I figured this post would make it to page 2 before anyone blamed Bush for Obama's moral and socialist problems. Oh yes -- also picking and choosing from the Bible to falsely criticize the truth.
Fleckjohn65 wrote:
WOW. Pass along to the parents of the kids killed recently in the mall shootings, or the parents of the children slaughtered while "safe" at school.
Really poor taste in posting this!!!
Thank you, Canada, for replying to a post concerning buybacks in America. We'll give your opinion all the consideration it deserves.
frankeieio wrote:
You need to do a little better lfdavis. Art Robinson, both the founder of the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine and one of the authors of the deceptive study you linked your second reference to may have at one time (a very long time ago) made some earnest contributions to his field of study, biochemistry, but after Linus Paulus decided to be rid of him in 1978, and certainly at the moment now, his work and methodologies are considered way out on the fringes, if not complete pseudo science.
I, should probably allow that don't need to keep "reading" because I have read ALL the papers and work published at the Heritage Foundation concerning global warming and from carefully reading those papers, I've found no compelling argument (that can be supported by evidence) that negates the prevailing assertions made by the climate science community concerning current man made global warming as a whole.
You need to do a little better lfdavis. Art Robin... (
show quote)
I'll just quit -- you're obviously TOO SMART to be fooled into thinking global warming is a liberal progressive construct designed to funnel money and power into their own coffers.
Oh, BTW, that whistling sound you hear is your integrity being forced out of your body by your over-inflated ego...
frankeieio wrote:
It is interesting that you bring up this article lfdavis. I have used it several times to illustrate how those, in this case James Taylor, would misconstrue scientific study to arrive at an ends.
Keep reading...
http://www.aproundtable.org/tps30info/globalwarmup.html
http://www.petitionproject.org/index.php
Gnslngr wrote:
I have educated myself, Sparky. Do a little reading yourself, if those old eyes still work.
Happy riding.
Here's some more reading for you, if you're open-minded enough to consider the other side of the argument.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2013/02/13/peer-reviewed-survey-finds-majority-of-scientists-skeptical-of-global-warming-crisis/