Posts for: 4uiprnt
Oct 26, 2016 11:30:17 #
Oct 21, 2016 22:44:47 #
1947-1948 Coincidence, Internet Blarney, or, just a Joke ?
The year was 1947. Some of you will recall that on July 8, 1947, a little more than 68 years ago, numerous witnesses claim that an Unidentified Flying Object, (UFO), with five aliens aboard, crashed onto a sheep and mule ranch just outside Roswell, New Mexico.
This is a well-known incident that many say has long been covered-up by the U.S. Air Force, as well as other Federal Agencies and Organizations.
However, what you may NOT know is that in the month of April, year 1948, nine months after the historic day,the following people were born:
Barrack Obama Sr., Albert A. Gore, Jr., Hillary Rodham, William J. Clinton, John F. Kerry, Howard Dean, Nancy Pelosi, Dianne Feinstein, Charles E. Schumer, Barbara Boxer, and Joe Biden
This is the obvious consequence of aliens breeding with sheep and jack-asses. I truly hope this bit of information clears up a lot of things for you. It certainly did for me. And now you can stop wondering why THEY support the bill to help all I*****l A***ns.
The year was 1947. Some of you will recall that on July 8, 1947, a little more than 68 years ago, numerous witnesses claim that an Unidentified Flying Object, (UFO), with five aliens aboard, crashed onto a sheep and mule ranch just outside Roswell, New Mexico.
This is a well-known incident that many say has long been covered-up by the U.S. Air Force, as well as other Federal Agencies and Organizations.
However, what you may NOT know is that in the month of April, year 1948, nine months after the historic day,the following people were born:
Barrack Obama Sr., Albert A. Gore, Jr., Hillary Rodham, William J. Clinton, John F. Kerry, Howard Dean, Nancy Pelosi, Dianne Feinstein, Charles E. Schumer, Barbara Boxer, and Joe Biden
This is the obvious consequence of aliens breeding with sheep and jack-asses. I truly hope this bit of information clears up a lot of things for you. It certainly did for me. And now you can stop wondering why THEY support the bill to help all I*****l A***ns.
Oct 18, 2016 12:54:44 #
A teacher asked her 6th grade class: “Who can tell me, which human organ becomes 10 times bigger when it’s stimulated?”
Maria stood up, bright red and angry, and said “How can you ask such a question? I’m telling my parents and they’re going to get you fired!”
The teacher was shocked by the outburst, but decided to ignore it. She asked the class again, “Who can tell me, which human organ becomes 10 times bigger when it’s stimulated?”
This time Thomas responded, “The answer is the iris in the human eye.”
“Very good, Thomas. Thank you,” replied the teacher who then turned her gaze on Maria.
“Maria, I need to tell you three things. First, you obviously have not done your homework. Second, you have a dirty mind. And third, I fear that one day you will be very, very disappointed.”
Maria stood up, bright red and angry, and said “How can you ask such a question? I’m telling my parents and they’re going to get you fired!”
The teacher was shocked by the outburst, but decided to ignore it. She asked the class again, “Who can tell me, which human organ becomes 10 times bigger when it’s stimulated?”
This time Thomas responded, “The answer is the iris in the human eye.”
“Very good, Thomas. Thank you,” replied the teacher who then turned her gaze on Maria.
“Maria, I need to tell you three things. First, you obviously have not done your homework. Second, you have a dirty mind. And third, I fear that one day you will be very, very disappointed.”
Oct 14, 2016 08:57:44 #
You are one sick dude!
rgrenaderphoto wrote:
You have to post pictures, they only understand pictures.
P.S>: I am going to put this in as many Attic posts today as I can.
P.S>: I am going to put this in as many Attic posts today as I can.
Oct 13, 2016 11:41:34 #
John_F wrote:
Why is this a "final" column; sounds like an 'opening' bugle call for 'throw the buns out.'
Unfortunately, He retired.
Oct 13, 2016 10:40:12 #
This is very true. Remember this is not for or against anyone running for office right now. It is something serious to consider. And we v**ed in the very people who are doing this to us. This is about as clear and easy to understand as it can be. The article below is completely neutral, neither anti-Republican nor anti-Democrat. Charlie Reese, a retired reporter for the Orlando Sentinel, has hit the nail directly on the head, defining clearly who it is that in the final analysis must assume responsibility for the judgments made that impact each one of us every day.
545 vs. 300,000,000 People - by Charlie Reese
Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.
Have you ever wondered, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, WHY do we have deficits?
Have you ever wondered, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, WHY do we have inflation and high taxes?
You and I don't propose a federal budget. The President does.
You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to v**e on appropriations.
The House of Representatives does.
You and I don't write the tax code, Congress does.
You and I don't set fiscal policy, Congress does.
You and I don't control monetary policy; the Federal Reserve Bank does.
One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one President, and nine Supreme Court justices equates to 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.
I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress.
In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank.
I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority.
They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a President to do one cotton-picking thing. I don't care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash.
The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator's responsibility to determine how he v**es.
Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.
What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker, who stood up and criticized the President for creating deficits. The President can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it.
The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes.
Who is the speaker of the House now? He is the leader of the majority party. He and fellow House members, not the President, can approve any budget they want. If the President vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to.
It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million cannot replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts -- of incompetence and irresponsibility. I can't think of a single domestic problem that is not traceable directly to those 545 people.
When you fully grasp the plain t***h that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.
If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair.
If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red.
If the Army & Marines are in Iraq and Afghanistan it's because they want them in Iraq and Afghanistan ...
If they do not receive social security but are on an elite retirement plan not available to the people, it's because they want it that way.
There are no insoluble government problems.
Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power.
Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exists disembodied mystical forces like "the economy," "inflation," or "politics" that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.
Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible.
They, and they alone, have the power.
They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses, provided the v**ers have the gumption to manage their own employees...
We should v**e all of them out of office and clean up their mess!
545 vs. 300,000,000 People - by Charlie Reese
Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.
Have you ever wondered, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, WHY do we have deficits?
Have you ever wondered, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, WHY do we have inflation and high taxes?
You and I don't propose a federal budget. The President does.
You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to v**e on appropriations.
The House of Representatives does.
You and I don't write the tax code, Congress does.
You and I don't set fiscal policy, Congress does.
You and I don't control monetary policy; the Federal Reserve Bank does.
One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one President, and nine Supreme Court justices equates to 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.
I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress.
In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank.
I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority.
They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a President to do one cotton-picking thing. I don't care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash.
The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator's responsibility to determine how he v**es.
Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.
What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker, who stood up and criticized the President for creating deficits. The President can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it.
The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes.
Who is the speaker of the House now? He is the leader of the majority party. He and fellow House members, not the President, can approve any budget they want. If the President vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to.
It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million cannot replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts -- of incompetence and irresponsibility. I can't think of a single domestic problem that is not traceable directly to those 545 people.
When you fully grasp the plain t***h that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.
If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair.
If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red.
If the Army & Marines are in Iraq and Afghanistan it's because they want them in Iraq and Afghanistan ...
If they do not receive social security but are on an elite retirement plan not available to the people, it's because they want it that way.
There are no insoluble government problems.
Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power.
Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exists disembodied mystical forces like "the economy," "inflation," or "politics" that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.
Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible.
They, and they alone, have the power.
They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses, provided the v**ers have the gumption to manage their own employees...
We should v**e all of them out of office and clean up their mess!
Sep 28, 2016 09:52:06 #
No matter who wins in November, American people will lose
http://www.presstv.com/Detail/2016/07/29/477532/November-American-people-Donald-Trump-Hillary-Clinton-
http://www.presstv.com/Detail/2016/07/29/477532/November-American-people-Donald-Trump-Hillary-Clinton-
Sep 28, 2016 09:30:33 #
Sep 23, 2016 22:12:22 #
Sep 17, 2016 16:36:48 #
michelle-obama-unloads-crushes-donald-trump-critical-swing-state
even duct tape can't fix stupid
even duct tape can't fix stupid
Sep 11, 2016 11:07:27 #
[quote=FrankR]WHY I STILL DO:
You are my kind of guy. Thanks for reminding me how great life can be.
You are my kind of guy. Thanks for reminding me how great life can be.
Sep 8, 2016 10:34:49 #
Great site & beautiful pictures. Keep up the good work. 
Sep 6, 2016 10:59:32 #
Just something to think about before the e******n this fall:
“Two Americas"
Written and originally published by Bob Lonsberry on his own web site on 9 December 2013.
The Democrats are right, there are two Americas . The America that works and the America that doesn't. The America that contributes and the America that doesn't. It's not the haves and the have not', it's the dos and the don'ts. Some people do their duty as Americans, obey the law, support themselves, contribute to society and others don't. That's the divide in America.
It's not about income ine******y, it's about civic irresponsibility. It's about a political party that preaches hatred, greed and victimization in order to win elective office. It's about a political party that loves power more than it loves its country.
That's not invective, that's t***h, and it's about time someone said it. The politics of envy was on proud display a couple weeks ago when President Obama pledged the rest of his term to fighting "income ine******y." He noted that some people make more than other people, that some people have higher incomes than others, and he says that's not just. That is the rationale of thievery. The other guy has it, you want it, Obama will take it for you. V**e Democrat. That is the philosophy that produced Detroit .
It is the e*******l philosophy that is destroying America . It conceals a fundamental deviation from American values and common sense because it ends up not benefiting the people who support it, but a betrayal.
The Democrats have not empowered their followers, they have ens***ed them in a culture of dependence and entitlement, of victim-hood and anger instead of ability and hope. The president's premise “ that you reduce income ine******y by debasing the successful“ seeks to deny the successful the consequences of their choices and spare the unsuccessful the consequences of their choices. Because, by and large, income variations in society are a result of different choices leading to different consequences. Those who choose wisely and responsibly have a far greater likelihood of success, while those who choose foolishly and irresponsibly have a far greater likelihood of failure.
Success and failure usually manifest themselves in personal and family income. You choose to drop out of high school or to skip college â “ and you are apt to have a different outcome than someone who gets a diploma and pushes on with purposeful education. You have your children out of wedlock and life is apt to take one course; you have them within a marriage and life is apt to take another course. Most often in life our destination is determined by the course we take.
My doctor, for example, makes far more than I do. There is significant income ine******y between us. Our lives have had an ine******y of outcome, but, our lives also have had an ine******y of effort. While my doctor went to college and then dev**ed his young adulthood to medical school and residency, I got a job in a restaurant. He made a choice, I made a choice, and our choices led us to different outcomes. His outcome pays a lot better than mine. Does that mean he c***ted and Barack Obama needs to take away his wealth? No, it means we are both free men in a free society where free choices lead to different outcomes.
It is not ine******y Barack Obama intends to take away, it is freedom. The freedom to succeed, and the freedom to fail. There is no true option for success if there is no true option for failure. The pursuit of happiness means a whole lot less when you face the punitive hand of government if your pursuit brings you more happiness than the other guy. Even if the other guy sat on his arse and did nothing. Even if the other guy made a lifetime's worth of asinine and short sighted decisions.
Barack Obama and the Democrats preach e******y of outcome as a right, while completely ignoring ine******y of effort. The simple Law of the Harvest “ as ye sow, so shall ye reap“ is sometimes applied as, "The harder you work, the more you get."
Obama would turn that upside down. Those who achieve are to be punished as enemies of society and those who fail are to be rewarded as wards of society. Entitlement will replace effort as the key to upward mobility in American society if Barack Obama gets his way. He seeks a lowest common denominator society in which the government besieges the successful and productive to foster e******y through mediocrity. He and his party speak of two Americas , and their grip on power is based on using the v**es of one to sap the productivity of the other. America is not divided by the differences in our outcomes, it is divided by the differences in our efforts.
It is a false philosophy to say one man's success comes about unavoidably as the result of another man's victimization.
What Obama offered was not a solution, but a separatism. He fomented division and strife, pitted one set of Americans against another for his own political benefit. That's what socialists offer. Marxist class warfare wrapped up with a bow. Two Americas , coming closer each day to proving the t***h to Lincoln 's maxim that a house divided against itself cannot stand.
"Life is ten percent what happens to you and ninety percent how you respond to it."
“Two Americas"
Written and originally published by Bob Lonsberry on his own web site on 9 December 2013.
The Democrats are right, there are two Americas . The America that works and the America that doesn't. The America that contributes and the America that doesn't. It's not the haves and the have not', it's the dos and the don'ts. Some people do their duty as Americans, obey the law, support themselves, contribute to society and others don't. That's the divide in America.
It's not about income ine******y, it's about civic irresponsibility. It's about a political party that preaches hatred, greed and victimization in order to win elective office. It's about a political party that loves power more than it loves its country.
That's not invective, that's t***h, and it's about time someone said it. The politics of envy was on proud display a couple weeks ago when President Obama pledged the rest of his term to fighting "income ine******y." He noted that some people make more than other people, that some people have higher incomes than others, and he says that's not just. That is the rationale of thievery. The other guy has it, you want it, Obama will take it for you. V**e Democrat. That is the philosophy that produced Detroit .
It is the e*******l philosophy that is destroying America . It conceals a fundamental deviation from American values and common sense because it ends up not benefiting the people who support it, but a betrayal.
The Democrats have not empowered their followers, they have ens***ed them in a culture of dependence and entitlement, of victim-hood and anger instead of ability and hope. The president's premise “ that you reduce income ine******y by debasing the successful“ seeks to deny the successful the consequences of their choices and spare the unsuccessful the consequences of their choices. Because, by and large, income variations in society are a result of different choices leading to different consequences. Those who choose wisely and responsibly have a far greater likelihood of success, while those who choose foolishly and irresponsibly have a far greater likelihood of failure.
Success and failure usually manifest themselves in personal and family income. You choose to drop out of high school or to skip college â “ and you are apt to have a different outcome than someone who gets a diploma and pushes on with purposeful education. You have your children out of wedlock and life is apt to take one course; you have them within a marriage and life is apt to take another course. Most often in life our destination is determined by the course we take.
My doctor, for example, makes far more than I do. There is significant income ine******y between us. Our lives have had an ine******y of outcome, but, our lives also have had an ine******y of effort. While my doctor went to college and then dev**ed his young adulthood to medical school and residency, I got a job in a restaurant. He made a choice, I made a choice, and our choices led us to different outcomes. His outcome pays a lot better than mine. Does that mean he c***ted and Barack Obama needs to take away his wealth? No, it means we are both free men in a free society where free choices lead to different outcomes.
It is not ine******y Barack Obama intends to take away, it is freedom. The freedom to succeed, and the freedom to fail. There is no true option for success if there is no true option for failure. The pursuit of happiness means a whole lot less when you face the punitive hand of government if your pursuit brings you more happiness than the other guy. Even if the other guy sat on his arse and did nothing. Even if the other guy made a lifetime's worth of asinine and short sighted decisions.
Barack Obama and the Democrats preach e******y of outcome as a right, while completely ignoring ine******y of effort. The simple Law of the Harvest “ as ye sow, so shall ye reap“ is sometimes applied as, "The harder you work, the more you get."
Obama would turn that upside down. Those who achieve are to be punished as enemies of society and those who fail are to be rewarded as wards of society. Entitlement will replace effort as the key to upward mobility in American society if Barack Obama gets his way. He seeks a lowest common denominator society in which the government besieges the successful and productive to foster e******y through mediocrity. He and his party speak of two Americas , and their grip on power is based on using the v**es of one to sap the productivity of the other. America is not divided by the differences in our outcomes, it is divided by the differences in our efforts.
It is a false philosophy to say one man's success comes about unavoidably as the result of another man's victimization.
What Obama offered was not a solution, but a separatism. He fomented division and strife, pitted one set of Americans against another for his own political benefit. That's what socialists offer. Marxist class warfare wrapped up with a bow. Two Americas , coming closer each day to proving the t***h to Lincoln 's maxim that a house divided against itself cannot stand.
"Life is ten percent what happens to you and ninety percent how you respond to it."
Aug 28, 2016 12:50:12 #
papakatz45 wrote:
If you are retired and don't need it for work anymore then why still use it?
It ain't broke yet.
Aug 28, 2016 11:48:37 #
papakatz45 wrote:
But you will be ready to change your way of doing things to suit Apple?
I have been using Apple products for the last 26 years in my graphic design and printing business, I won't have to change anything.
I also use the PC for communicating with customers who don't want to change the way they do things to communicate with me.
I'm a Willow, I can bend, But I won't submit to the snoopes a Microsoft because the system I have now works just fine and when it stops working I'll just continue on with the Mac.
I retired almost exactly a year ago and see no need to replace the PC with anything when it bites the dust.