ROCKS OFF - The Rolling Stones Message Board

PartyDoll MEG

Rocks Off Regular

Offline

Just one drink from your
lovin' cup

Posts: 3,127

Re: Obama elected President
Reply #7325 - Sep 14^th, 2009 at 7:53pm

texile wrote on Sep 14^th, 2009 at 7:02pm:

I attended a townhall meeting here in my city and the primary question from the one-sided crowd was whether 'illegals' would get health care, and one lady stood up and said, and i quote, 'can you guarantee that i will have a Christian doctor? because i don't want some Muslim man between me and the sheets...'
that's the temperament of these people.
I know people who oppose Obama on issues, but the ones out there with their socialist-fear-mongering signs are fucking nuts.
They are not a cross-section of the American public - because if that were so, it would be truly terrifying.

I find that video terrifying, texile. (Thanks, Pdog)

Is this man nuts or is he brave...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Q7XH8lfGMc&feature=related

Back to top

« Last Edit: Sep 14^th, 2009 at 8:03pm by PartyDoll MEG »

IP Logged

Pdog

Rocks Off Regular

Offline

Posts: 6,130
aTx
Gender: male

Re: Obama elected President
Reply #7326 - Sep 14^th, 2009 at 7:55pm

Riffhard wrote on Sep 14^th, 2009 at 6:14pm:

Pdog wrote on Sep 14^th, 2009 at 6:06pm:

so where's the diverse cross section?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UASS1qFAIQ8

Gee imagine that! A a person that titles the video with the words "Tea baggers" shows true objective reporting! LOL! Try again Pdog. Shall I dig out the images of liberal freak burning Bush in effigy? How about the images of the freakish left carrying signs calling our troops murderers. Would that be a fair representation of all anti war activists?

Riffy

Definitely crazies on both sides. The problem is that the GOP is embracing their lunatics, even encouraging them, not denouncing and marginalizing them as they should. There won't be anything left of the GOP but crazy white southern christians if they keep alienating and embarrassing what's left of intellectual conservatives.

Back to top

IP Logged

Pdog

Rocks Off Regular

Offline

Posts: 6,130
aTx
Gender: male

Re: Obama elected President
Reply #7327 - Sep 14^th, 2009 at 8:01pm

Riffhard wrote on Sep 14^th, 2009 at 6:25pm:

fuman wrote on Sep 14^th, 2009 at 6:13pm:

Pdog wrote on Sep 14^th, 2009 at 5:42pm:

Riffy still owes me a C-note on the WMD's...

I thought I read that in an earlier post. Well, I'm sure he'll pay up, being all integritious and so on, too. People here know him, I've heard.

Personally, the thought of prostitution slavery makes me sick. So if this pans out the way riffi is most certainly hoping, then they should do time. I have no doubt Holder will look into this.

Wasn't Delay pretty close to some prostitution slavery in the Marianas Islands? Forced abortions too. Not that he personally committed any crime. He an evangelical christian, pure as the driven snow.

And wasn't Murkowski the corrupt AK Gov that Palin replaced?

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/05/09/real.delay/

Pdog is lying, fucknut!! He's either lying or has me mistaken for someone else. I guess because he, for some unknown reason, has been duped like you into believing Barry that he must be telling the truth. Well like Joe Wilson so rightly pointed out about Barry, he's lying.

Oh, what? You thought that Wilson was lying about Obama lying? You're wrong. Again.

Here's just a blurb from the linked article, but I'm sure even you are smart enough to figure it out. Or, like so many leftards you can just spin Barry's lies to suit your own particular brand of blinders-on dronism.

"The Congressional Research Service, the legislative branch's research arm, took a close look at H.R. 3200 in a report dated August 25. It concludes that the bill's individual mandate to have health insurance (with tax penalties for non-compliance) would apply to legal residents and illegal aliens alike."

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/09/10/taking_liberties/entry5301652.shtml

Riffy

not a liar... and not going to buy into your name calling... you've made a ton of promises, guarentees and wagers... of course you don't actually owe me money... if you think that's what is really going on... so, I'm a liar b/c of what? you never said WMD's existed and promised they'd be found? You didn't make gentelmen bets?
Are you capable of civil debate or are you enjoying acting like the people in the video form 9-12 in DC... What next, you claim I'm a Nazi? You never liked being called one yourself. Why do you call me names then? Your intent is clear, the word is just your tool...

Back to top

IP Logged

Pdog

Rocks Off Regular

Offline

Posts: 6,130
aTx
Gender: male

Re: Obama elected President
Reply #7328 - Sep 14^th, 2009 at 8:03pm

fuman wrote on Sep 14^th, 2009 at 6:31pm:

Riffhard wrote on Sep 14^th, 2009 at 6:30pm:

fuman wrote on Sep 14^th, 2009 at 6:20pm:

Riffhard wrote on Sep 14^th, 2009 at 6:18pm:

Pdog wrote on Sep 14^th, 2009 at 6:11pm:

fuman wrote on Sep 14^th, 2009 at 4:32pm:

Riffhard wrote on Sep 14^th, 2009 at 4:16pm:

fuman wrote on Sep 14^th, 2009 at 3:56pm:

Do you honestly believe anybody here trusts your integrity enough to place a wager with you?

Puhleez

Are you questioning my integrity funman?!?!?!!!!! You don't even fucking know me son! You're damned straight I have integrity! Most people on this forum know my real name, and where I work! However, you raise an interesting point. I don't trust you much as I don't even know who you are. So in this case why not a gentleman's bet? Sound good to you?

Here's the bet. I'll bet that Eric Holder will not call for a special prosecutor, or seek any legal action on his on with regards to ACORN. What say you?

Riffy

What makes you think that I consider you a gentleman? Get real.
Most people knowing your name and your workplace proves what?

I would hope that an investigation will occur, if there is cause.
You're ready to prosecute?

If you were Riffy this would a be a good time to change the subject... let's talk about all the Republican sex scandals this year...

WTF is that supposed to mean Pdog? Want to back up your allegations? Or are you just going to play the same old time worn tactics of the left? I mean it's obvious that the only people that oppose Barry are either redneck Bible thumpers or racists! Right? Pathetic!

You'd be wise to take a good hard look at Barry's approval numbers. He's sinking like a rock. In fact that's a great new nick name for Barry. Barack the Sinking Rock.

Riffy

Actually, they're going back up.

Oh yeah! He's just killing it funman!

Riffy

Notice how it's moving up?

up and over 50%... maybe people just realized he outlasted Bush in keeping us safe!!!

Back to top

IP Logged

fuman

Ex Member

Rocks Off Rules You Bastards

Gender: male

Re: Obama elected President
Reply #7329 - Sep 14^th, 2009 at 8:29pm

Riffhard wrote on Sep 14^th, 2009 at 6:47pm:

fuman wrote on Sep 14^th, 2009 at 6:33pm:

Did you call me fucknut?

That's so mean . . .

Did you claim that I was lying? Did you imply that I was no gentleman and might welch on a bet?

By the way you should know that Joe Wilson is well read on the bill that the Dems are trying to pass. More well read than any of the liberals on this site that's for damned sure. He has stated that not only is there no enforcement mechanism, but that the amendment to the bill that would prevent illegals from getting health care was shot down by Pelosi and her henchmen. Why would they do that? Likewise an amendment that would prevent tax payer funded abortions was also shot down. Again, why would Democrats do that? Wilson was telling the truth! Obama was lying.

Oh, and as for the poll numbers. You may want to take a look a that graph again. The trend is what is going down, and it has been since the coronation of Barack. It will continue to go down because Barack is doing everything in his power to destroy capitalism and the free market.

He's a one term chump, and once 2010 gets here he's a lame duck.

Riffy

I did write those words. You don't notice any difference?

I certainly believe that Rep Wilson has read more of the bill than me, but that doesn't explain the lapse of decorum (his bad etiquette) (his poor manners in the chamber). That was a political stunt. Anyway, it's all done now. The millions of voting hispanics have seen what they need to know. Apology accepted, next.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Sep 14^th, 2009 at 8:49pm by fuman »

IP Logged

Pdog Rocks Off Regular Offline Posts: 6,130 aTx Gender:	Re: Obama elected President Reply #7330 - Sep 15^th, 2009 at 7:00am notice how Riffy will still bitch about being called a nazi years ago... still bitch about anti-war protestors... yet it is ok for him to call me names and he thinks the actions of the 9-12 marchers are tasteful and not unpatriotic... anyone seeing a theme and pattern here?
Back to top	IP Logged

lotsajizz Rocks Off Regular Offline Rocks Off Rules You Bastards Posts: 1,818 Rhode Island Gender:	Re: Obama elected President Reply #7331 - Sep 15^th, 2009 at 8:11am The bushgeeks immediately hit with the 'ad hominem' attacks and spurrious allegations when they are disagreed with. The past record of posts shows how it always starts with all who the geeks are in a pissing contest. God forbid they called on it!
Back to top	"He who makes a beast of himself gets rid of the pain of being a man." Dr. Johnson. IP Logged

fuman

Ex Member

Rocks Off Rules You Bastards

Gender: male

Re: Obama elected President
Reply #7332 - Sep 15^th, 2009 at 8:29am

fuman wrote on Sep 14^th, 2009 at 6:18pm:

Riffhard wrote on Sep 14^th, 2009 at 6:14pm:

Pdog wrote on Sep 14^th, 2009 at 6:06pm:

so where's the diverse cross section?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UASS1qFAIQ8

Gee imagine that! A a person that titles the video with the words "Tea baggers" shows true objective reporting! LOL! Try again Pdog. Shall I dig out the images of liberal freak burning Bush in effigy? How about the images of the freakish left carrying signs calling our troops murderers. Would that be a fair representation of all anti war activists?

Riffy

That's a fair critique.

Got any links to show a contrasting side?

I'd like to see 30-40 thousand liberals burning W in effigy, that would be a fairer comparison. Don't you agree?

I didn't think there would be any follow ups regarding the "diversity" of ethnic attendees, but last night I saw a bit of O'Reilly and HE was questioning whether or not this "almost exclusively white" crowd was a problem for the movement. A ground up movement, or as I would call it, a bowel movement.

Of course his guest said "no", because the diversity was in the "real American" concerns of big government taking over their lives.

Real Americans? Now that sounds like something Hitler would have said, substituting Germany of course.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Sep 15^th, 2009 at 8:30am by fuman »

IP Logged

fuman

Ex Member

Rocks Off Rules You Bastards

Gender: male

Re: Obama elected President
Reply #7333 - Sep 15^th, 2009 at 8:39am

I thought this was pretty funny:

From TPM:
Glenn Beck: Tea Party March Had 1.7 Million People!

Glenn Beck appeared this morning on Fox & Friends, where he insisted that the the Tea Party march on Washington attracted 1.7 million people. This is more than twice what even the organizers of the event say it was, with the FreedomWorks estimate yesterday being between 600,000 and 800,000.

Beck cited a university study of the crowd -- though he's not sure which university: "We had a university, I think it's University of -- I don't remember which university it is -- um, look at the pictures. And you know, they can do body space and calculate -- 1.7 million, that crowd was estimated."
********************************************************************************
****
Pete Piringer, public affairs officer for the D.C. Fire and Emergency Department:

There's another big problem with the photograph: it doesn't include the National Museum of the American Indian, a building located at the corner of Fourth St. and Independence Ave. that opened on Sept. 14, 2004. (Looking at the photograph, the building should be in the upper right hand corner of the National Mall, next to the Air and Space Museum.) That means the picture was taken before the museum opened exactly five years ago. So clearly the photo doesn't show the "tea party" crowd from the Sept. 12 protest.

Back to top

original.jpg (Attachment deleted)

IP Logged

Jesus Christ

Rocks Off Regular

Offline

Let he who is without
sin cast the first stone.

Posts: 525
Heaven
Gender: male

Re: Obama elected President
Reply #7334 - Sep 15^th, 2009 at 9:58am

Pdog wrote on Sep 15^th, 2009 at 7:00am:

notice how Riffy ... thinks the actions of the 9-12 marchers are tasteful and not unpatriotic... anyone seeing a theme and pattern here?

I got me a big ol' set of Glenn Beck-approved
9-12 truck nutz at the big "I got mine screw
everyone else" rally. They are tasteful - in fact
they are strawberry flavored.

They taste like...VICTORY.

Back to top

&&&&"Hey, JC go fuck yourself you little bitch!" - Riffhard&&&&"...Jesus was...a tranny. " - Nankerphelge&&&&&&&&

IP Logged

Riffhard

Rocks Off Regular

Offline

Rocks Off Rules You Bastards

Posts: 1,940
Gender: male

Re: Obama elected President
Reply #7335 - Sep 15^th, 2009 at 10:14am

fuman wrote on Sep 15^th, 2009 at 8:39am:

I thought this was pretty funny:

From TPM:
Glenn Beck: Tea Party March Had 1.7 Million People!

Glenn Beck appeared this morning on Fox & Friends, where he insisted that the the Tea Party march on Washington attracted 1.7 million people. This is more than twice what even the organizers of the event say it was, with the FreedomWorks estimate yesterday being between 600,000 and 800,000.

Beck cited a university study of the crowd -- though he's not sure which university: "We had a university, I think it's University of -- I don't remember which university it is -- um, look at the pictures. And you know, they can do body space and calculate -- 1.7 million, that crowd was estimated."
********************************************************************************
****
Pete Piringer, public affairs officer for the D.C. Fire and Emergency Department:

There's another big problem with the photograph: it doesn't include the National Museum of the American Indian, a building located at the corner of Fourth St. and Independence Ave. that opened on Sept. 14, 2004. (Looking at the photograph, the building should be in the upper right hand corner of the National Mall, next to the Air and Space Museum.) That means the picture was taken before the museum opened exactly five years ago. So clearly the photo doesn't show the "tea party" crowd from the Sept. 12 protest.

LOL! Now that's funny as hell! Some kook is claiming that the numbers are being made up!!! ROTFLMMFAO!!!

Let's have a look at some photos that are from the event, and then this lying sack of shit can comment on them, Okay? Sound good to everyone here?

Okay, great, here we go..

Here is a picture from a security cam taken on September 12th 2009.

Now let's take a good hard look at a picture of graph that shows how DC police estimate crowd size. This is from USA Today during the "Coronation" of Barry.

So far so good.

Now let's take a look at all those "rednecks and Bible thumpers".

Here's a few more of the "racists"!

Oh, and one more. Just to prove to everyone here that is buying into this guy that you linked to is lying through his teeth, let's have a look at the time lapsed footage of the event on Saturday.

Here you go

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_sjvc6baor8&feature=player_embedded

I truly hope that you guys and the idiot pundits on the left continue to ignore these every day real Americans! I must say that having looked at the photos, and talked to my cousins who are from Alexandria, Va. (and were at the event), that yes, the crowd was probably closer to 1.5 million people. Funny how the only ones trying to actually deny that fact are left wing bloggers, and pundits. And gee, you can imagine my shock when I discover that the Obamadrones only believe what they are told by their puppet masters.

Riffy

Back to top

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&"When all government...in little as in great things, shall be drawn to Washington as the center of all power, it will render powerless the checks provided...” Thomas Jefferson&&&&"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have. The course of history shows us that as a government grows, liberty decreases." — Thomas Jefferson&&&&&&&&We're not old men.We don't bother about petty morals--Keef&&&&Actually, it only takes one drink to get me loaded. Trouble is, I can't remember if it's the thirteenth or fourteenth. &&-- George Burns&&&&&&I ain't no leftist!-Bob Dylan&&&&"In the beginning of a change, the patriot is a brave and scarce

IP Logged

Riffhard

Rocks Off Regular

Offline

Rocks Off Rules You Bastards

Posts: 1,940
Gender: male

Re: Obama elected President
Reply #7336 - Sep 15^th, 2009 at 10:20am

Pdog you are now lying!! I would challenge you to produce one single post where I made a monetary bet with you concerning WMDs inside Iraq. I'd also like to see you produce a post from me claiming that Iraq would be a free democratic country sans any problems withing five years of the attack on Baghdad.

Produce those posts or shut the hell up and apologize!!! I never once made any such bet with you, and I know god damned good and well that you will not be able to prove I did!

Look you want civility? Fine. I can do civil, but when you flat out lie about me, oor claim that I would welch on a bet you can forget it! I never made that god damned bet! Prove it!

Riffy

Back to top

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&"When all government...in little as in great things, shall be drawn to Washington as the center of all power, it will render powerless the checks provided...” Thomas Jefferson&&&&"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have. The course of history shows us that as a government grows, liberty decreases." — Thomas Jefferson&&&&&&&&We're not old men.We don't bother about petty morals--Keef&&&&Actually, it only takes one drink to get me loaded. Trouble is, I can't remember if it's the thirteenth or fourteenth. &&-- George Burns&&&&&&I ain't no leftist!-Bob Dylan&&&&"In the beginning of a change, the patriot is a brave and scarce

IP Logged

Riffhard

Rocks Off Regular

Offline

Rocks Off Rules You Bastards

Posts: 1,940
Gender: male

Re: Obama elected President
Reply #7337 - Sep 15^th, 2009 at 10:38am

fuman wrote on Sep 14^th, 2009 at 8:29pm:

Riffhard wrote on Sep 14^th, 2009 at 6:47pm:

fuman wrote on Sep 14^th, 2009 at 6:33pm:

Did you call me fucknut?

That's so mean . . .

Did you claim that I was lying? Did you imply that I was no gentleman and might welch on a bet?

By the way you should know that Joe Wilson is well read on the bill that the Dems are trying to pass. More well read than any of the liberals on this site that's for damned sure. He has stated that not only is there no enforcement mechanism, but that the amendment to the bill that would prevent illegals from getting health care was shot down by Pelosi and her henchmen. Why would they do that? Likewise an amendment that would prevent tax payer funded abortions was also shot down. Again, why would Democrats do that? Wilson was telling the truth! Obama was lying.

Oh, and as for the poll numbers. You may want to take a look a that graph again. The trend is what is going down, and it has been since the coronation of Barack. It will continue to go down because Barack is doing everything in his power to destroy capitalism and the free market.

He's a one term chump, and once 2010 gets here he's a lame duck.

Riffy

I did write those words. You don't notice any difference?

I certainly believe that Rep Wilson has read more of the bill than me, but that doesn't explain the lapse of decorum (his bad etiquette) (his poor manners in the chamber). That was a political stunt. Anyway, it's all done now. The millions of voting hispanics have seen what they need to know. Apology accepted, next.

A couple of things here. Firstly, you claim that there is a big difference in my words and yours. Oh really? Well son, let me set you straight here. I'm a firm believer that if you call someone a cheat you'd better be damned sure ready to prove it. You alleged that I was a cheater that would not pay on a bet that I had lost on. That's not true. We're waiting for Pdog to produce the post where I made a 100 dollar bet with him. He won't be able to produce that post because it doesn't exist. See, Pdog and you have called me a cheater. Where I come from that is about the lowest thing you can say about someone. So your words were every bit as inflammatory as mine. More so to me in fact. You can call me a fucknut, fucktard, or an asshole all you want, I could care less. Everyone on this board knows that that is just hyperbolic name calling. I do it all the time admittedly! But when you make the claim of someone being a cheat you're telling the whole RO community that I can't be trusted to keep my word, or make good on a bet. That's way over the line! It's just about as bad as having a screaming pussified hissy fit and calling everyone that you had known for years on-line a Nazi.

Secondly, what is it about liberals that they always like to group people? You claim that a whole bunch of "Hispanics" saw all they needed to see with Joe Wilson. What exactly does that mean? You are aware that the vast majority of Hispanics that are legal citizens don't want open boarders and nationalized health care to cover illegal immigrants, right? I mean surely you do KNOW that, right?

By saying that "Hispanics saw all they needed to, and there are a lot of votes there", you are making the point perfectly about the claims on the right! You are saying that your party is willing to look the other way with regards to illegal status.

You want civility? Then don't lie about my integrity. Call me all the names you want, but don't say that I'm a cheat. Because anyone that knows me knows that that is absurd in the extreme.

Riffy

Back to top

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&"When all government...in little as in great things, shall be drawn to Washington as the center of all power, it will render powerless the checks provided...” Thomas Jefferson&&&&"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have. The course of history shows us that as a government grows, liberty decreases." — Thomas Jefferson&&&&&&&&We're not old men.We don't bother about petty morals--Keef&&&&Actually, it only takes one drink to get me loaded. Trouble is, I can't remember if it's the thirteenth or fourteenth. &&-- George Burns&&&&&&I ain't no leftist!-Bob Dylan&&&&"In the beginning of a change, the patriot is a brave and scarce

IP Logged

Jesus Christ

Rocks Off Regular

Offline

Let he who is without
sin cast the first stone.

Posts: 525
Heaven
Gender: male

Re: Obama elected President
Reply #7338 - Sep 15^th, 2009 at 11:31am

Riffhard wrote on Sep 15^th, 2009 at 10:14am:

[LOL! Now that's funny as hell! Some kook is claiming that the numbers are being made up!!! ROTFLMMFAO!!!

I truly hope that you guys and the idiot pundits on the left continue to ignore these every day real Americans! I must say that having looked at the photos, and talked to my cousins who are from Alexandria, Va. (and were at the event), that yes, the crowd was probably closer to 1.5 million people. Funny how the only ones trying to actually deny that fact are left wing bloggers, and pundits.

Riffy

Is the kook you're talking about Pete Piringer, public affairs officer for the D.C. Fire and Emergency Department? His oft-quoted estimate was off-the-record and shouldn't be taken as gospel, so please stop dissing our brave first responders.

Or is it Bill O'Reilly, who called the rally "predominantly white" (that one photo of two African Americans out of a crowd estimated in the millions notwithstanding)?

Or were the damned lying kooks members of the two groups that sponsored the event? They offered more modest but widely varying numbers. Pete Sepp, a National Taxpayers Union spokesman, said the group estimated the crowd at 75,000 in the morning and from 200,000 and 300,000 as the day went on. FreedomWorks spokesman Adam Brandon put his "conservative" estimate at 600,000 to 800,000 after comparing photographs of Saturday's protest with previous events.

Although no official crowd estimates were issued, local officials and an expert indicated the number was more likely under 100,000, still a sizable turnout.

Was it Farouk El-Baz, a Boston University research professor and expert on crowd estimation, who said that his informal research from press coverage indicated 75,000 as the peak number? (Of course his highly un-American name makes his estimate suspect no matter what his job is.)

Surely it couldn't have been Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority spokesman Steven Taubenkibel, who said Saturday that ridership figures indicated an extra 87,000 people took the subway all day, a significant increase over the 350,000 average.

from the LA Times:

Confusion and anger over crowd estimates are as much a part of Washington as its marble monuments. Organizers of the Million Man March in 1995 threatened to sue the National Park Service over its crowd estimate of 400,000, when their own number was 1.5 million to 2 million.

Boston University's Center for Remote Sensing estimated the Million Man March crowd at 837,214, with a 20% margin of error. The center, headed by El-Baz, used aerial photographs provided by the Park Service to do a computer analysis of the turnout.

Afterward, Congress directed the agency not to produce estimates.

"We do not give crowd estimates for any event, any time, whatsoever, period," said National Park Service spokesman Bill Line.

El-Baz said the only accurate way to measure attendance is by counting heads in a photograph taken from an airplane or satellite, an expensive undertaking. No such photo was taken Saturday, to El-Baz's knowledge. Airspace over the National Mall is restricted.

"There is just no way for anybody [on the ground] to estimate the crowds," El-Baz said of people trying to do rough counts. "Most of these [other] numbers are not even in the ballpark."

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-crowd15-2009sep15,0,1062512...

Back to top

&&&&"Hey, JC go fuck yourself you little bitch!" - Riffhard&&&&"...Jesus was...a tranny. " - Nankerphelge&&&&&&&&

IP Logged

fuman

Ex Member

Rocks Off Rules You Bastards

Gender: male

Re: Obama elected President
Reply #7339 - Sep 15^th, 2009 at 11:39am

Riffhard wrote on Sep 15^th, 2009 at 10:38am:

fuman wrote on Sep 14^th, 2009 at 8:29pm:

Riffhard wrote on Sep 14^th, 2009 at 6:47pm:

fuman wrote on Sep 14^th, 2009 at 6:33pm:

Did you call me fucknut?

That's so mean . . .

Did you claim that I was lying? Did you imply that I was no gentleman and might welch on a bet?

By the way you should know that Joe Wilson is well read on the bill that the Dems are trying to pass. More well read than any of the liberals on this site that's for damned sure. He has stated that not only is there no enforcement mechanism, but that the amendment to the bill that would prevent illegals from getting health care was shot down by Pelosi and her henchmen. Why would they do that? Likewise an amendment that would prevent tax payer funded abortions was also shot down. Again, why would Democrats do that? Wilson was telling the truth! Obama was lying.

Oh, and as for the poll numbers. You may want to take a look a that graph again. The trend is what is going down, and it has been since the coronation of Barack. It will continue to go down because Barack is doing everything in his power to destroy capitalism and the free market.

He's a one term chump, and once 2010 gets here he's a lame duck.

Riffy

I did write those words. You don't notice any difference?

I certainly believe that Rep Wilson has read more of the bill than me, but that doesn't explain the lapse of decorum (his bad etiquette) (his poor manners in the chamber). That was a political stunt. Anyway, it's all done now. The millions of voting hispanics have seen what they need to know. Apology accepted, next.

A couple of things here. Firstly, you claim that there is a big difference in my words and yours. Oh really? Well son, let me set you straight here. I'm a firm believer that if you call someone a cheat you'd better be damned sure ready to prove it. You alleged that I was a cheater that would not pay on a bet that I had lost on. That's not true. We're waiting for Pdog to produce the post where I made a 100 dollar bet with him. He won't be able to produce that post because it doesn't exist. See, Pdog and you have called me a cheater. Where I come from that is about the lowest thing you can say about someone. So your words were every bit as inflammatory as mine. More so to me in fact. You can call me a fucknut, fucktard, or an asshole all you want, I could care less. Everyone on this board knows that that is just hyperbolic name calling. I do it all the time admittedly! But when you make the claim of someone being a cheat you're telling the whole RO community that I can't be trusted to keep my word, or make good on a bet. That's way over the line! It's just about as bad as having a screaming pussified hissy fit and calling everyone that you had known for years on-line a Nazi.

Secondly, what is it about liberals that they always like to group people? You claim that a whole bunch of "Hispanics" saw all they needed to see with Joe Wilson. What exactly does that mean? You are aware that the vast majority of Hispanics that are legal citizens don't want open boarders and nationalized health care to cover illegal immigrants, right? I mean surely you do KNOW that, right?

By saying that "Hispanics saw all they needed to, and there are a lot of votes there", you are making the point perfectly about the claims on the right! You are saying that your party is willing to look the other way with regards to illegal status.

You want civility? Then don't lie about my integrity. Call me all the names you want, but don't say that I'm a cheat. Because anyone that knows me knows that that is absurd in the extreme.

Riffy

This is classic:

"Secondly, what is it about liberals that they always like to group people?"

Back to top

IP Logged

Riffhard

Rocks Off Regular

Offline

Rocks Off Rules You Bastards

Posts: 1,940
Gender: male

Re: Obama elected President
Reply #7340 - Sep 15^th, 2009 at 12:14pm

fuman wrote on Sep 15^th, 2009 at 11:39am:

Riffhard wrote on Sep 15^th, 2009 at 10:38am:

fuman wrote on Sep 14^th, 2009 at 8:29pm:

Riffhard wrote on Sep 14^th, 2009 at 6:47pm:

fuman wrote on Sep 14^th, 2009 at 6:33pm:

Did you call me fucknut?

That's so mean . . .

Did you claim that I was lying? Did you imply that I was no gentleman and might welch on a bet?

By the way you should know that Joe Wilson is well read on the bill that the Dems are trying to pass. More well read than any of the liberals on this site that's for damned sure. He has stated that not only is there no enforcement mechanism, but that the amendment to the bill that would prevent illegals from getting health care was shot down by Pelosi and her henchmen. Why would they do that? Likewise an amendment that would prevent tax payer funded abortions was also shot down. Again, why would Democrats do that? Wilson was telling the truth! Obama was lying.

Oh, and as for the poll numbers. You may want to take a look a that graph again. The trend is what is going down, and it has been since the coronation of Barack. It will continue to go down because Barack is doing everything in his power to destroy capitalism and the free market.

He's a one term chump, and once 2010 gets here he's a lame duck.

Riffy

I did write those words. You don't notice any difference?

I certainly believe that Rep Wilson has read more of the bill than me, but that doesn't explain the lapse of decorum (his bad etiquette) (his poor manners in the chamber). That was a political stunt. Anyway, it's all done now. The millions of voting hispanics have seen what they need to know. Apology accepted, next.

A couple of things here. Firstly, you claim that there is a big difference in my words and yours. Oh really? Well son, let me set you straight here. I'm a firm believer that if you call someone a cheat you'd better be damned sure ready to prove it. You alleged that I was a cheater that would not pay on a bet that I had lost on. That's not true. We're waiting for Pdog to produce the post where I made a 100 dollar bet with him. He won't be able to produce that post because it doesn't exist. See, Pdog and you have called me a cheater. Where I come from that is about the lowest thing you can say about someone. So your words were every bit as inflammatory as mine. More so to me in fact. You can call me a fucknut, fucktard, or an asshole all you want, I could care less. Everyone on this board knows that that is just hyperbolic name calling. I do it all the time admittedly! But when you make the claim of someone being a cheat you're telling the whole RO community that I can't be trusted to keep my word, or make good on a bet. That's way over the line! It's just about as bad as having a screaming pussified hissy fit and calling everyone that you had known for years on-line a Nazi.

Secondly, what is it about liberals that they always like to group people? You claim that a whole bunch of "Hispanics" saw all they needed to see with Joe Wilson. What exactly does that mean? You are aware that the vast majority of Hispanics that are legal citizens don't want open boarders and nationalized health care to cover illegal immigrants, right? I mean surely you do KNOW that, right?

By saying that "Hispanics saw all they needed to, and there are a lot of votes there", you are making the point perfectly about the claims on the right! You are saying that your party is willing to look the other way with regards to illegal status.

You want civility? Then don't lie about my integrity. Call me all the names you want, but don't say that I'm a cheat. Because anyone that knows me knows that that is absurd in the extreme.

Riffy

This is classic:

"Secondly, what is it about liberals that they always like to group people?"

You're right! It is classic because it's true! You guys always group people. To liberals everyone is a member of a certain group. Gay, Lesbian, African American, Hispanic, Native American, the one group that liberals never embrace is just plain Americans. Not "white " Americans! Americans period! Black, white, yellow, red, whatever.

See, a good example of this collective liberal group-think is the reaction towards the 1.5 million people that marched on DC this past Saturday. Liberals must group them! They have to group them! That's how liberals think. The people that marched on DC could be nothing more than lilly white redneck Bible thumpers! That's the way liberals look at the world. They can't just see 1.5 million people, and reflect upon the reason why so many people, from every single state in the nation, would converge on DC. It must be some crazy redneck lilly white Bible thumper thing. That's the liberal mind set. Strange, but true.

Riffy

Back to top

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&"When all government...in little as in great things, shall be drawn to Washington as the center of all power, it will render powerless the checks provided...” Thomas Jefferson&&&&"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have. The course of history shows us that as a government grows, liberty decreases." — Thomas Jefferson&&&&&&&&We're not old men.We don't bother about petty morals--Keef&&&&Actually, it only takes one drink to get me loaded. Trouble is, I can't remember if it's the thirteenth or fourteenth. &&-- George Burns&&&&&&I ain't no leftist!-Bob Dylan&&&&"In the beginning of a change, the patriot is a brave and scarce

IP Logged

Starbuck

Rocks Off Regular

Offline

Postito, Ergo Sum.

Posts: 4,708
Minneapolis, MN
Gender: male

Re: Obama elected President
Reply #7341 - Sep 15^th, 2009 at 12:16pm

riffy is clearly upset. perhaps because justin morneau is out for the remainder of the season?

Back to top

"Why would any sane person want to leave Rocks Off? If you have an issue outside of Rocks Off, handle it. When you return it will be as if you never have left. Once you are here-it's expected you stay. Why waste long cultivated posting skills somewhere else? The outside world will not understand." -Nellie

“You assclowns are destroying this nation.” –Riffy

"You can lead a horse to the facts, but you can't make the horse understand the facts if he's a dumbfuck horse stuck on stupid." - Riffy

Posts: 66936 | Registered: Dec 2002

IP Logged

fuman

Ex Member

Rocks Off Rules You Bastards

Gender: male

Re: Obama elected President
Reply #7342 - Sep 15^th, 2009 at 12:20pm

Riffhard wrote on Sep 15^th, 2009 at 12:14pm:

fuman wrote on Sep 15^th, 2009 at 11:39am:

Riffhard wrote on Sep 15^th, 2009 at 10:38am:

fuman wrote on Sep 14^th, 2009 at 8:29pm:

Riffhard wrote on Sep 14^th, 2009 at 6:47pm:

fuman wrote on Sep 14^th, 2009 at 6:33pm:

Did you call me fucknut?

That's so mean . . .

Did you claim that I was lying? Did you imply that I was no gentleman and might welch on a bet?

By the way you should know that Joe Wilson is well read on the bill that the Dems are trying to pass. More well read than any of the liberals on this site that's for damned sure. He has stated that not only is there no enforcement mechanism, but that the amendment to the bill that would prevent illegals from getting health care was shot down by Pelosi and her henchmen. Why would they do that? Likewise an amendment that would prevent tax payer funded abortions was also shot down. Again, why would Democrats do that? Wilson was telling the truth! Obama was lying.

Oh, and as for the poll numbers. You may want to take a look a that graph again. The trend is what is going down, and it has been since the coronation of Barack. It will continue to go down because Barack is doing everything in his power to destroy capitalism and the free market.

He's a one term chump, and once 2010 gets here he's a lame duck.

Riffy

I did write those words. You don't notice any difference?

I certainly believe that Rep Wilson has read more of the bill than me, but that doesn't explain the lapse of decorum (his bad etiquette) (his poor manners in the chamber). That was a political stunt. Anyway, it's all done now. The millions of voting hispanics have seen what they need to know. Apology accepted, next.

A couple of things here. Firstly, you claim that there is a big difference in my words and yours. Oh really? Well son, let me set you straight here. I'm a firm believer that if you call someone a cheat you'd better be damned sure ready to prove it. You alleged that I was a cheater that would not pay on a bet that I had lost on. That's not true. We're waiting for Pdog to produce the post where I made a 100 dollar bet with him. He won't be able to produce that post because it doesn't exist. See, Pdog and you have called me a cheater. Where I come from that is about the lowest thing you can say about someone. So your words were every bit as inflammatory as mine. More so to me in fact. You can call me a fucknut, fucktard, or an asshole all you want, I could care less. Everyone on this board knows that that is just hyperbolic name calling. I do it all the time admittedly! But when you make the claim of someone being a cheat you're telling the whole RO community that I can't be trusted to keep my word, or make good on a bet. That's way over the line! It's just about as bad as having a screaming pussified hissy fit and calling everyone that you had known for years on-line a Nazi.

Secondly, what is it about liberals that they always like to group people? You claim that a whole bunch of "Hispanics" saw all they needed to see with Joe Wilson. What exactly does that mean? You are aware that the vast majority of Hispanics that are legal citizens don't want open boarders and nationalized health care to cover illegal immigrants, right? I mean surely you do KNOW that, right?

By saying that "Hispanics saw all they needed to, and there are a lot of votes there", you are making the point perfectly about the claims on the right! You are saying that your party is willing to look the other way with regards to illegal status.

You want civility? Then don't lie about my integrity. Call me all the names you want, but don't say that I'm a cheat. Because anyone that knows me knows that that is absurd in the extreme.

Riffy

This is classic:

"Secondly, what is it about liberals that they always like to group people?"

You're right! It is classic because it's true! You guys always group people. To liberals everyone is a member of a certain group. Gay, Lesbian, African American, Hispanic, Native American, the one group that liberals never embrace is just plain Americans. Not "white " Americans! Americans period! Black, white, yellow, red, whatever.

See, a good example of this collective liberal group-think is the reaction towards the 1.5 million people that marched on DC this past Saturday. Liberals must group them! They have to group them! That's how liberals think. The people that marched on DC could be nothing more than lilly white redneck Bible thumpers! That's the way liberals look at the world. They can't just see 1.5 million people, and reflect upon the reason why so many people, from every single state in the nation, would converge on DC. It must be some crazy redneck lilly white Bible thumper thing. That's the liberal mind set. Strange, but true.

Riffy

You missed the irony, again.

Here's another one:
"You guys always group people"

Back to top

« Last Edit: Sep 15^th, 2009 at 12:21pm by fuman »

IP Logged

Jesus Christ

Rocks Off Regular

Offline

Let he who is without
sin cast the first stone.

Posts: 525
Heaven
Gender: male

Re: Obama elected President
Reply #7343 - Sep 15^th, 2009 at 12:46pm

fuman wrote on Sep 15^th, 2009 at 12:20pm:

You missed the irony, again.

Here's another one:
"You guys always group people"

None of THOSE PEOPLE ever understand
irony. That's a FACT!

PS I'm kidding...in case THOSE PEOPLE
can't tell.

PSS That was a joke too.

Seriously, though, irony is often
ill-served in this thread. See, for
instance, the many complaints
about Jesus being "holier than thou".

Back to top

&&&&"Hey, JC go fuck yourself you little bitch!" - Riffhard&&&&"...Jesus was...a tranny. " - Nankerphelge&&&&&&&&

IP Logged

Riffhard

Rocks Off Regular

Offline

Rocks Off Rules You Bastards

Posts: 1,940
Gender: male

Re: Obama elected President
Reply #7344 - Sep 15^th, 2009 at 12:57pm

fuman wrote on Sep 15^th, 2009 at 12:20pm:

Riffhard wrote on Sep 15^th, 2009 at 12:14pm:

fuman wrote on Sep 15^th, 2009 at 11:39am:

Riffhard wrote on Sep 15^th, 2009 at 10:38am:

fuman wrote on Sep 14^th, 2009 at 8:29pm:

Riffhard wrote on Sep 14^th, 2009 at 6:47pm:

fuman wrote on Sep 14^th, 2009 at 6:33pm:

Did you call me fucknut?

That's so mean . . .

Did you claim that I was lying? Did you imply that I was no gentleman and might welch on a bet?

By the way you should know that Joe Wilson is well read on the bill that the Dems are trying to pass. More well read than any of the liberals on this site that's for damned sure. He has stated that not only is there no enforcement mechanism, but that the amendment to the bill that would prevent illegals from getting health care was shot down by Pelosi and her henchmen. Why would they do that? Likewise an amendment that would prevent tax payer funded abortions was also shot down. Again, why would Democrats do that? Wilson was telling the truth! Obama was lying.

Oh, and as for the poll numbers. You may want to take a look a that graph again. The trend is what is going down, and it has been since the coronation of Barack. It will continue to go down because Barack is doing everything in his power to destroy capitalism and the free market.

He's a one term chump, and once 2010 gets here he's a lame duck.

Riffy

I did write those words. You don't notice any difference?

I certainly believe that Rep Wilson has read more of the bill than me, but that doesn't explain the lapse of decorum (his bad etiquette) (his poor manners in the chamber). That was a political stunt. Anyway, it's all done now. The millions of voting hispanics have seen what they need to know. Apology accepted, next.

A couple of things here. Firstly, you claim that there is a big difference in my words and yours. Oh really? Well son, let me set you straight here. I'm a firm believer that if you call someone a cheat you'd better be damned sure ready to prove it. You alleged that I was a cheater that would not pay on a bet that I had lost on. That's not true. We're waiting for Pdog to produce the post where I made a 100 dollar bet with him. He won't be able to produce that post because it doesn't exist. See, Pdog and you have called me a cheater. Where I come from that is about the lowest thing you can say about someone. So your words were every bit as inflammatory as mine. More so to me in fact. You can call me a fucknut, fucktard, or an asshole all you want, I could care less. Everyone on this board knows that that is just hyperbolic name calling. I do it all the time admittedly! But when you make the claim of someone being a cheat you're telling the whole RO community that I can't be trusted to keep my word, or make good on a bet. That's way over the line! It's just about as bad as having a screaming pussified hissy fit and calling everyone that you had known for years on-line a Nazi.

Secondly, what is it about liberals that they always like to group people? You claim that a whole bunch of "Hispanics" saw all they needed to see with Joe Wilson. What exactly does that mean? You are aware that the vast majority of Hispanics that are legal citizens don't want open boarders and nationalized health care to cover illegal immigrants, right? I mean surely you do KNOW that, right?

By saying that "Hispanics saw all they needed to, and there are a lot of votes there", you are making the point perfectly about the claims on the right! You are saying that your party is willing to look the other way with regards to illegal status.

You want civility? Then don't lie about my integrity. Call me all the names you want, but don't say that I'm a cheat. Because anyone that knows me knows that that is absurd in the extreme.

Riffy

This is classic:

"Secondly, what is it about liberals that they always like to group people?"

You're right! It is classic because it's true! You guys always group people. To liberals everyone is a member of a certain group. Gay, Lesbian, African American, Hispanic, Native American, the one group that liberals never embrace is just plain Americans. Not "white " Americans! Americans period! Black, white, yellow, red, whatever.

See, a good example of this collective liberal group-think is the reaction towards the 1.5 million people that marched on DC this past Saturday. Liberals must group them! They have to group them! That's how liberals think. The people that marched on DC could be nothing more than lilly white redneck Bible thumpers! That's the way liberals look at the world. They can't just see 1.5 million people, and reflect upon the reason why so many people, from every single state in the nation, would converge on DC. It must be some crazy redneck lilly white Bible thumper thing. That's the liberal mind set. Strange, but true.

Riffy

You missed the irony, again.

Here's another one:
"You guys always group people"

I didn't miss it funman! I am just making the case that liberals love to group people by race, religion, sexual orientation, or whatever else works for their argument. Now you may find it ironic that I make the case about the group-"liberals", but my point is no less valid. This is a group-think mentality (that even I was afflicted with when I was liberal) is real and it's pervasive amongst liberals. Why? I have no idea, but I too remember using the same lame group association arguments. Oh, and just for your information, I don't consider liberals a group per se. I think of liberals has patients dealing with a mental defect called liberalism. Many are cured miraculously when the veil is lifted from their eyes, but sadly, some never get over the self victimization that is liberalism.

Riffy

Back to top

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&"When all government...in little as in great things, shall be drawn to Washington as the center of all power, it will render powerless the checks provided...” Thomas Jefferson&&&&"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have. The course of history shows us that as a government grows, liberty decreases." — Thomas Jefferson&&&&&&&&We're not old men.We don't bother about petty morals--Keef&&&&Actually, it only takes one drink to get me loaded. Trouble is, I can't remember if it's the thirteenth or fourteenth. &&-- George Burns&&&&&&I ain't no leftist!-Bob Dylan&&&&"In the beginning of a change, the patriot is a brave and scarce

IP Logged

Riffhard

Rocks Off Regular

Offline

Rocks Off Rules You Bastards

Posts: 1,940
Gender: male

Re: Obama elected President
Reply #7345 - Sep 15^th, 2009 at 1:10pm

Man, oh, man it must suck to be an Obamadrone these days! I mean what with all the idiocy that is emanating from the White House, and morons like Pelosi calling average Americans "Nazis" and "astroturfers". His poll numbers are down again btw! Yep, that little surge that he got from his speech has faded back to pre-speech lows. That's because people quickly realized that Barry was lying, and Joe Wilson rightly called him on it!

LOL! Nice! Here's the dealio from Rasmussen today-----

"Support for the President’s health care proposal has been increasing daily over the past week. However, today’s tracking results show support falling for the first time since the speech. Forty-five percent (45%) now favor passage of the Congressional health care reform plan, a figure that’s up just a single point since the speech. Fifty-two percent (52%) are now opposed. Those figures include 23% who Strongly Favor the plan and 41% who are Strongly Opposed."

So it must come as real gut shot when even the liberal leaning Politico destroys the myth of Obama's brilliance. To had insult to injury, the author of the article is a liberal!!

Great news for America! Terrible news for Obamadrones, and their lackeys in the MSM!!!

Here's the headline from Politico.

Opinion: So far, Obama's failing miserably

....and here's the linked article. Read it Drones. You might have to face some cold hard truths about the worst president in American history-Barack Obama

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0909/27134.html

Riffy

Back to top

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&"When all government...in little as in great things, shall be drawn to Washington as the center of all power, it will render powerless the checks provided...” Thomas Jefferson&&&&"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have. The course of history shows us that as a government grows, liberty decreases." — Thomas Jefferson&&&&&&&&We're not old men.We don't bother about petty morals--Keef&&&&Actually, it only takes one drink to get me loaded. Trouble is, I can't remember if it's the thirteenth or fourteenth. &&-- George Burns&&&&&&I ain't no leftist!-Bob Dylan&&&&"In the beginning of a change, the patriot is a brave and scarce

IP Logged

Jesus Christ

Rocks Off Regular

Offline

Let he who is without
sin cast the first stone.

Posts: 525
Heaven
Gender: male

Re: Obama elected President
Reply #7346 - Sep 15^th, 2009 at 1:30pm

Riffhard wrote on Sep 15^th, 2009 at 12:57pm:

Oh, and just for your information, I don't consider liberals a group per se. I think of liberals has patients dealing with a mental defect called liberalism. Many are cured miraculously when the veil is lifted from their eyes, but sadly, some never get over the self victimization that is liberalism.

Riffy

Hmmm. A unique take on the word, I must say. But then words, with actual meanings attached, never were your strong suit.

from dictionary.com:

liberals - 3 dictionary results

Be a Conservative Leader
Take Back Your Campus Start Today - Learn More!
CampusReform.org (hey, that's pretty funny! What a great place to recruit conservatives!)

lib⋅er⋅al /ˈlɪbərəl, ˈlɪbrəl/

–adjective 1. favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.
2. (often initial capital letter) noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform.
3. of, pertaining to, based on, or advocating liberalism.
4. favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, esp. as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties.
5. favoring or permitting freedom of action, esp. with respect to matters of personal belief or expression: a liberal policy toward dissident artists and writers.
6. of or pertaining to representational forms of government rather than aristocracies and monarchies.
7. free from prejudice or bigotry; tolerant: a liberal attitude toward foreigners.
8. open-minded or tolerant, esp. free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc.
9. characterized by generosity and willingness to give in large amounts: a liberal donor.
10. given freely or abundantly; generous: a liberal donation.
11. not strict or rigorous; free; not literal: a liberal interpretation of a rule.
12. of, pertaining to, or based on the liberal arts.
13. of, pertaining to, or befitting a freeman.

–noun 14. a person of liberal principles or views, esp. in politics or religion.
15. (often initial capital letter) a member of a liberal party in politics, esp. of the Liberal party in Great Britain.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Origin:
1325–75; ME < L līberālis of freedom, befitting the free, equiv. to līber free + -ālis -al 1

Related forms:

lib⋅er⋅al⋅ly, adverb
lib⋅er⋅al⋅ness, noun

Synonyms:
1. progressive. 7. broad-minded, unprejudiced. 9. beneficent, charitable, openhanded, munificent, unstinting, lavish. See generous. 10. See ample.

Antonyms:
1. reactionary. 8. intolerant. 9, 10. niggardly.

Be a Conservative Leader
Take Back Your Campus Start Today - Learn More!
CampusReform.org

Lib⋅er⋅al /ˈlɪbərəl, ˈlɪbrəl/

–noun a city in SW Kansas. pop. 14,911.

Dictionary.com Unabridged
Based on the Random House Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2009.

lib·er·al (lĭb'ər-əl, lĭb'rəl)
adj.

Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry.
Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded.
Of, relating to, or characteristic of liberalism.
Liberal Of, designating, or characteristic of a political party founded on or associated with principles of social and political liberalism, especially in Great Britain, Canada, and the United States.
Tending to give freely; generous: a liberal benefactor.
Generous in amount; ample: a liberal serving of potatoes.
Archaic Permissible or appropriate for a person of free birth; befitting a lady or gentleman.
Obsolete Morally unrestrained; licentious.

Tending to give freely; generous: a liberal benefactor.
Generous in amount; ample: a liberal serving of potatoes.
Archaic Permissible or appropriate for a person of free birth; befitting a lady or gentleman.
Obsolete Morally unrestrained; licentious.
Not strict or literal; loose or approximate: a liberal translation.
Of, relating to, or based on the traditional arts and sciences of a college or university curriculum: a liberal education.

Archaic Permissible or appropriate for a person of free birth; befitting a lady or gentleman.
Obsolete Morally unrestrained; licentious.
n.
A person with liberal ideas or opinions.
Liberal A member of a Liberal political party.

[Middle English, generous, from Old French, from Latin līberālis, from līber, free; see leudh- in Indo-European roots.]
lib'er·al·ly adv., lib'er·al·ness n.

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2009 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

****************
I still can't figure out why you use this as an epithet. Seems more like a compliment.
Then again, you use the word "pussy" the same way, and pussies are generally delightful.

Actual unretouched photo of George W. (hiccup) Bush eating pussy! TRUE FACT!

Back to top

&&&&"Hey, JC go fuck yourself you little bitch!" - Riffhard&&&&"...Jesus was...a tranny. " - Nankerphelge&&&&&&&&

IP Logged

Riffhard

Rocks Off Regular

Offline

Rocks Off Rules You Bastards

Posts: 1,940
Gender: male

Re: Obama elected President
Reply #7347 - Sep 15^th, 2009 at 1:41pm

Jesus Christ wrote on Sep 15^th, 2009 at 1:30pm:

Riffhard wrote on Sep 15^th, 2009 at 12:57pm:

Oh, and just for your information, I don't consider liberals a group per se. I think of liberals has patients dealing with a mental defect called liberalism. Many are cured miraculously when the veil is lifted from their eyes, but sadly, some never get over the self victimization that is liberalism.

Riffy

Hmmm. A unique take on the word, I must say. But then words, with actual meanings attached, never were your strong suit.

from dictionary.com:

liberals - 3 dictionary results

Be a Conservative Leader
Take Back Your Campus Start Today - Learn More!
CampusReform.org (hey, that's pretty funny! What a great place to recruit conservatives!)

lib⋅er⋅al /ˈlɪbərəl, ˈlɪbrəl/

–adjective 1. favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.
2. (often initial capital letter) noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform.
3. of, pertaining to, based on, or advocating liberalism.
4. favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, esp. as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties.
5. favoring or permitting freedom of action, esp. with respect to matters of personal belief or expression: a liberal policy toward dissident artists and writers.
6. of or pertaining to representational forms of government rather than aristocracies and monarchies.
7. free from prejudice or bigotry; tolerant: a liberal attitude toward foreigners.
8. open-minded or tolerant, esp. free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc.
9. characterized by generosity and willingness to give in large amounts: a liberal donor.
10. given freely or abundantly; generous: a liberal donation.
11. not strict or rigorous; free; not literal: a liberal interpretation of a rule.
12. of, pertaining to, or based on the liberal arts.
13. of, pertaining to, or befitting a freeman.

–noun 14. a person of liberal principles or views, esp. in politics or religion.
15. (often initial capital letter) a member of a liberal party in politics, esp. of the Liberal party in Great Britain.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Origin:
1325–75; ME < L līberālis of freedom, befitting the free, equiv. to līber free + -ālis -al 1

Related forms:

lib⋅er⋅al⋅ly, adverb
lib⋅er⋅al⋅ness, noun

Synonyms:
1. progressive. 7. broad-minded, unprejudiced. 9. beneficent, charitable, openhanded, munificent, unstinting, lavish. See generous. 10. See ample.

Antonyms:
1. reactionary. 8. intolerant. 9, 10. niggardly.

Be a Conservative Leader
Take Back Your Campus Start Today - Learn More!
CampusReform.org

Lib⋅er⋅al /ˈlɪbərəl, ˈlɪbrəl/

–noun a city in SW Kansas. pop. 14,911.

Dictionary.com Unabridged
Based on the Random House Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2009.

lib·er·al (lĭb'ər-əl, lĭb'rəl)
adj.

Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry.
Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded.
Of, relating to, or characteristic of liberalism.
Liberal Of, designating, or characteristic of a political party founded on or associated with principles of social and political liberalism, especially in Great Britain, Canada, and the United States.
Tending to give freely; generous: a liberal benefactor.
Generous in amount; ample: a liberal serving of potatoes.
Archaic Permissible or appropriate for a person of free birth; befitting a lady or gentleman.
Obsolete Morally unrestrained; licentious.

Tending to give freely; generous: a liberal benefactor.
Generous in amount; ample: a liberal serving of potatoes.
Archaic Permissible or appropriate for a person of free birth; befitting a lady or gentleman.
Obsolete Morally unrestrained; licentious.
Not strict or literal; loose or approximate: a liberal translation.
Of, relating to, or based on the traditional arts and sciences of a college or university curriculum: a liberal education.

Archaic Permissible or appropriate for a person of free birth; befitting a lady or gentleman.
Obsolete Morally unrestrained; licentious.
n.
A person with liberal ideas or opinions.
Liberal A member of a Liberal political party.

[Middle English, generous, from Old French, from Latin līberālis, from līber, free; see leudh- in Indo-European roots.]
lib'er·al·ly adv., lib'er·al·ness n.

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2009 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

****************
I still can't figure out why you use this as an epithet. Seems more like a compliment.
Then again, you use the word "pussy" the same way, and pussies are generally delightful.

Actual unretouched photo of George W. (hiccup) Bush eating pussy! TRUE FACT!

Hey Flea I'm gonna say this one more time. Go fuck yourself you pussified little fuck! You are a god damned joke! If you had any clue how many people on this board think that you are a peice of shit it would make your head spin! They are laughing at you you tiny little shower of shit! I get PMs on a daily baisis when you try your little elitest smug fuck posts such as the one above.

Hey there you little douche bag here's an idea, next time the Stones come to NYC why don't you bring your scrawny little punk ass to the city and come see me at Stout? Why not "man up" and actually "cross the street"? Can you do that you little pussy? Come on Flea?! You can do it! Come say this shit to my face instead of hiding behind your keyboard and dictionary?!

I mean I know that this is just wishful thinking. You're too much of a little pussy to ever talk this smack my face. However, I want you to know that I'll be there waiting. Across the street.

I thought you left this board? You stupid little freak.

Riffy

Back to top

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&"When all government...in little as in great things, shall be drawn to Washington as the center of all power, it will render powerless the checks provided...” Thomas Jefferson&&&&"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have. The course of history shows us that as a government grows, liberty decreases." — Thomas Jefferson&&&&&&&&We're not old men.We don't bother about petty morals--Keef&&&&Actually, it only takes one drink to get me loaded. Trouble is, I can't remember if it's the thirteenth or fourteenth. &&-- George Burns&&&&&&I ain't no leftist!-Bob Dylan&&&&"In the beginning of a change, the patriot is a brave and scarce

IP Logged

fuman

Ex Member

Rocks Off Rules You Bastards

Gender: male

Re: Obama elected President
Reply #7348 - Sep 15^th, 2009 at 2:06pm

Well that was a stupid response. Why get so upset?
I thought you said you could care less about this type of thing, as long as your integrity isn't questioned?

I for one enjoy JC's posts, probably doesn't surprise you, but they don't cause me to me roll on the floor laughing my ass off.

However, fleas do that to me, so I guess we're sort of similar on that one.

Back to top

IP Logged

2000monkey Rocks Off Regular Offline Rocks Off Rules You Bastards Posts: 210	Re: Obama elected President Reply #7349 - Sep 15^th, 2009 at 2:23pm "I mean I know that this is just wishful thinking. You're too much of a little pussy to ever talk this smack my face. However, I want you to know that I'll be there waiting. Across the street."
Back to top	IP Logged

Poll
Question: What item is most likely found in the top drawer of Riffy's dresser?
naked pictures of Reagan 5 (20.0%) Barry O voodoo doll 3 (12.0%) Hoffa's body 2 (8.0%) DVDs of "saved by the bell", season 3 1 (4.0%) JC's boss's phone number 2 (8.0%) bucket of chicken 5 (20.0%) three sticks of "secret" deoderant, labels facing out 3 (12.0%) "Eagles Greatest Hits" CD 4 (16.0%) Total votes: 25 « Last Modified by: Starbuck on: Mar 3^rd, 2010 at 5:01pm »