hey, What??, I don’t think that comment is correct. all data indicates the arctic ice has shrunk dramatically. yesterday an article announced they are planning to have arctic cruises next year thru the northwest passage. the arctic ice is far less than it was 50 years ago.
Bob, one of my partners just returned from an Alaskan cruise. They went into one of the glacial bays and the tour director said that the Glaciers are growing, not retreating due to Global Warming.
Libby, I think the people who live up there and have observed for years know what is going on more than the debunked fraudulent scientists who have predicted our demise and many have resigned in disgrace. By the way, your scientists that predicted all those hurricanes that didn’t happen are from Colorado State, the land of the weed smokers. Their muddled brains just can’t understand why we haven’t had three or four named bad hurricanes this year.
I’m sure Julie and the crew have a firm grasp on climate change. When Gopher needs to change out of his white shorts, they all know it’s winter.
September 10, 2014 at 2:01 pm
KY jw says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Agent, currently (as in this week) Iceland and Canada are arguing over the ownership of the Northwest Passage. See, it’s now open (the ice has melted enough that ships CAN get through) and both Canada and Iceland want to be in charge. I’m just guessing here, but that sure sounds like the ice isn’t growing.
September 10, 2014 at 2:19 pm
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Hey KYjw, In today’s journal article, it has an article about oil trains coming through Kentucky carrying the Bakken field oil and they are worried about accidents and volatility. Of course, they wouldn’t have to transport oil by train had the Keystone Pipeline been approved. Do you think Oil trains or pipelines are safer to transport oil? We do need the energy despite all the misguided efforts to do it with switchgrass, algae and wind.
September 10, 2014 at 5:00 pm
txmouthbreatherboogereatertx says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
If we could bottle up the hot air from your mouth and the rest of the Neo-Cons, we could get rid of green house gases and fuel the entire economy. No pipeline, no trains, just pure clean air that doesn’t smell like you’ve been eating a shit sandwich all day everyday. We would also go back to learning in our schools instead of learnin’. People could go fishing instead of fishin’. And last but not least, wrasslin’ and racin’ would be capital crimes.
I don’t accept your trumped up pro Global Warming phooey Libby. There is just as much evidence that we don’t have a problem. Do you deny your Global Warming people going to Antarctica last year hoping to find seals and penguins swimming in the warm water and instead getting stuck in the ice? Even ice breakers couldn’t get to them and they had to be rescued by helicopter. That ship has been crushed by now by the extremely thick ice.
That ship was the Russian “Akademik-Shokalskiy” (say it 3 times real fast)was on an expedition/cruise to recreate experiments done by an expedition one hundred years ago. The myth that it got stuck because the ice grew around it is incorrect. Won’t bore with details, but the ice that surrounded it had broken from a big iceberg (due to “Global Warming”, some say) and drifted to their area where it surrounded them surprisingly quickly. However, the irony of “Global Warming people” being trapped in ice is and was duly noted, even if not exactly accurate.
OMG Nomesaneman! You’re going to confuse Agent with all them there facts. He’s old school, man. Earth is flat, moon is made of cheese, and there ain’t no global warming. Period. After all, he’s from Texas…
September 10, 2014 at 10:11 am
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Hey nosaneman, good spin. Gee, I wonder what all those news reports with video of this stuck ship were all about for two weeks and them wondering how they were going to be rescued. If icebreakers couldn’t get to them, I think it is pretty bad.
September 10, 2014 at 11:34 am
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
He told you what they were all about Agent. You have got to have the thickest skull in all of Texas. And that’s saying alot!
September 10, 2014 at 10:15 am
txmouthbreatherboogereatertx says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Partners and cruises? It’s adding up Cliven and I’m proud of you. You are a brave man living in Texico roping a different kind of steed. Just make sure you wrap up your willy if you are going to whore it up.
Libby and txmouth,
I ran into my old science teacher at the Baskin Robins 31 Flavors last night. He said he is pretty darn sure he was on the same cruise. My teacher said that GLOBAL warming and climate change is bigger than Alaksa and a few glacier bays. But, he told Julie thanks for trying out.
So Bob, our fearless leader is due to speak tonight on ISIS and Terror. How many ways do you think he will spin it? Any act of terror meets with a reply that we shouldn’t jump to conclusions or it is workplace violence or saying he shouldn’t have played golf after the first beheading because it might not have been the best “optics”.
I say he should take a page out of Slick Willy’s lies. Do you remember Willy saying it depends on what the definition of is is? Obama could just say it depends on the definition of ISIS is. That should satisfy Libby, Planet and Boogerbrain, right?
When I get done watching our fearless leader speak I think I will take my clothes off and rub chicken fat all over my body as I sprawl out in my indoor tree stand. Sometimes I let my mail order bride Mihn Li wipe me down with a rag on a stick so I can get those hard to reach places. When I’m done washing up, I reuse the chicken fat I put on my body the next morning and mix it with my bacon fat for breakfast. Who says I don’t care about the environment and recycling?
Good one Dave. These are “inconvenient truths” for the Global Warming freaks who think you can just sail through the Northwest Passage with no problem. Great pictures of the poor Polar Bears who seem to be thriving now. How funny was it that Al Gore was predicting the polar ice would be gone in 7 short years back in 2007.
Libby…how can you say that Fox News is not fair and balanced??? They are taking current events in the world and reporting them. They have the balls to report the truth where as the left leaning, wussy-liberal media does not. You lefties apparently put way too much stock in the likes of Mika Brzezinski(sp), Rachel Maddow, Chuck Todd, et al.
So does MSNBC, CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC, etc., etc., etc. FOX News just happens to be the only mainstream news channel that leans to the right. In that sense the “fair and balanced” is right on the money as they keep it balanced (considering Fox News has more viewers than all of it’s competitors combined.)by telling the other side of the story; by covering the stories that the Liberal media routinely turns a blind eye to or spins to make it Lefty-friendly.
Normally in a capitalistic market, there would be fair competition. Do you really think Rupert Murdoch would allow such ventures to compete against Fox? The “liberal media” at least has several outlets with varying points of view. If more droids are watching Fox than any other media channel that would be bothersome on many levels. Refers back to the fraternity and evangelical movement of mass mind control. But then again, Australia’s own Rupert Murdoch is part of the Blutty Commonwealth and conservatives would love to be led by the Queeen again. Cheerio Pip Pip and make sure you watch for dingos crikey! Here’s a typical Fox story. Coked up, short skirt tells a story about health insurance, somehow the troops are involved, some country music in the back ground. Then they bring in the meek Alan Combs and start yelling at him to make themselves look “maverick” ggrroowwl. Then the anchor ends up in trouble for sexual harassment or at an airport in Minnesota with in kilo in his sinus and some dust in his beard.
Also, Fox doesn’t just lean to the Right either. That shit tipped over, rolled down Mt Everest, steam rolled through every trailer park in ‘Murrica. The trail of dust left behind is what causes tornadoes in the bible belt. The sin is from the Tazmanian Devil himself, Rupert Murdoch, his flock is just carrying out his dirty deeds.
Don’t forget the Koch Brothers and the Americans for Prosperity that “educates citizens about where their elected officials stand on our issues.” It also has included false attacks about health care reform, clean energy, economic issues, and elected Democrats like President Obama.
And uses FoxNews to do their campaigning for them:
Txmouth, way to channel the great Dr. Hunter S Thompson. Getting all gonzo and shit!
September 15, 2014 at 10:56 am
txmouthbreatherboogereatertx says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Damn it Captain, writin’ and books are fer queers
September 15, 2014 at 4:54 pm
Captain Planet says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
If that’s true, then call me Ronald Reagan.
September 10, 2014 at 2:27 pm
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Yes Trust me, these nut jobs would rather download an app and pick up Media Matters, Moveon.org and watch the non reporters of current events of CBS, ABC, NBC, MSNBC and get a thrill up their leg every time their exalted leader lies to the American People.
Trust Me – if you fact-check many things coming out of FoxNews you will find they border on the absurd. But that’s the problem, no-one that watches fact checks. They buy it all lock, stock, and barrel. When someone presents other evidence, it is routinely labeled socialist and completely and utterly dismissed. They are not even a news source, let alone a credible one.
Libby, please cite the incidences of O’Reilly not reporting based on facts. He has a whole department under him fact checking the info before he airs it. I don’t always agree with him because he is soft on liberalism, but I haven’t seen any of the leftists on his program dispute his facts. All they do is spin, spin and spin until he stops them and says this is the no-spin zone. Can Rachel Madcow say the same thing and prove her facts?
I knew you couldn’t do it. Knowing you, you spent an hour or two, couldn’t refute anything so you dismissed it out of hand to borrow your wording.
September 12, 2014 at 9:05 am
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Are you that stupid? I posted a comment a foot long listing all of them. Read it and shut the hell up.
September 10, 2014 at 3:40 pm
Don't Call Me Shirley says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
How many have died while fighting the “war on Christmas”? How many have lost limbs due to landmines in this “war on Christmas”? Exactly what facts did O’Reilly use when he declared that there is a “war on Christmas”? Oh no! Somebody said “Happy Holidays” instead of saying the obligatory “Merry Christmas”! Oh, the horror! It’s war! The sky is falling! It’s the end of the world! Stores no longer sell Christmas items, right? All churches have been shut down and forbidden to celebrate Christmas, right?
Yeah, O’Reilly really bases his reporting on facts. He’s not trying to con and scare people into buying his books. Make up a war, sell more books. Cha-ching! There’s a sucker born every minute.
• O’Reilly falsely claimed Bush didn’t oppose 9-11 Commission. O’Reilly defended President George W. Bush from a Kerry-Edwards ’04 TV ad highlighting Bush’s opposition to creation of the 9-11 Commission by denying that Bush had ever opposed the commission. In fact, Bush did oppose the creation of the 9-11 Commission. (10/21/04)
• O’Reilly falsely claimed Iraq had ricin. O’Reilly responded to a caller to his radio show by defending the Iraq war: “They did have ricin up there in the north — so why are you discounting that so much?” In fact, the Duelfer report (the final report of the Iraqi Survey Group, led by Charles A. Duelfer, which conducted the search for weapons in Iraq following the U.S.-led invasion) indicates that Iraq did not have ricin. (10/19/04)
• O’Reilly repeated discredited claims on Iraq-Al Qaeda link. O’Reilly interrupted a former Clinton administration official who tried to correct the record on O’Reilly’s claim that terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi constitutes a direct link between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein’s Iraq. He also allowed a conservative guest to repeat without challenge other discredited claims about Iraq’s supposed involvement in terrorism — claims O’Reilly has himself cited in the past. (9/27/04)
• O’Reilly fabricated “Paris Business Review” as source for success of French boycott. O’Reilly falsely claimed “they’ve lost billions of dollars in France according to ‘The Paris Business Review'” due to an American boycott he advocated of French imports. Media Matters for America found no evidence of a publication named “The Paris Business Review.” (4/27/04)
• O’Reilly cited phony stats to argue that taxes on rich are excessive. O’Reilly tried to “blow off” the argument that wealthy Americans ought to pay more taxes by citing phony statistics about the tax burden the rich currently bear. (6/30/04)
• O’Reilly confused on elementary economics. O’Reilly told a caller on his radio show, “We [the United States] have a trade deficit with everybody, because everybody wants our stuff, and we’re not wild about snails” — indicating that he doesn’t know the definition of “trade deficit” and implying that the United States runs a trade surplus with France. In fact, in the first four months of 2004, the United States had a $3 billion trade deficit with France. (6/10/04)
• O’Reilly doctored quotation to suggest Soros wished his own father dead. During his smear campaign against progressive financier, philanthropist, and political activist George Soros, O’Reilly doctored a 1995 quotation by Soros to make it seem as if Soros wished his own father dead. (6/1/04)
• O’Reilly questioned if Kennedy would show up to Democratic convention … as Kennedy spoke behind him. O’Reilly teased an upcoming segment of The O’Reilly Factor, broadcast live from the Democratic National Convention, by saying of convention speaker Senator Edward Kennedy: “When we come back, we’ll let you listen to Ted Kennedy for a while, if he shows up.” In fact, Kennedy had already shown up and had been speaking for several minutes, as O’Reilly need only have turned around to see. (7/27/04)
• O’Reilly disparaged Democrats with trifecta of voter falsehoods. In a discussion about what went wrong for Democrats in the November 2 election, O’Reilly claimed that Democrats “lost votes from four years ago”; that “18- to 24[-year-old]s didn’t go” to the polls; and that “[c]ommitted Republicans didn’t carry the day for the president; independents did.” All three claims are false. (11/4/04)
• O’Reilly on the radio: Three lies, one broadcast. Lie No. 1: Bush tax cuts didn’t create the budget deficit. Lie No. 2: “Socialistic” French, Germans, and Canadian governments tax at 80 percent. Lie No. 3: Canadian, British, and French media are “government-controlled,” but Italian media is free. (7/7/04)
You forgot O’Rally enjoys loofas, harassing the gals that work for him, couldn’t get it up so his wife started banging a cop and he threatened her thinking he had some kind of clout. Wow this sounds a lot like Rush Limbaugh
September 10, 2014 at 4:41 pm
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Except for the oxy.
September 10, 2014 at 4:47 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Many of these that you posted, you tried to put a “opinion” around what you perceived were facts in order to cement all of them as facts.
It is a dishonest method of debate.
For example:
“O’Reilly on the radio: Three lies, one broadcast. Lie No. 1: Bush tax cuts didn’t create the budget deficit. Lie No.” <——–Opinion. A 2001 recession is largely attributed to the deficits in that time frame. If it were the tax cuts, then why did the revenues start to grow again, leading to a deficit of 161 billion in 2007? We had two recessions under Bush W. 2001, then 2008. Those affected revenues more than the tax cuts.
That isn't even counting the fact that we continued those tax cuts currently, and when talking about removing them for the wealthiest 1%, that tax increase was considered to be maybe $95 billion per year, so it's impossible that was the main part of the budget deficit. In fact, it's plain out BULL. Subtracting the $95 billion from Bush W's deficits would not have eliminated them. So they were not the sole cause.
The tax cuts are not the reason for the deficit, or they would continue to be for the current president Obama.
I have directed one of your outrageous comments. Do you want me to direct the rest?
September 10, 2014 at 4:57 pm
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Bob – If you have tax cuts and you have a deficit then OF COURSE the tax cuts contributed to the deficit. Without them, the deficit would not have been as big. That’s first grade math, dude.
September 10, 2014 at 5:06 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
To act like $95 billion on a nearly $500 billion dollar deficit is what caused the deficits, and without them we would be in Clinton Surplus city is against basic math “dude”.
And in the #1 point, it would not be what “caused” the deficits. It didn’t “create” the budget deficit.
September 10, 2014 at 5:24 pm
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Nobody’s “acting” like anything. How come we have to take everything you say literally (about the rhapsody for example) but you are allowed to read into what other people say and infer you know their thought process behind their statement.
Maybe the tax cuts didn’t “create” the deficit, but they surely contributed to it.
Is that statement true or not true? If you say not true, then you are being a dishonest debater.
September 10, 2014 at 6:04 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
“ush tax cuts didn’t create the budget deficit.”
To say this line is correct is a blatant lie.
$95 billion is not a huge contributing factor.
Create: Were there no deficits before the Bush Tax Cuts?
To say $95 billion a year is even close to the problem on what was 3.4 trillion in revenues is completely a fallacy (It went up to 3.8 the following year with no changes in tax code, which is about 11%. That shows it wasn’t the tax rate but rather the economy). That is about 2.5% O’Reily was 100% correct in the statement the 2.5% difference in revenues did not “create” the budget deficit.
I’m not debating dishonestly. Your crud you put up about O’Reily however is dishonest. The guy makes mistakes, as do every source, but your imperfection argument to discredit ALL 100% of his facts is insane. If the source isn’t right 100% of the time they most be wrong eh? Fox News is one of the only agencies that doesn’t say exactly the same thing as every other liberal news agency. Most if not all of what you put above is laughable. So he said “if he shows up” while someone was behind him. Are we in grade school? The 9/11 commission I would have to look up but who cares even if it were true, but I have a hard time believing anything about Iraq from your mouth.
You are basically a clique mentality person. It’s why you are a liberal. It’s popular, easy, and people back you up, and hey you get to beat down Faux News and the racists and homophobes and be the shining white knight right?
Beating down Faux News is exactly the problem with this country, not the solution. It is that mentality that breeds people in ISIS.
Hey, you’re so crazy Faux News, and you republicans rob us poor people, why not kill them right?
Why don’t we repeat France, behead the upper class right? Some good ol’ label the rich, label this, label that, and see how it works out eh?
Just the fact that you’re trying to discredit Faux News as a whole is a huge problem Libby. I use MSN. I use CNN. I don’t discredit them due to some idiotic ramblings of Rachel Maddow and Keith Olbermann. Even they say things that are correct, shocking I know.
September 10, 2014 at 6:10 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
The whole line didn’t paste:
“O’Reilly on the radio: Three lies, one broadcast. Lie No. 1: Bush tax cuts didn’t create the budget deficit. Lie”
To say this is correct is the blatant lie I was referring to.
Just as I thought. Dishonest. Quibbling. You suck, bob.
September 11, 2014 at 12:47 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
You are honestly saying it is ok to say that 2.5% of our total annual revenues “created” the deficit with the Bush Tax cuts?
I am not debating dishonestly. These are numbers.
I suck? Keep. The debate. As numbers.
Give me evidence why I am wrong. Not personal attacks.
I might add the $95 billion is estimated from 10 years starting in 2012, accounting for inflation, the amount is actually more like $60 billion from Bush’s time period, which is actually 1.8 percent.
You need to admit your source that called O’Reily a liar for saying the Bush Tax Cuts didn’t “create” the deficit is wrong. It absolutely did not create the deficit. It absolutely was barely a contributing factor. Ergo, why those tax cuts are still mostly in affect.
September 11, 2014 at 1:04 pm
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Bob – if you spent less time flapping your gums and more time trying to comprehend you will have understood that I agreed with you, and changed the statement to “Bush tax cuts contributed to the budget deficit.” I did not state the amount of contribution, just that they contributed. Now. Try to tell me that my statement is wrong. I dare you.
September 11, 2014 at 7:43 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
When you switched the argument you didn’t admit that thusly, O’Reily did not lie.
You instead said I was being dishonest.
Your (I’m assuming quoted from a link) comment specifically said O’reily lied based on the phrase “created”. Now you have gone so far off topic, you changed what it meant, and now it is a true statement?
That’s the definition of dishonest and is why I said you were dishonest to begin with. I’m completely on point. You aren’t. It was wrong to start, with basically putting things like that (opinions rather than facts) in there as a means to collect some mass piece that you claim are “all” lies or incorrect info and now you’re going to shift it to “contributed” and say it was accurate? No. The whole thing was you twisting the scenario. Most of those mean nothing. At all. And you’re trying to destroy both his character and his credibility with lies yourself.
While we are on contributing to the debt what “contributes” more, 1.8% in taxes, or $1 trillion in spending excess per year for roughly 4 years? Which one should we be focusing on? You are on O’reily for saying Bush W’s tax cuts didn’t create the debt, then switch it to well they contributed, and then you want to ignored what amounted to an increase of 17% of our total revenues? (accounting for federal, state, and local we were at 5.7 trillion. This is a generous number).
September 12, 2014 at 9:08 am
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
bob – if I admit I was wrong will you shut the hell up? This is just a different kind of bullying from you, but bullying just the same. Give it a f’n rest.
September 12, 2014 at 6:01 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
It is not bullying.
I gave you every piece of information while you tried to twist facts. I’m debating.
You really don’t like people sticking to facts I suppose.
And you had every choice whether to keep debating it or saying “ok well I don’t agree, we can agree to disagree”
I’m not bullying you into responding.
I am demanding you debate honestly. There is a difference.
This is old. Debate with respect. Not ending each sentence saying this is new for a bully but a bully none the less.
You are the bully. I won’t have it flipped. And we won’t be having swearing matches anymore. I’ll just let you do that and go off the rails. I don’t have to anymore. It just gives you power.
September 11, 2014 at 9:36 am
Trust me I am not a liberal says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Libby–you cannot be fair and balanced when you do your fact checking by turning on NBC, MSNBC, CNN, etc. So…you’re saying that these so-called news sources are credible? Please!! They are not the free speaking media that they are supposed to be-they are supposed to report the TRUTH. Instead, they report what they are TOLD to report and HOW to report it. Go fact check THAT.
Trust Me – I do not watch the news. I do my research online with many different sources, even FoxNews. But I do like Brian Williams. He strikes me as a credible journalist.
News sources have always chosen to report what they determine to be newsworthy. That doesn’t make them slanted. In fact, there are alot if things reported on that I wish weren’t. That’s why I don’t watch the news.
But many times FoxNews’ “reporting” consists of half-truths and exagerrations, if not out-and-out lies. That’s not fair and balanced. It’s dishonest reporting.
And if you fact check MSNBC, CNN, NBC, etc. you’ll find they have crossed the border on the absurd. And that’s the problem, your (and by extension all liberals) dissonance to the bullshit that is spewed out consistently that pushes a false narrative or Leftist agenda.
What part of I don’t watch the news do you not understand? I don’t need to watch the news to know what to think. That’s the problem with the right. They need FauxNews to tell them what to think.
Libby, you are much like the apparently departed Ron and gather your info from left leaning sites or our wonderful government who really stretches the truth on just about every issue confronting the country. How many lies has Obama told this country in the past 6 years? How has that worked out for the country.
September 15, 2014 at 2:47 pm
txmouthbreatherboogereatertx says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Cliven, you get your news from a tin foil hat. It usually comes from your fellow Texican Alex Jones. My question to you is how good of a reception do you get while you are in your bunker? There is a lot of metal there between the cans of dog food, the bunker itself, the metal plate in your head, etc. Don’t you every think that maybe you are getting some of your signals crossed?
September 10, 2014 at 1:10 pm
txmouthbreatherboogereatertx says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Yeah Libby, how can you say that Fox News isn’t fair and balanced? All their “journalist” come from tabloid papers and tv shows like Current Affair and MTV or magazines like Maxim. Man I just want to get some blow and watch those short skirts right now. Oh that’s right, they have short skirts because when you do blow all day your attention span goes away and they wouldn’t be able to get anyone to watch that “dribble”.
At one point, on Fox News, they were criticizing the movie “Noah” because it showed Noah drinking alcohol. They said that, according to the Bible, Noah never drank. They actually said that. The Fox News Bible-thumpers don’t even know what’s in their own Bible. Then again, most Bible-thumpers don’t.
You focus on them quite a bit. The only reason you just said what you did is yet again, to feel good about yourself.
You are the zealot. Not the bible thumper so to speak.
September 11, 2014 at 6:16 pm
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Apparently, you know nothing about history. Water was not safe to drink back in the day. That is why they drank wine. I do agree that Noah was a bad movie and took big liberties with the truth of what really happened back then.
The only things growing thicker than the polar cap are the skulls of the Gaia-worshipping global warming enthusiasts. I say BRING IT ON, SUN! I want to grow grapes in my backyard and host a luau in my backyard in January.
Speaking of ridiculous predictions that have repeatedly failed to come true, how about that rapture? Now that’s something you can really believe. The predictions may have been wrong 100 times, but that 101st time will definitely be correct. Any day now, the chosen ones will float up into the sky (and they won’t even need oxygen masks), and the savior will descend from his sky-throne and burn all those evil scientists.
Shirley, the rapture is meant to happen once. The predictions haven’t failed to come true 100 times. The fact that the end of the world hasn’t happened, does not prove it may or may not happen, either side.
People have ignorantly been wrong 1000’s of times trying to predict the rapture. That doesn’t reflect on the prediction itself, if it were valid. This is the most illogical argument I have ever seen what seems to be an atheist make.
So if I predict Romney will beat Obama in a landslide and that doesn’t happen, the prediction is still valid? Are you kidding me? Go back to reading Revelations and leave the real world to the sane people.
Is bullying. It is clique style arguing. That’s crazy ol’e him.
The car flipping happened. They went off a bridge. Contact highs do for a fact cause tunnel vision. To say it doesn’t affect driving is bull crap.
I have used the drug. It does not enhance your ability to focus. It limits it. This is not an opinion.
September 10, 2014 at 4:58 pm
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
All he asked is if that was you and I confirmed. All the other stuff you post confirms your nuthood.
September 10, 2014 at 5:03 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
No. Just hell no.
You don’t get to insult me, and say that’s the nut job there!
Then say all you did was confirm. You joined the insulting band wagon. You will apologize immediately. ENOUGH!
Do I need to report you?
September 10, 2014 at 5:06 pm
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Uh oh. I’m on report. Are you going to ground me, too?
September 10, 2014 at 5:08 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Do you have any idea how immature you are?
You’re basically saying “na na na na na na, I can insult you all I want, what are you going to do?”
I have tried to keep this peaceful. You’re acting like an inhuman jerk.
Knock it off. Seriously. It doesn’t make you the cool kid to start talking like this.
September 10, 2014 at 5:10 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Look up bullying. Seriously. Look up gay bullying.
You and booger just did it.
You brought up my sexual orientation in an insult to call me a nut.
You’re so open minded and accepting though. It’s those “other” republicans and zealots who attack people right?
As long as I’m the bad guy it’s ok to attack me right?
Look in the mirror kiddo! It’s you! You’re the issue.
You’re the person who doesn’t seek peace. You’re the one who seeks the labels. You’re the one who insults after you establish them.
This is old. I’m tired of it. If you would like I can just report this based on sexual harassment. You know this is wrong.
September 10, 2014 at 5:14 pm
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Bob – you have been attacking me for years. And I have tried to reach some kind of amiable existence with you several times. Yet you continue to insult me and call me names. Now, I just beat you to the punch and that angers you.
You think you are the be all and end all of debating. Newsflash, pal, this isn’t a debate forum. It’s a blog. People’s opinions and emotions come out on a blog. Saying I am dishonest in my “debate” style is ludicrous. I’m not debating. I’m giving my opinion and many times back it up with facts, other times it’s just an opinion. Guess what? I’m entitled to it and on this blog, SO ARE YOU. Don’t like it? Move on. It’s that simple.
September 10, 2014 at 5:20 pm
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
First of all, report it. I didn’t say anything about sexual orientation in regards to you. It’s your flip-flopping and tortuous path to find peace that make you a nut in my eyes. You shouldn’t have shared so much if you didn’t want people to come to their own conclusions. I am not bullying you. I’ve tried to talk civilly to you about this very issue and you refuse.
Report whoever you want.
September 10, 2014 at 5:21 pm
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
You are NOT being bullied. Everything that was said was true and it came from your own mouth.
This is funny. The bully complaining about being bullied.
September 10, 2014 at 5:29 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
First:
I am not a bully.
Second:
Yes. I. Am.
I did make comments about my background.
That does NOT give you the ability to call me a nut.
Is it morally right to call me a nut?
Did I start out insulting people?
Who started this, me or you?
Does a bully act, or react? Because in all circumstances I know, they ACT.
So tell me, how did this bully find problems from you, when reacting to your actions?
September 10, 2014 at 6:14 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Libby,
The way you debate is dishonest. I won’t keep saying how.
I have not been attacking you.
I have always responded to an attack from you pissed off. I have been reaching out to you. You have not been reaching out to me. And I have done so constantly lately.
In your other post you also blame agent for your attacks. This goes on a lot with you.
It is not ok to belittle people while you give an opinion. Such as calling someone insane for example, they usually reply back calling you an idiot, (as I did).
Then if you continue, they usually call you more names.
This is how we fight every time.
You belittle me.
I bash your head in.
You are trying to claim you now attack first to adjust to my aggressive behavior?
No. You’re saying that because you finally realize how aggressive you look when I don’t really fight back as hardcore. Whereas before you could rely on me swearing at you in reply, which you need in order to spearhead your hate.
You aren’t a good person. This is old. It’s your choice to stop.
September 10, 2014 at 6:19 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Ok Fine, we are doing it this way.
Was it ok to start out calling me insane, and a nut?
Was that ok behavior, and should my reply have been nice to you?
Then you try to link it to my “arrogance”. As if I always think I debate well.
I do debate well. Do I need to demonstrate submission to you and say I am bad at debating to be considered a human?
I think not. When people take an argument they always absolutely believe themselves to be correct. To expect me to argue believing I am wrong is a rather unrealistic expectation.
You say things like that when I’m right in a debate. You can’t win the debate on points, so you try a “you always think you’re right” as a method to take away any actual points on the topic at hand.
It is a dishonest method of debate.
I do not say “you always think you’re right” to you. I say every time, “stay on point, do you disagree here or not?” and then ask for proof.
On one occasion I said I needed proof regarding a Bush W statement and there was no way I believed it. You pointed to the book, I said thanks, and I went on my way.
When I am talked to as a debate, and not as a point for character belittling spree I am always respectful.
It is not a lot to ask, for you to stay on point and refrain from character attacks. Is it?
Really that is a literal question. Is what I’m asking too much to ask?
September 11, 2014 at 9:00 am
LIbby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Bob – I DON’T WANT TO DEBATE WITH YOU. I DON’T WANT TO TALK TO YOU. YOU SUCK. YOU ARE A NUTJOB. LEAVE ME ALONE AND YOU WON’T GET ATTACKED. Is that any clearer for you? I despise you. I will never be nice to you. LEAVE ME ALONE.
September 11, 2014 at 12:54 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Libby,
What in the world is your issue?
You are getting angrier the nicer I get. I am not swearing. You are. I’m not going in a rage. You are.
What seems to be getting you mad, is that I’m pointing out how mean you are.
You can’t yell all caps that I need to leave you alone and I won’t get attacked. This post right here isn’t an attack either.
What you need to do, is stay on point on debates, and not insult my or other people’s character.
End of story. It’s called respect. You can’t just try to justify it again and again and say you will attack us even if we speak because you despise us.
Someone has anger issues here and it isn’t me.
September 11, 2014 at 1:06 pm
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
I do have anger issues. But only with you. I will address those issues by not responding to your constant needling and berating.
September 11, 2014 at 7:33 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
For the last time Libby, no, it is not just with me, and no, I don’t belittle and degrade.
You seem to think that your little zingers and insults you throw out are harmless.
They aren’t. It is why people fight with you.
When you insult my background, my religion, my party, and those who are affiliated with it, I will respond. And I do not berate. I do not belittle.
When I call you names, that is not belittling. It is insulting. You have a hard time dealing with semantics.
You have a problem knowing what is ok to say, and then you have a problem with wondering why people fight with you. The answer is that what you say isn’t ok.
I go over the top in response. But I do NOT randomly berate and belittle you.
Ever.
September 10, 2014 at 4:54 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
You need to stop.
I didn’t have any weed whatsoever. And the car did flip. Get over yourself.
As for going gay for a while I never once said that.
I said I had a disgust toward the vagina, and vastly preferred anal sex.
I explained I knew aversions and sexual growth and how it occurred.
If you aim to call me crazy, we can talk but you won’t like it.
You really are a bad person. Do you look up and say these things and feel proud about it?
September 10, 2014 at 5:02 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
You are literally mocking a real scenario on that one I might add.
You are wrong. End of story. It happened. Does it make you feel good thinking you could mock an accident that could have left people dead?
September 10, 2014 at 5:07 pm
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Who’s mocking an accident? I’m mocking you.
September 10, 2014 at 5:10 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
The accident was part of that mockery.
And it’s not ok to mock me either.
September 10, 2014 at 7:10 pm
nonesaneman says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Bob, not making sport of your afflictions at all, but your post reminded me of the old story about the young dentist who had a fear of “lady parts” because his mother had always told him that they had teeth down there. Well, he confessed this fear to a smitten young lady who invited him back to her place to have a look for himself and so prove that there were no teeth.
After his inspection he remarked: “Well, no wonder you have no teeth. Just look at the condition of those gums!!”
September 10, 2014 at 9:52 pm
nomesaneman says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Bob, not making sport of your afflictions, but you did remind me of the old story about the young dentist who had a fear of the lady parts because his mother told him that they had teeth down there. In time, he confessed this fear to a smitten young lady who invited him to have a look for himself and so prove that there were no teeth. After his inspection he remarked: “Well, no wonder you have no teeth. Just look at the condition of those gums!!”
September 11, 2014 at 1:54 pm
KY jw says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
TMI
September 11, 2014 at 5:03 pm
txmouthbreatherboogereatertx says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Sum dem dang near venus fly traps right Agent?
September 11, 2014 at 7:31 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
KY:
If he had said that to a gay man, would you still hold to it having absolutely no insulting things that the gay man should pay attention to?
Not only was I mocked for my sexual orientation, I was called a blatant liar, and was called a born again Christian as an insult.
No. These are not the types of things that should be ignored, and you would never do so if someone on the right was doing such an attack to someone on the left.
September 12, 2014 at 9:00 am
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
bob – the “right” police. LOL!
September 12, 2014 at 9:50 am
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
If you are mocked and insulted here, why don’t you leave the site? Or. Put on your big boy pants, dry your tears, and man up. But your constant snivelling is really annoying.
September 12, 2014 at 6:03 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Yes, my constant defending myself from you must annoy you Libby.
If you are so offended by me you could leave if you choose.
You don’t have a lot of consistency do you? Just vitriol and hate.
September 15, 2014 at 9:05 am
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
bob – brush up on your reading skills. I’m not offended by you. Just annoyed.
September 10, 2014 at 5:25 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
And you, Booger,
90% of the comments you make to agent are about either his butt, or sucking on another guy, or about his masculinity.
I don’t know why you’re so obsessed with using gay behavior as an insult while saying the zealots hate on gays.
My “finding god” so to speak was not irrational or crazy behavior. Though you saw it that way because I finally realized I dealt with people like you on a regular basis. Religion was frowned on. Kids was frowned on. Hell, where I’m from, taking a relationship seriously from the get go and thinking of marriage is frowned on. Monogamy is frowned on. People that attack like you are why I changed to believe.
You are talking to a Catholic, turned (militant) Atheist (I hope you know what that is. This is why I know all the arguments against the bible, I MADE these arguments over 15 years ago myself kid), turned Agnostic, then turned Christian. Note the changes there and the order.
I could explain the reasons I turned Christian, but you would call me a nut, yet again.
Everyone who saw what happened in my life called me lucky, and said that what has happened in my life leaves absolutely no doubt there is a god. I converted my (girlfriend at the time, now wife). She actually said to me, “I don’t know why you don’t believe in God. I watched you come to me, and tell me you somehow knew your father was going to die, as if you were being told, how, and when. I watched you tell him a week before he died that you would read a book he liked to your daughter. I watched you tell him goodbye a week before his death. I watched you tell me you think I was put in your life because my dad died the same way, before your dad even died. I watched you before that time frame say you didn’t believe and argue against God. And let me tell you, I BELIEVE because of seeing all that has happened with you.”. Those aren’t exact words, but it’s darn close, and then we started going to Christian classes.
I didn’t choose to be Christian. It happened. I feel sorry for you. I’ve been where you are. If you want to talk without mocking the hell out of me, I can go into more detail about what she meant, what happened, and details of my life.
There are few examples of God working clearly in someone lives that match what happened to me. And I’m not going to continue to deny it. That’s why my change seemed hardcore.
“New Christians” seem to be the most vocal about politics and the first to call out everyone else. This is the biggest bang for the buck for the Right. Convert as many as you can, reap that first year commission and keep flipping them over and over as each new tactic ensues. You are wrong about 90% of my posts as I try to keep it in the neighborhood of 94%. I will make sure any hint of masculinity associated with the Right is brought down to Earth, especially in colonies such as Texico. My goal is to made every “rodeo clown” just an extra in Brokeback Mountain 2. So far I’ve identified several candidates on IJ and they will be receiving calls by the casting director soon.
September 11, 2014 at 12:57 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Booger, that post didn’t even make sense.
I’m not running around being vocal about it.
You basically insulted my coming to God, so I explained it.
The people converting around me weren’t told. They TOLD ME. As in with my wife.
I was still an agnostic.
As for the 90% to 94%, that’s some serious attitude right there. You do what I said you do. And then you say the right deserves it. THAT is a preacher zealot. The type who has to attack the unjust, in your righteous manner. I was raised Catholic do you not remember? I know when I see a self righteous jerk.
Please note I am refraining from attacking you. But you aren’t with me, and I seldom see you do it.
I have even said I wish better for you.
But you, you don’t wish better on your enemies. You want to attack, and attack, and attack,
And the reason I said people like you make me believe more,
You constantly want to bring my religion into it, and degrade me for it.
When you have seen this enough, you see it for what it is. You will figure it out eventually Booger.
But until then, try to at least practice some self control, and respect for others.
September 11, 2014 at 1:58 pm
KY jw says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
bob, don’t you get that txmouthbreatherboogereatertx says what he (she?) says to be funny and obnoxious on purpose? It works for him (her??).
Why do you make a big deal out of it?
Libby doesn’t debate. txmouthbreatherboogereatertx doesn’t always make sense.
September 11, 2014 at 7:36 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
KW:
I responded to you in the wrong spot regarding Booger.
But regarding Libby:
Yes. She debates. That’s what her comment was. Unless you are admitting that her comment was just an insult to belittle the comment I had just made as being insane, with that being the sole comment and not to spark a debate on the comment I made.
I actually at that point would be thinking higher of Libby calling it a debate rather than believing it was solely made to insult me.
Are you aiming to say she only meant to insult me and that is ok?
September 12, 2014 at 9:01 am
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Yes, I was aiming only to insult you. And it’s OK with me.
September 12, 2014 at 6:04 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Then you are lacking basic morals.
I don’t ever just start a comment with you just to insult you.
I go for the debate. I can’t believe you think this is ok Libby.
September 15, 2014 at 11:18 am
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
I guess responding to debate my comment by saying “Are you an idiot?” is not trying to insult me in bob-land?
Look. I don’t like you. I will insult you if you continue to needle me. You can point out that it is wrong and tell me I don’t have morals all you want. You are going to get what you have been dishing out for over 2 years to me.
You set the tone. Live with it. Or, you can leave me alone and debate in peace on here.
September 17, 2014 at 1:08 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Libby,
When you call me insane, I typically call you an idiot.
I guess when you called me insane it wasn’t trying to insult me eh?
You said yourself, the only purpose from your comment was not to debate but to attack me.
See above when KY JW joined in. And I said unless you mean to say her goal was to insult me. And you said it was.
It is the only insult I have said thus far.
And trust me Libby, Idiot is not the worst thing to be called when you come in and say something that is absurd.
September 17, 2014 at 6:03 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
A: I did not dish out on you for two years. You just in a recent post yet again talked about “shutting down Texico”. You make politics against entire states. I don’t consider your hate to me a problem, nearly to the degree that you hate sects of people.
B: Following A, you have started this with me. I constantly try to make an end. I say things I feel I did wrong. At no point do you feel you did anything wrong.
C: Following B, it is how you treat people you don’t agree with that make you have morals, not your friends. So when you say you just don’t like me, hello Christian zealot who you hate, that doesn’t practice love, just reasons to hate. That’s you.
D: If you have a problem with C which followed B and A, then maybe you should change B and A and C, and try to treat people well that you disagree with, which explains your hostility to anyone who questions your absurd insults and commentary on politics, that you all too often make into a bullying spree and make fun little one liners and zingers. You aren’t a good person. Good people don’t do this. If you have a problem, say it. Throwing in a zinger at the same time doesn’t make you any better a person than the person you say doesn’t respect you.
September 17, 2014 at 6:04 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Texas:
I was fairly vocal in politics before I became a Christian.
I have been posting here 7 years. I specifically didn’t turn Christian until recently. I was told to turn Christian. My wife pulled me into it. But the change did not happen until recently.
When I was agnostic and told Agent he was acting far too much a religious guy in some of these posts, I was just as active in politics.
You like to label all types of people, and it’s not ok.
September 11, 2014 at 1:09 pm
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
All of this bullshit resulted from a simple question:
“Is bob the guy that flipped his car on a bridge after having contact buzz from weed, then went gay for a while and found God?”
Just what is disparaging about that? I’ll tell you. Nothing.
Booger’s question was an incredibly insulting question, reflecting poorly and insanity on every aspect of my character.
Second:
You joined in, on the bully spree saying a zinger, “in a NUT shell”.
Third: THAT IS BULLYING. Making it fun and pulling everyone in to the zingers and insults. I DO NOT DO THIS.
Fourth:
You made another comment, calling me insane implying I believe in prophecies. Not ok.
All of this came from you refusing to admit it was wrong, and treat me like a human being.
You are used to bullying people and getting others to say it’s ok.
Well, it’s not.
I’m not going to swear about it any longer, even though I’m mad, but I’m still going to say it’s wrong Libby.
September 11, 2014 at 1:26 pm
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
It may be wrong, but it feels so right when I do it to you. You should reflect back on your own past behavior on this forum. Maybe then you will take some responsibility for the circumstances in which you find yourself. Until then, expect more of the same from me.
September 11, 2014 at 3:19 pm
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Bob, it appears that you are having a run in with Libby, Booger, Planet and Shirley. They are the resident trolls on this forum using nasty, name calling posts because they don’t want to debate the issues. They don’t have a leg to stand on, most voted for Obama twice and think he has done a swell job. They also don’t watch any news and prefer to get it on left wing sites slanted horribly to the left. The chickens are coming home to roost on Obama and he has no clue.
September 11, 2014 at 4:43 pm
txmouthbreatherboogereatertx says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Libby, It sounds like you are having a run in with Cliven. Cliven is the resident choad in this forum spreading false information, and copy and pastes from his leaders because he doesn’t want to debate the issues. He doesn’t have a leg to stand on because he’s in a rascal scooter all the time. He votes his party line because he is brain washed from all those men in uniforms that he idolizes. His best friend is the local dog catcher and is doing a swell job. He’ll have his hand out like all Texicans writing off any expense he can because he is an entitled mcjob creator. Even though if he is buying his business on a land contract because he can’t finance it any other way, he’s a swell guy. Just ask him. He has to watch fox news because they yell and scream which works for him due to being deaf because he’s been kicked by a mule too many times. I have no idea what chickens coming home to roost has to do with anything, but it sounds like something an inbred from Texico would say.
September 11, 2014 at 4:46 pm
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Agent – you don’t need to stir the pot. That’s what trolls do.
September 11, 2014 at 4:48 pm
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
LOL, boog!
September 11, 2014 at 7:51 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Libby,
Have you noticed I’m ignoring agents comments?
And I’m not agreeing with them or joining on a band wagon of insults with a horde of friends to bash on another person?
He doesn’t need to stir the pot and he can’t stir the pot.
This is you. Any comments I say are linked to you. I don’t care about agent. I don’t care about other people (I dealt with Booger separately but that is another story). Our conversation here is you. Let’s try not to drag agent into it.
And agent, please try to make comments that sound a little less…Conservative extreme. We have to be representatives of common sense if we want people to like us. We can’t say someone was so stupid they voted for Obama. We can say why Obama was bad, but to call them stupid for voting for him isn’t the right way of doing things…
September 10, 2014 at 4:53 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Are you an idiot? That is not comparable. At all.
The bible has never once stated a time. It has stated a circumstance. The fact that the circumstance has not happened, says nothing to the prophecy itself.
The bible never said the name of the anti christ, even says “not even the son knows the hour”. It even says only two witnesses will know it is the end of the world. You are talking about a prophecy that hasn’t happened. Not a prophecy that people say has happened.
Example: The bible DIDN’T say “And Romney will win in a landslide” and it didn’t happen. The bible would say something a lot more like “A republican who is an a hole will win against a man from the east”. Could that be Obama and Romney? Yes. If it was not though, could that be another circumstance entirely it is talking about? Yes.
That would be the equivalent.
You can’t say the bible was wrong about the prophecy unless you mean to say the prophecy happened to date and didn’t happen how you thought it would. You can’t confirm or deny a prophecy that hasn’t happened.
1 Samuel, 15:3. Do not spare them, put to death all men and women, children and infants. The bible says a lot of things. How many children and infants have you killed today? How many would Jesus kill? Nice book you have there.
I know more on the bible than you. Until I was 18 I read that thing all the time. After I was 18 I tried to work it against itself all the time.
You’re trying to have a biblical debate though, because you cannot discredit my original argument. And that is a dishonest way of debating with me. What was the purpose of your bible quote above? The answer is why I am religious. You feel a need to attack and degenerate religion or those associated with it. Identify this need and you will realize there is no evolutionary reason you would have that need. It isn’t evolutionary. It is biblical. You are being pulled by another to do this. Guess who?
I don’t care what the bible says on the issue. I care about the logic on this. I didn’t aim to argue on prophecy. That is a childish argument to have.
You are aware the prophecy he is referring to says that no one knows the hour of the end of the world.
He says 100 people incorrectly predicted the end of the world so the prophecy itself is wrong. Well…In order for the prophecy to be right the 100 people would have to be wrong as the prophecy said no one knows the hour.
That’s a separate argument though. My original point is still correct:
No amount of someone trying to say the end of the world is coming disproves a prophecy about the end of the world. Whether Christian, Muslim, or hell, the Mayan calendar. The only reason you are trying to discredit the bible is to insult me and link that to insanity believing in the bible to side step my original argument. That is not proper debate.
Do you want a debate on the bible? You aren’t a Christian. Should we talk about 1 Samuel 15:3?
1 Samuel 15:3 is talking about a supposed “incident”. This supposed “incident” of God telling Saul to destroy a town which was evil according to you never happened. So why do you ask me if I have killed children and infants today? At which part of the bible does God tell me to kill infants and babies? There is no section. Assuming the bible were all real (I doubt this), then yes, someone at some point would have killed some babies and men and women. At that point though you can’t be mad because it was God’s will. I’m sure he knew the fate of the ones he had killed. At which point: It wouldn’t matter.
So either that scripture you quoted was real, happened, and didn’t matter because God knew what he was doing.
Or, it was fake, and didn’t happen, and doesn’t matter because it didn’t happen.
In either case, at no point in that scripture does it say to kill your enemies, nor does Christ say that.
Christ tells me to do things you yourself don’t and won’t do. So if we want to have a talk about how often you disregard people for sexual pleasure like a monkey, you won’t like the talk. I want to hear you explain to me how as an atheist, you would care about your selfish desires with sex less than a Christian who is told to abstain until marriage, and dedicate until death.
So in this way, humans are actually acting in a way that really harms themselves. The more sexual partners you have, the less you bond and less dopamine you produce to keep you connected to a future mate. But Christians are actually trying to abstain. Albeit failing often. Atheists are not. They go by impulses and the fact that they are a human. How they “feel” so to speak. The filter of religion is a good thing. I used to hate it as a Catholic. But at the same time, I had and still have a very very different set of rules as to what is ok and what is not than an atheist. There is no way around that. And this set of rules is a higher standard than my atheist peers.
So I would say this is one situation in which the bible is benefiting many people, while you want to insult the bible for being “barbaric” and “regulated” ways of living, I prefer to look at the benefits.
As an atheist why should you forgive your parent, who abused you for life?
You might say because having a good relationship makes you happy. What if it doesn’t make you happy though? What if you can’t be happy because of the severity of what your parents did? But what if, due to religion, you are told that you simply must fix this relationship with your parent, and must forgive them, and as the bible says “sacrifice yourself” as Jesus did himself, for your enemies? People you have no gain from for doing said sacrifice?
I would say you would be more likely to make this sacrifice. Yet another benefit of Christianity, not linked to whether or not the religion itself is correct.
I’m all about benefits. And I see none in being a non believer.
I didn’t used to see any benefits to being Christian either. Until I realized I’m just different from having been raised Catholic and I want my daughter to have the same chance, albeit with a more lenient father and mother.
September 16, 2014 at 7:34 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
My daughter was born first, and that’s why I said I needed to have her have the same chance of being assured a life where she could look past herself and be totally selfless.
I realized it then. I also of course applied that to my second child later on.
September 17, 2014 at 1:05 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Farmer John,
Let me ask you a question. What would your opinion be if I told you the Muslim faith was a violent religion?
Most democrat atheists would defend the Muslim religion.
This does a good job of explaining Muslim quotes of violence. Like I said to you, the quote you used was historical. It was not asking you to kill babies and children. The Muslim violence quotes instruct you to do that to this day. 109 quotes telling you to kill.
Yet atheists typically defend the Muslim faith.
There are roughly 10 different Al Qaeda groups, ISIS, and several other violent Islamic sects.
If I were go up to you, and claim the Muslim religion was evil or barbaric, you would almost certainly defend the faith and call me an ignorant right wing zealot. I have seen it happen. It always happens. Why? Why do you want to defend a literally violent religion and not a peaceful one?
Being a Christian was illegal in Rome until AD 313. Before then, the Christians were persecuted for about 300 years.
Yet you and other atheists state that Christianity has a special type of persecution. You ignore Christianity’s suffrage, and pay attention to the suffrage of let’s just say, the Muslims being killed by ISIS right now.
Why?
It’s a legitimate question to ask an atheist.
Why is Christian suffering ignored?
Why are the people in the U.S. more likely to defend Muslims than Christians who are in current day not murdering? Based on a “supposed” violent past during the crusades? (which if you look into it most historians agree was more about land than religion).
The only answer is something is causing people to focus more on Christians than Muslims. Consistently.
The answer, when faced with a tangible real world statement that has no reason such as “Christians are attacked while Muslims are defended”, is that some force is causing it.
Is it media?
News didn’t exist in 1 AD. Yet Christians were persecuted then, and other religions were not in Rome.
What force Farmer?
There’s only one: Satan.
Pay attention to the attacks, and your word vomit that got you off topic when I was not making a religious debate. You then quoted the bible, in defiance of God.
You had no reason to. You just felt compelled. That is being compelled to hate.
It’s that simple.
September 17, 2014 at 3:48 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
And Farmer:
When I say why do we not focus on Christian suffrage and why do we focus on the crusades, you should note that in a world without a god,
300 years of Christian persecution,
Would be about equal to the Crusades and Inquisition.
But instead you guys have a habit of focusing on just the areas of history that are Christian leaning, and not the ones against Christians.
It would have to be equal in the absence of a god. But it’s not. The nature against Christianity for no reason at all, proves the existence of something that is causing that bias.
It’s simple logic.
I’m not often convinced of the existence of God by “and in the beginning, there was nothing” or other bible quotes.
Like you, I consider most that to be far too likely to be a load of crap. Do you really think I believed in a bible first and a God second?
I actually believed in Evil first, God second, bible to a degree third, after I did more studying of it and found it was more consistent than I thought in some areas.
September 10, 2014 at 5:00 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Let me state this better for you Libby:
He talks about the rapture itself. The rapture itself is a prediction.
You are talking about a person. Not the bible.
If a person takes the rapture (a prophecy) and says “The world will end 2008.”. That is a person being wrong. The prophecy has not been proven wrong 100 times.
100 people took the prophecy to mean something. It doesn’t reflect at all on the prophecy itself. It reflects on the people. The prophecy wasn’t wrong 100 times. Were each of the 100 people saying the world would end the same day? The same anti christ? I think not.
The prophecy itself still remains unproven.
This is logic. I am tired of you acting like that had to do with my religious beliefs.
You don’t even know my opinion on the rapture. At all. I wasn’t making an argument for it. Only against his logics.
The point was to argue against the logic that 100 people being wrong is proof the prophecy itself it wrong.
You are the one who argued with me. You butted in. If you don’t want to argue on it, DON’T BUTT IN.
You said I was insane for suggesting that 100 people saying the world would end is evidence against the prophecy.
Let’s keep this civil, is my comment or is it not correct, that whether people are wrong or right about a prophecy it doesn’t affect whether or not the prophecy is real?
And if your answer is that I was right,
A: You chimed in and were wrong in your comment
B: You chose to make that comment just to harass me
C: Now you’re upset I responded and you have no reason to be.
Don’t act like I randomly argued with you. You chose this conversation.
September 10, 2014 at 5:17 pm
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Yes, your comment was correct (I will not say it’s “right” as I don’t believe in the rhapsody.)
I was not wrong to butt in, this is a blog.
I am not upset that you responded. I don’t give a rats ass.
September 10, 2014 at 5:28 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
You clearly do. That’s why you made the comment.
Act human. We don’t need to fight, and you just caused us to have one for no reason. Especially true because now you get that your comment was just so far off base.
I don’t like fighting with people Libby.
September 12, 2014 at 9:50 am
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Libby, why are you talking about rhapsody and Bob is talking about rapture? Are you so screwed up you don’t know the difference? What do you believe in, if anything?
September 12, 2014 at 9:52 am
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
What I believe in is nobody’s business but mine. I don’t feel a need to pontificate on public forums about my religious beliefs. And I think that is pretty much appreciated by all.
September 12, 2014 at 12:18 pm
txmouthbreatherboogereatertx says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
“Bohemian Rhapsody”
Is this the real life?
Is this just fantasy?
Caught in a landslide,
No escape from reality.
Open your eyes,
Look up to the skies and see,
I’m just a poor boy, I need no sympathy,
Because I’m easy come, easy go,
Little high, little low,
Anyway the wind blows doesn’t really matter to me, to me.
Mama, just killed a man,
Put a gun against his head,
Pulled my trigger, now he’s dead.
Mama, life had just begun,
But now I’ve gone and thrown it all away.
Mama, ooh,
Didn’t mean to make you cry,
If I’m not back again this time tomorrow,
Carry on, carry on as if nothing really matters.
Too late, my time has come,
Sent shivers down my spine,
Body’s aching all the time.
Goodbye, everybody, I’ve got to go,
Gotta leave you all behind and face the truth.
Mama, ooh (anyway the wind blows),
I don’t wanna die,
I sometimes wish I’d never been born at all.
I see a little silhouetto of a man,
Scaramouche, Scaramouche, will you do the Fandango?
Thunderbolt and lightning,
Very, very frightening me.
(Galileo) Galileo.
(Galileo) Galileo,
Galileo Figaro
Magnifico.
I’m just a poor boy, nobody loves me.
He’s just a poor boy from a poor family,
Spare him his life from this monstrosity.
Easy come, easy go, will you let me go?
Bismillah! No, we will not let you go. (Let him go!)
Bismillah! We will not let you go. (Let him go!)
Bismillah! We will not let you go. (Let me go!)
Will not let you go. (Let me go!)
Never, never let you go
Never let me go, oh.
No, no, no, no, no, no, no.
Oh, mama mia, mama mia (Mama mia, let me go.)
Beelzebub has a devil put aside for me, for me, for me.
So you think you can stone me and spit in my eye?
So you think you can love me and leave me to die?
Oh, baby, can’t do this to me, baby,
Just gotta get out, just gotta get right outta here.
(Oh, yeah, oh yeah)
Nothing really matters,
Anyone can see,
Nothing really matters,
Nothing really matters to me.
Anyway the wind blows.
September 12, 2014 at 6:08 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Agent,
I’m fairly sure she was mocking the rapture by saying rhapsody. I think it was intentional…I might be wrong.
Libby,
There you go again basically implying people who put religious opinions online are somehow bad people.
Sharing religious beliefs is a good thing. Fighting about them isn’t.
You can’t form a good believe without sharing alternate beliefs. This actually reflects more on your unwillingness to expand beliefs than it reflects on you being a very open minded individual to facts and points of views.
September 15, 2014 at 9:09 am
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
“There you go again basically implying people who put religious opinions online are somehow bad people.”
There you go with your good and bad, black and white. I never said, or implied, that people who post religious opinions are bad. Just annoying. It’s not necessary or welcomed, especially on an insurance forum.
September 11, 2014 at 6:22 pm
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Bob, so Libby now admits she is a troll. Good for her. Admitting her problem is the first step to finding a cure. She must have be going to Troll Anonymous meetings now.
You technically did Libby, when I asked what the point of your comment was if it wasn’t to debate, and you said to insult me.
I expect that means you wanted a response to that insult.
And then we have the definition of a troll.
September 15, 2014 at 9:09 am
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
No reponse was needed. I just want you to go away.
September 17, 2014 at 3:38 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
I answer your question and no response was needed?
Apparently you don’t even like hearing your own statements.
A response was needed to your question which was designed to make agent look extreme.
September 15, 2014 at 12:50 pm
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Bob, every few years, there is some nutjob who predicts the end of the world, gathers up a few followers and holes up in a cave somewhere for a while until they run out of supplies and have to come out. Man will not know when this is going to happen, only God knows.
Wow, I don’t read “Bob”, but something surely stirred him. And, I’m guessing it isn’t global warming. Let me guess, some of you were called names. Heck, maybe even me.
“Something stirred him.” It was the Rhapsody. And yeah, I called him some names. None that he didn’t deserve. I just wish he would go away. I’m sure there are all kinds of religious websites he could rhapsodize on all day long. I don’t even think the guy works in insurance. He’s never once mentioned anything insurance related. I’m thinking troll.
Label what people deserve and then punish them with the righteousness of (god) Libby.
No, I’ve kept this civil.
I always keep on topic, and you always throw in insults about my debates. When you do that I generally insult you back. This time I have chosen not to.
And am working on that.
And you still throw out insults.
Don’t tell me what I deserve. No human deserves to be treated like crap.
Good. I guess Chrisianity is rubbing off on you with the old turn the other cheek thing. I’ve already told you I will continue to insult you as long as you talk to me on this blog. You have been forewarned.
Ah as long as I debate properly and ask to be treated fairly,
I have been amply warned about the beatings that will ensue.
Libby, you know darn well that’s poor behavior.
September 11, 2014 at 1:18 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
And don’t say “finally” as you yourself aren’t practicing turning the other cheek yourself right now.
You think so highly of yourself.
You are content throwing out insults and forcing others to turn the cheek.
You can’t debate with one liners and zingers and “burns” and expect people to be ok with it.
It’s not ok.
September 11, 2014 at 1:28 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
P.S.
Stop censoring me with the dislikes Libby!
(obviously I’m not serious)
Have you noticed even still, not one dislike from me on your comments?
While we are on the topic of respecting people…
What’s with that disrespectful guy not doing that eh?
September 11, 2014 at 1:32 pm
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
“Ah as long as I debate properly and ask to be treated fairly” No. As long as you don’t talk to me. If you do, you have been forewarned about my likely response.
“And don’t say “finally” as you yourself aren’t practicing turning the other cheek yourself right now.” I wasn’t talking about me. I was talking about you. Check out your prior posts up until this week. You’ll see what I’m talking about.
“You are content throwing out insults and forcing others to turn the cheek.” I’m not forcing anyone to do anything. You have your own choices to make. I have only explained the consequences.
“You can’t debate with one liners and zingers and “burns” and expect people to be ok with it.” Again, for the feint of hearing, I don’t debate. I express an opinion. Sometimes based on facts I source, sometimes not. And you don’t know what I expect. If you aren’t OK with it, oh well. I will keep on keepin on.
September 11, 2014 at 1:35 pm
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Why do you think it is me disliking you bob? I’m certainly not in a minority in that category on here! I venture to say your only fan is Agent. And that’s because he kisses your ass and vice-versa.
September 11, 2014 at 1:41 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
“Ah as long as I debate properly and ask to be treated fairly” No. As long as you don’t talk to me. If you do, you have been forewarned about my likely response.
Being forwarned about being unjustly attacked doesn’t make the attack any more just.
“And don’t say “finally” as you yourself aren’t practicing turning the other cheek yourself right now.” I wasn’t talking about me. I was talking about you. Check out your prior posts up until this week. You’ll see what I’m talking about.
You missed the point. If you’re going to say it, you better practice it. You basically don’t do what you just told me I finally do. Very very ironic comment from you. Also, my comments before this week were always 100% of the time responding to your insults and zingers, as you degraded me. While they were wrong, I shouldn’t have to practice turning the cheek to your rude attacks. But I have now chosen to do so, and now that I have, it doesn’t reflect well on you that you have chosen in consistent fashion not to turn the other cheek. Whether or not I started it is then irrelevant. You’re still continuing now if I even speak. That is abusive behavior. If I talk I am suddenly causing the wraith you will give? No.
“You are content throwing out insults and forcing others to turn the cheek.” I’m not forcing anyone to do anything. You have your own choices to make. I have only explained the consequences.
You have explained horrible consequences of your own choices, not mine. I can speak without having the expectation be that I will be attacked.
Because talking to you whatsoever is punishable by being insulted, no matter how respectful I am. If I don’t accept your one liner and insults, I have to suffer your wrath right? This is a paradox argument, where again, if we don’t accept your zingers and argue back you will give us consequence. This is not a peaceful line of thought.
“You can’t debate with one liners and zingers and “burns” and expect people to be ok with it.” Again, for the feint of hearing, I don’t debate. I express an opinion. Sometimes based on facts I source, sometimes not. And you don’t know what I expect. If you aren’t OK with it, oh well. I will keep on keepin on.
This is a bully. You will insult and insult. Find someone who is eh? Zingers involving slurs and insults based on someone’s religion, or republican affiliation are bullying and basically hate issues, akin to being against gays. It’s not ok for the religious right, it’s not ok for you.
September 11, 2014 at 2:07 pm
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
You keep talking to me….
“Being forwarned about being unjustly attacked doesn’t make the attack any more just.” I don’t attack. I insult you. You have always been the attack dog “bashing my face in” “slapping my face” and many other graphic hints of violence towards me. I only mock and insult.
“You missed the point. If you’re going to say it, you better practice it.” You missed the point. I was mocking you again. You really aren’t too bright, are you?
“You have explained horrible consequences of your own choices, not mine. I can speak without having the expectation be that I will be attacked.” Horrible consequences? Being attacked? A little melodramatic there aren’t we? Why would you WANT to talk to someone that has already told you they intend to mock and insult you? Are you a masochist in addition to being batshit crazy? The consequence will be of your own making. That’s all I can say about that.
“If I don’t accept your one liner and insults, I have to suffer your wrath right?” You don’t have to suffer anything if you just don’t talk to me. Again, why would you want to?
“Zingers involving slurs and insults based on someone’s religion, or republican affiliation are bullying and basically hate issues, akin to being against gays.” Wrong. It is not your religion I mock, it’s your miraculous transformation and constant proselytizing. I have nothing against religion. I have something against people that feel a need to preach about it to me. Again, it only bolsters my claim that you are a nut.
September 12, 2014 at 12:02 pm
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
And bob – reread the post. I didn’t say “finally.” YOU DID.
September 12, 2014 at 12:27 pm
Get your facts straight says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Thought I’d bring up that I too am a fan of Bob’s posts. He’s about the only coherent regular commentator on here. Most others just degrade to childish name calling. While I may not always agree with Bob, at least I understand his views as he explains them civilly.
Figured you could use a breather from all the negative attacks you’ve had lately Bob.
September 12, 2014 at 6:17 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Libby,
As another side comment:
I know you have disliked my comments. I didn’t just accuse you of all dislikes. That’s a nice try at earning some “holier than thou” points against me.
I just said that I have not disliked any of yours. Not once.
It was a comparison stating that any dislikes are not forms of censorship.
I was pointing out how absurd your likes comment was. I personally don’t care.
September 12, 2014 at 6:20 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Thanks getyourfacts straight.
Much appreciated.
I think we all need a breather including Libby. She is angrier than usual.
September 17, 2014 at 6:11 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Just a side comment to all of this Libby:
Stay focused. Who talked to who here? I’ve avoided a lot of your posts.
You talked to me. On one of my posts. And are now infuriated I responded, and are warning me if I ever talk to you I will be insulted.
How is that not bully? I avoided you, you called me insane, I replied to that, and you started fighting with me saying not to talk to you, or you would insult me.
You also said the only reason you put the comment to my original statement was to insult me.
So if I comment at all on this site, you will reply to it, and then state I never have the right to reply to your reply, and that doing so means I have been warned of the insults I will receive.
You aren’t acting logical. You’re in the wrong.
Realize it. Change it. Be a better person.
September 15, 2014 at 12:52 pm
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Libby, you are so stupid you don’t know the difference between Rhapsody and the Rapture. You really need to do some research before making stupid mistakes. I almost think you got that from Planet or Booger.
Even then, I am not giving you consequences currently.
I’m giving you a talk about how wrong this is, and giving you the chance to end it.
September 11, 2014 at 2:39 pm
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
You’re the one dragging this on, not me. Whether I’m right or wrong is besides the point. The fact that you are now deciding to act civil does not negate your past behavior. You can’t just insult and bully me for 2 years, find Jesus, and expect to be forgiven. It doesn’t work that way.
You have said horrible things to and about me. You have never once apologized. I have. What did my olive branches to you get me? Nothing. More abuse.
So, no, I’m not ready to kiss and make up with you just because you’re a sanctimonious blowhard that has just found Jesus. I will forgive, but I will not forget. You were despicable then and you’re despicable now. Now you’re just into a different kind of bullying.
September 12, 2014 at 10:44 am
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Bob, Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned. Libby is the prime evidence of that. I am afraid she has not forgotten all the times you wore her down and she ended up screaming – LEAVE ME ALONE as she has done on this blog once again.
September 12, 2014 at 11:32 am
txmouthbreatherboogereatertx says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Again Cliven, your recaps make us feel we are right back at the scene. I can not express how much I appreciate your play by play analysis. The simpleton point of view makes it much easier for your kind to undertand. The screaming of “LEAVE ME ALONE!” are just spine tingling. For a moment, I thought Howard Cosell was in the booth, but he’s a Jew and we know how you feel about them.
September 13, 2014 at 12:30 am
Captain Planet says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
txmouth,
That last line might be the best one liner you have ever wrote. I was driving away from the office at lunch yesterday, repeating it, and crying.
September 11, 2014 at 1:38 pm
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
And, the only reason I use the buttons are because it grays out the green and red and I can then easily find new posts. It becomes more difficult as the blog gets longer. The Notify me of comments button doesn’t work with my computer. Not that I owe you an explanation.
At what point did I bring up the gays, and at what point did I originally even want an argument about God?
This wasn’t an argument about gays. My notch isn’t up there, bro.
I’m asking to be treated fairly. Not for Libby to accept God. We talked about a prophecy, and whether or not people being wrong on it makes the prophecy wrong 100 times, or the people who were wrong wrong 100 times.
It’s simple “dude”.
You all really want to pull my religion into this, which as I have said several times really just proves to me the existence of God.
Do you try to pull Muslim religion into fights with people who are of Muslim religion?
Do you even honestly try to mention the 109 sections of violence in their bible?
Again, something causes you to revolt against Christianity.
I am treating all here fairly, including you. I didn’t just imply you are a bigot who hated gays now did I?
Bob, I was always told by my parents not to argue about Religion or Politics. It seems to bring out the worst in people, particularly with the Atheist crowd and left wing trolls like we have on this site. They must have a very sad life with nothing to look forward to. In the back of their mind, they have to wonder – is this all there is? Perhaps they are ok with that reality.
I actually very much doubt at this point they want to debate politics.
They just want it there to attack more.
Libby insulted me, then told me screaming to never talk to her.
I didn’t randomly talk to her. I was randomly insulted for no reason at all.
And I responded to that insult.
Apparently if I meet the requirements she has to declare a human worthy of being degraded, she can then insult and insult and insult.
This is beyond the point of insanity.
The folks on here after me I am convinced are specifically doing so because of their lack of Christian faith, and are being compelled to seek my words as more proof of why Christianity is so bad.
I don’t think it has to do with anything of substance. Just some evil, sent from my personal buddy Mr Lucifer, not necessarily for me. More so to entrap the people he clearly already has.
I know evil when I see it, and nonsense. This is evil and nonsense. When something is horribly immoral and keeps coming back to religion and insulting God and religion, I tend to think it has a reason behind it.
Hey WTF, these people have jobs but their employer is not getting much bang for their bucks. They blog incessantly all day on every subject that comes up on IJ. According to them, this is an entitlement that their employer allows.
Exactly Cliven. And as a wonderful owner of a beautiful insurance agenstry/fire works tent, you are all the busier. Funny how in insurance, the “owner” is still selling policies rather than managing, developing new business, and training your slaves. By the way Cliven, businesses on land contracts are more of a hobby farm than an actual business.
Agent,
Were you at the Palin Pumpkin Family Funtime Brawl? Sarah actually asked at one point, “Don’t you know who I am?” Oh, I cannot wait for the video of this to come out. It’s also being reported she was wearing tall white pumps with the American flag on them. This is why God created the video feature for our phones. What happens when Alaska goes Texico-style? Oh yeah, the Palin Pumpkin Family Funtime Brawl, baby! Bristol is going medieval!
Hi Captain, I wish we could say that was a funny political cartoon but unfortunately it is reality. Can you imagine if this stripper trash lead our nation? I mean he people already do, but her in particular. I wonder how the Assembly of God, Inc feels about her antics. I know she is absolved with her 10% tax deductible “misgiving” to a church corporation, but they are a good family just look at their family tree. Like they always say, a family that plays together stays together. Pray tell.
Txmouth, she really demonstrates those family values she gets all preachy about, eh? Bristol was a
real hit at the party, Willow was weeping, Track was racing, Todd was teetering, and Sarah was DBing like she always does. Looks like this family wants their reality show back.
I wonder how many more babies were made after the make up session at the pumpkin farm. Word is Sultry Sarah is still fertile and probably has room for at least 3 more in her tadpole trap. Let’s all come up with 3 possible names for the “Palin Klan” additions.
Good thinking Libby. I was thinking there would be a “Reagan” in there somewhere. One of those Uni-Sexual names. I bet if Sarah would have 5 more, she could name them after the Fab Five University of Michigan Basketball Team. Or was it the Baseketball Team?
I think their names are predominantly “T” – so how about Trash (obvious here), Tumor (family is a cancer on society), and Texas (seems fitting for a family who likes to drunken bawl).
Agent,
Sorry to inform you, but even if you do get your hands on one of those all black burgers from Burger King, consuming it will NOT put more soul in your pole.
Planet, if you are not too busy planning your next company picnic, I suggest you schedule a visit to your psychiatrist and see what can be done about your dysfunction. You and your soul mate Booger need a lobotomy. Try not to get caught peeing on Chick Fil A’s building. That might be hard to explain to your family when they are bailing you out.
That will be the day Planet. You haven’t made an intelligent post on this forum in three years. I am sure you and Booger have gotten together and try to outdo each other on insults to me, steal my moniker to post your hate. Everyone can see what you are doing so you might as well stop now and keep your posts on the subject matter.
Cliven-Lee Harvey Oswald, when are you going to keep your posts on the subject matter? Go back to each article, search the comment section, notice how quick you are to post, read how many of those posts mention “rule by the pen”, Benghazi, taxes, as well as all the other Fox Comedy Soup du Jour. This is why your “moniker” was stolen. You are right though Cliven, it’s a blast insulting you. There’s no outdoing one or the other, it’s complementary.
September 12, 2014 at 10:37 pm
Captain Planet says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Agent, what was your plea deal when you got busted for jizzing on the Chic Fil A building the day you went and bought your I-Hate-Homos sandwich?
Hi Captain, I read a funny but true article in the Texican Repulican Aristocratic Sun Times. It was about an insurance agent that did exactly what you were describing. Turns out he had to perform a few dirty deeds with the DA in order to get out of trouble. He enjoyed it so much, he kept going back for more.
Agent,
Given AP’s indictment, I am starting to understand why you are the way you are. Were you a victim of the rule of thumb as well? If so, I don’t agree with it and am sorry. Texico-tude is like the Catholic Church, 25 years behind the times and willing to abuse little kids. AP cites his Eastern Texico upbringing is the reason why I ask. Does this make Peterson a “Branch Davidian”?
Have you made that appointment yet Planet? From your posts, you appear to have not and perhaps smoking those corn stalks and made you go off a very deep end.
sounds like there is still enough sand left on most beaches for many people to firmly stick their heads in it
Oh Boy! Our monthly Global Warming article from IJ. I wonder how much Al Gore is paying them to publish this.
Ok for the record…This isn’t me.
Or the Bob about the arctic ice.
I was staying out of a lot of these posts for a little while after things were out of hand.
Bob, are you saying that Booger stole your moniker as well?
Cliven-Lee Harvey Oswald, I will always warn you when I will steal your moniker. When can I get you on my podcast by the way?
You nailed it Bob!
Yet…the polar ice cap to the north keeps expanding and getting thicker. Hmm…
hey, What??, I don’t think that comment is correct. all data indicates the arctic ice has shrunk dramatically. yesterday an article announced they are planning to have arctic cruises next year thru the northwest passage. the arctic ice is far less than it was 50 years ago.
Bob, one of my partners just returned from an Alaskan cruise. They went into one of the glacial bays and the tour director said that the Glaciers are growing, not retreating due to Global Warming.
Well, if Julie says so it must be so. Phooey on all those silly scientists. We got us a bonafide tour director in charge up here, by golly.
Libby,
Julie got,like a B- in Science so she is quite the expert. Why do you think she is leading tours all day?
Libby, I think the people who live up there and have observed for years know what is going on more than the debunked fraudulent scientists who have predicted our demise and many have resigned in disgrace. By the way, your scientists that predicted all those hurricanes that didn’t happen are from Colorado State, the land of the weed smokers. Their muddled brains just can’t understand why we haven’t had three or four named bad hurricanes this year.
I’m sure Julie and the crew have a firm grasp on climate change. When Gopher needs to change out of his white shorts, they all know it’s winter.
Agent, currently (as in this week) Iceland and Canada are arguing over the ownership of the Northwest Passage. See, it’s now open (the ice has melted enough that ships CAN get through) and both Canada and Iceland want to be in charge. I’m just guessing here, but that sure sounds like the ice isn’t growing.
Hey KYjw, In today’s journal article, it has an article about oil trains coming through Kentucky carrying the Bakken field oil and they are worried about accidents and volatility. Of course, they wouldn’t have to transport oil by train had the Keystone Pipeline been approved. Do you think Oil trains or pipelines are safer to transport oil? We do need the energy despite all the misguided efforts to do it with switchgrass, algae and wind.
If we could bottle up the hot air from your mouth and the rest of the Neo-Cons, we could get rid of green house gases and fuel the entire economy. No pipeline, no trains, just pure clean air that doesn’t smell like you’ve been eating a shit sandwich all day everyday. We would also go back to learning in our schools instead of learnin’. People could go fishing instead of fishin’. And last but not least, wrasslin’ and racin’ would be capital crimes.
Here. Learn yourself something, Agent.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/himalayan-glaciers-growing.htm
I don’t accept your trumped up pro Global Warming phooey Libby. There is just as much evidence that we don’t have a problem. Do you deny your Global Warming people going to Antarctica last year hoping to find seals and penguins swimming in the warm water and instead getting stuck in the ice? Even ice breakers couldn’t get to them and they had to be rescued by helicopter. That ship has been crushed by now by the extremely thick ice.
That ship was the Russian “Akademik-Shokalskiy” (say it 3 times real fast)was on an expedition/cruise to recreate experiments done by an expedition one hundred years ago. The myth that it got stuck because the ice grew around it is incorrect. Won’t bore with details, but the ice that surrounded it had broken from a big iceberg (due to “Global Warming”, some say) and drifted to their area where it surrounded them surprisingly quickly. However, the irony of “Global Warming people” being trapped in ice is and was duly noted, even if not exactly accurate.
The ship was stuck for about 2 weeks total, the passenges rescued by helicopter about a week or so in. The ship wasn’t crushed. Here it is coming back into New Zealand port:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/southland-times/news/9607412/Akademik-Shokalskiy-arrives-in-Bluff
OMG Nomesaneman! You’re going to confuse Agent with all them there facts. He’s old school, man. Earth is flat, moon is made of cheese, and there ain’t no global warming. Period. After all, he’s from Texas…
Hey nosaneman, good spin. Gee, I wonder what all those news reports with video of this stuck ship were all about for two weeks and them wondering how they were going to be rescued. If icebreakers couldn’t get to them, I think it is pretty bad.
He told you what they were all about Agent. You have got to have the thickest skull in all of Texas. And that’s saying alot!
Partners and cruises? It’s adding up Cliven and I’m proud of you. You are a brave man living in Texico roping a different kind of steed. Just make sure you wrap up your willy if you are going to whore it up.
Libby and txmouth,
I ran into my old science teacher at the Baskin Robins 31 Flavors last night. He said he is pretty darn sure he was on the same cruise. My teacher said that GLOBAL warming and climate change is bigger than Alaksa and a few glacier bays. But, he told Julie thanks for trying out.
If global warming’s real, how come they still got all them 31 flavors? I thought vanilla always melted first.
So Bob, our fearless leader is due to speak tonight on ISIS and Terror. How many ways do you think he will spin it? Any act of terror meets with a reply that we shouldn’t jump to conclusions or it is workplace violence or saying he shouldn’t have played golf after the first beheading because it might not have been the best “optics”.
I say he should take a page out of Slick Willy’s lies. Do you remember Willy saying it depends on what the definition of is is? Obama could just say it depends on the definition of ISIS is. That should satisfy Libby, Planet and Boogerbrain, right?
When I get done watching our fearless leader speak I think I will take my clothes off and rub chicken fat all over my body as I sprawl out in my indoor tree stand. Sometimes I let my mail order bride Mihn Li wipe me down with a rag on a stick so I can get those hard to reach places. When I’m done washing up, I reuse the chicken fat I put on my body the next morning and mix it with my bacon fat for breakfast. Who says I don’t care about the environment and recycling?
Arctice ice pack expanding. By 1.7 million kilometers:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2738653/Stunning-satellite-images-summer-ice-cap-thicker-covers-1-7million-square-kilometres-MORE-2-years-ago-despite-Al-Gore-s-prediction-ICE-FREE-now.html
Good one Dave. These are “inconvenient truths” for the Global Warming freaks who think you can just sail through the Northwest Passage with no problem. Great pictures of the poor Polar Bears who seem to be thriving now. How funny was it that Al Gore was predicting the polar ice would be gone in 7 short years back in 2007.
nomesaneman,
Watch it with your facts. Agent doesn’t like those, ignores them, and goes to tour guides for his scientific method.
Hey liberals!, the Global Warming, oops, Climate Change Debate ain’t over until all the unbiased & uncensored facts say it’s over.
You mean all the Fair and Balanced “facts” from FauxNews? LOL! We’ll all be burned up and extinct and you still won’t believe it. Morons.
Libby…how can you say that Fox News is not fair and balanced??? They are taking current events in the world and reporting them. They have the balls to report the truth where as the left leaning, wussy-liberal media does not. You lefties apparently put way too much stock in the likes of Mika Brzezinski(sp), Rachel Maddow, Chuck Todd, et al.
No, we just put stock in the truth. Faux News spins the facts to suit their agenda.
So does MSNBC, CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC, etc., etc., etc. FOX News just happens to be the only mainstream news channel that leans to the right. In that sense the “fair and balanced” is right on the money as they keep it balanced (considering Fox News has more viewers than all of it’s competitors combined.)by telling the other side of the story; by covering the stories that the Liberal media routinely turns a blind eye to or spins to make it Lefty-friendly.
Just keep on drinking that FauxNews kool-aid Destro.
Normally in a capitalistic market, there would be fair competition. Do you really think Rupert Murdoch would allow such ventures to compete against Fox? The “liberal media” at least has several outlets with varying points of view. If more droids are watching Fox than any other media channel that would be bothersome on many levels. Refers back to the fraternity and evangelical movement of mass mind control. But then again, Australia’s own Rupert Murdoch is part of the Blutty Commonwealth and conservatives would love to be led by the Queeen again. Cheerio Pip Pip and make sure you watch for dingos crikey! Here’s a typical Fox story. Coked up, short skirt tells a story about health insurance, somehow the troops are involved, some country music in the back ground. Then they bring in the meek Alan Combs and start yelling at him to make themselves look “maverick” ggrroowwl. Then the anchor ends up in trouble for sexual harassment or at an airport in Minnesota with in kilo in his sinus and some dust in his beard.
Also, Fox doesn’t just lean to the Right either. That shit tipped over, rolled down Mt Everest, steam rolled through every trailer park in ‘Murrica. The trail of dust left behind is what causes tornadoes in the bible belt. The sin is from the Tazmanian Devil himself, Rupert Murdoch, his flock is just carrying out his dirty deeds.
Don’t forget the Koch Brothers and the Americans for Prosperity that “educates citizens about where their elected officials stand on our issues.” It also has included false attacks about health care reform, clean energy, economic issues, and elected Democrats like President Obama.
And uses FoxNews to do their campaigning for them:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/01/fox-news-koch-brothers-campaign-afp_n_5548191.html
Txmouth, way to channel the great Dr. Hunter S Thompson. Getting all gonzo and shit!
Damn it Captain, writin’ and books are fer queers
If that’s true, then call me Ronald Reagan.
Yes Trust me, these nut jobs would rather download an app and pick up Media Matters, Moveon.org and watch the non reporters of current events of CBS, ABC, NBC, MSNBC and get a thrill up their leg every time their exalted leader lies to the American People.
Trust Me – if you fact-check many things coming out of FoxNews you will find they border on the absurd. But that’s the problem, no-one that watches fact checks. They buy it all lock, stock, and barrel. When someone presents other evidence, it is routinely labeled socialist and completely and utterly dismissed. They are not even a news source, let alone a credible one.
And as such, can not be fair and balanced.
Libby, please cite the incidences of O’Reilly not reporting based on facts. He has a whole department under him fact checking the info before he airs it. I don’t always agree with him because he is soft on liberalism, but I haven’t seen any of the leftists on his program dispute his facts. All they do is spin, spin and spin until he stops them and says this is the no-spin zone. Can Rachel Madcow say the same thing and prove her facts?
Agent – I won’t waste my time providing evidence to you. You’d never believe it and would dismiss it out of hand without researching it yourself.
I knew you couldn’t do it. Knowing you, you spent an hour or two, couldn’t refute anything so you dismissed it out of hand to borrow your wording.
Are you that stupid? I posted a comment a foot long listing all of them. Read it and shut the hell up.
How many have died while fighting the “war on Christmas”? How many have lost limbs due to landmines in this “war on Christmas”? Exactly what facts did O’Reilly use when he declared that there is a “war on Christmas”? Oh no! Somebody said “Happy Holidays” instead of saying the obligatory “Merry Christmas”! Oh, the horror! It’s war! The sky is falling! It’s the end of the world! Stores no longer sell Christmas items, right? All churches have been shut down and forbidden to celebrate Christmas, right?
Yeah, O’Reilly really bases his reporting on facts. He’s not trying to con and scare people into buying his books. Make up a war, sell more books. Cha-ching! There’s a sucker born every minute.
• O’Reilly falsely claimed Bush didn’t oppose 9-11 Commission. O’Reilly defended President George W. Bush from a Kerry-Edwards ’04 TV ad highlighting Bush’s opposition to creation of the 9-11 Commission by denying that Bush had ever opposed the commission. In fact, Bush did oppose the creation of the 9-11 Commission. (10/21/04)
• O’Reilly falsely claimed Iraq had ricin. O’Reilly responded to a caller to his radio show by defending the Iraq war: “They did have ricin up there in the north — so why are you discounting that so much?” In fact, the Duelfer report (the final report of the Iraqi Survey Group, led by Charles A. Duelfer, which conducted the search for weapons in Iraq following the U.S.-led invasion) indicates that Iraq did not have ricin. (10/19/04)
• O’Reilly repeated discredited claims on Iraq-Al Qaeda link. O’Reilly interrupted a former Clinton administration official who tried to correct the record on O’Reilly’s claim that terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi constitutes a direct link between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein’s Iraq. He also allowed a conservative guest to repeat without challenge other discredited claims about Iraq’s supposed involvement in terrorism — claims O’Reilly has himself cited in the past. (9/27/04)
• O’Reilly fabricated “Paris Business Review” as source for success of French boycott. O’Reilly falsely claimed “they’ve lost billions of dollars in France according to ‘The Paris Business Review'” due to an American boycott he advocated of French imports. Media Matters for America found no evidence of a publication named “The Paris Business Review.” (4/27/04)
• O’Reilly cited phony stats to argue that taxes on rich are excessive. O’Reilly tried to “blow off” the argument that wealthy Americans ought to pay more taxes by citing phony statistics about the tax burden the rich currently bear. (6/30/04)
• O’Reilly confused on elementary economics. O’Reilly told a caller on his radio show, “We [the United States] have a trade deficit with everybody, because everybody wants our stuff, and we’re not wild about snails” — indicating that he doesn’t know the definition of “trade deficit” and implying that the United States runs a trade surplus with France. In fact, in the first four months of 2004, the United States had a $3 billion trade deficit with France. (6/10/04)
• O’Reilly doctored quotation to suggest Soros wished his own father dead. During his smear campaign against progressive financier, philanthropist, and political activist George Soros, O’Reilly doctored a 1995 quotation by Soros to make it seem as if Soros wished his own father dead. (6/1/04)
• O’Reilly questioned if Kennedy would show up to Democratic convention … as Kennedy spoke behind him. O’Reilly teased an upcoming segment of The O’Reilly Factor, broadcast live from the Democratic National Convention, by saying of convention speaker Senator Edward Kennedy: “When we come back, we’ll let you listen to Ted Kennedy for a while, if he shows up.” In fact, Kennedy had already shown up and had been speaking for several minutes, as O’Reilly need only have turned around to see. (7/27/04)
• O’Reilly disparaged Democrats with trifecta of voter falsehoods. In a discussion about what went wrong for Democrats in the November 2 election, O’Reilly claimed that Democrats “lost votes from four years ago”; that “18- to 24[-year-old]s didn’t go” to the polls; and that “[c]ommitted Republicans didn’t carry the day for the president; independents did.” All three claims are false. (11/4/04)
• O’Reilly on the radio: Three lies, one broadcast. Lie No. 1: Bush tax cuts didn’t create the budget deficit. Lie No. 2: “Socialistic” French, Germans, and Canadian governments tax at 80 percent. Lie No. 3: Canadian, British, and French media are “government-controlled,” but Italian media is free. (7/7/04)
There’s more if you want it.
You forgot O’Rally enjoys loofas, harassing the gals that work for him, couldn’t get it up so his wife started banging a cop and he threatened her thinking he had some kind of clout. Wow this sounds a lot like Rush Limbaugh
Except for the oxy.
Many of these that you posted, you tried to put a “opinion” around what you perceived were facts in order to cement all of them as facts.
It is a dishonest method of debate.
For example:
“O’Reilly on the radio: Three lies, one broadcast. Lie No. 1: Bush tax cuts didn’t create the budget deficit. Lie No.” <——–Opinion. A 2001 recession is largely attributed to the deficits in that time frame. If it were the tax cuts, then why did the revenues start to grow again, leading to a deficit of 161 billion in 2007? We had two recessions under Bush W. 2001, then 2008. Those affected revenues more than the tax cuts.
That isn't even counting the fact that we continued those tax cuts currently, and when talking about removing them for the wealthiest 1%, that tax increase was considered to be maybe $95 billion per year, so it's impossible that was the main part of the budget deficit. In fact, it's plain out BULL. Subtracting the $95 billion from Bush W's deficits would not have eliminated them. So they were not the sole cause.
http://news.firedoglake.com/2012/08/27/cbo-nearly-1-trillion-saved-by-letting-bush-tax-cuts-over-250000-expire/
The tax cuts are not the reason for the deficit, or they would continue to be for the current president Obama.
I have directed one of your outrageous comments. Do you want me to direct the rest?
Bob – If you have tax cuts and you have a deficit then OF COURSE the tax cuts contributed to the deficit. Without them, the deficit would not have been as big. That’s first grade math, dude.
To act like $95 billion on a nearly $500 billion dollar deficit is what caused the deficits, and without them we would be in Clinton Surplus city is against basic math “dude”.
And in the #1 point, it would not be what “caused” the deficits. It didn’t “create” the budget deficit.
Nobody’s “acting” like anything. How come we have to take everything you say literally (about the rhapsody for example) but you are allowed to read into what other people say and infer you know their thought process behind their statement.
Maybe the tax cuts didn’t “create” the deficit, but they surely contributed to it.
Is that statement true or not true? If you say not true, then you are being a dishonest debater.
“ush tax cuts didn’t create the budget deficit.”
To say this line is correct is a blatant lie.
$95 billion is not a huge contributing factor.
Create: Were there no deficits before the Bush Tax Cuts?
To say $95 billion a year is even close to the problem on what was 3.4 trillion in revenues is completely a fallacy (It went up to 3.8 the following year with no changes in tax code, which is about 11%. That shows it wasn’t the tax rate but rather the economy). That is about 2.5% O’Reily was 100% correct in the statement the 2.5% difference in revenues did not “create” the budget deficit.
I’m not debating dishonestly. Your crud you put up about O’Reily however is dishonest. The guy makes mistakes, as do every source, but your imperfection argument to discredit ALL 100% of his facts is insane. If the source isn’t right 100% of the time they most be wrong eh? Fox News is one of the only agencies that doesn’t say exactly the same thing as every other liberal news agency. Most if not all of what you put above is laughable. So he said “if he shows up” while someone was behind him. Are we in grade school? The 9/11 commission I would have to look up but who cares even if it were true, but I have a hard time believing anything about Iraq from your mouth.
You are basically a clique mentality person. It’s why you are a liberal. It’s popular, easy, and people back you up, and hey you get to beat down Faux News and the racists and homophobes and be the shining white knight right?
Beating down Faux News is exactly the problem with this country, not the solution. It is that mentality that breeds people in ISIS.
Hey, you’re so crazy Faux News, and you republicans rob us poor people, why not kill them right?
Why don’t we repeat France, behead the upper class right? Some good ol’ label the rich, label this, label that, and see how it works out eh?
Just the fact that you’re trying to discredit Faux News as a whole is a huge problem Libby. I use MSN. I use CNN. I don’t discredit them due to some idiotic ramblings of Rachel Maddow and Keith Olbermann. Even they say things that are correct, shocking I know.
The whole line didn’t paste:
“O’Reilly on the radio: Three lies, one broadcast. Lie No. 1: Bush tax cuts didn’t create the budget deficit. Lie”
To say this is correct is the blatant lie I was referring to.
http://www.usgovernmentrevenue.com/year_revenue_2003USbn_15bs1n#usgs302
For the revenues in 2003.
Scoreboard:
Libby – OH SNAP!
Agent – nil
Just as I thought. Dishonest. Quibbling. You suck, bob.
You are honestly saying it is ok to say that 2.5% of our total annual revenues “created” the deficit with the Bush Tax cuts?
I am not debating dishonestly. These are numbers.
I suck? Keep. The debate. As numbers.
Give me evidence why I am wrong. Not personal attacks.
I might add the $95 billion is estimated from 10 years starting in 2012, accounting for inflation, the amount is actually more like $60 billion from Bush’s time period, which is actually 1.8 percent.
You need to admit your source that called O’Reily a liar for saying the Bush Tax Cuts didn’t “create” the deficit is wrong. It absolutely did not create the deficit. It absolutely was barely a contributing factor. Ergo, why those tax cuts are still mostly in affect.
Bob – if you spent less time flapping your gums and more time trying to comprehend you will have understood that I agreed with you, and changed the statement to “Bush tax cuts contributed to the budget deficit.” I did not state the amount of contribution, just that they contributed. Now. Try to tell me that my statement is wrong. I dare you.
When you switched the argument you didn’t admit that thusly, O’Reily did not lie.
You instead said I was being dishonest.
Your (I’m assuming quoted from a link) comment specifically said O’reily lied based on the phrase “created”. Now you have gone so far off topic, you changed what it meant, and now it is a true statement?
That’s the definition of dishonest and is why I said you were dishonest to begin with. I’m completely on point. You aren’t. It was wrong to start, with basically putting things like that (opinions rather than facts) in there as a means to collect some mass piece that you claim are “all” lies or incorrect info and now you’re going to shift it to “contributed” and say it was accurate? No. The whole thing was you twisting the scenario. Most of those mean nothing. At all. And you’re trying to destroy both his character and his credibility with lies yourself.
While we are on contributing to the debt what “contributes” more, 1.8% in taxes, or $1 trillion in spending excess per year for roughly 4 years? Which one should we be focusing on? You are on O’reily for saying Bush W’s tax cuts didn’t create the debt, then switch it to well they contributed, and then you want to ignored what amounted to an increase of 17% of our total revenues? (accounting for federal, state, and local we were at 5.7 trillion. This is a generous number).
bob – if I admit I was wrong will you shut the hell up? This is just a different kind of bullying from you, but bullying just the same. Give it a f’n rest.
It is not bullying.
I gave you every piece of information while you tried to twist facts. I’m debating.
You really don’t like people sticking to facts I suppose.
And you had every choice whether to keep debating it or saying “ok well I don’t agree, we can agree to disagree”
I’m not bullying you into responding.
I am demanding you debate honestly. There is a difference.
This is old. Debate with respect. Not ending each sentence saying this is new for a bully but a bully none the less.
You are the bully. I won’t have it flipped. And we won’t be having swearing matches anymore. I’ll just let you do that and go off the rails. I don’t have to anymore. It just gives you power.
Libby–you cannot be fair and balanced when you do your fact checking by turning on NBC, MSNBC, CNN, etc. So…you’re saying that these so-called news sources are credible? Please!! They are not the free speaking media that they are supposed to be-they are supposed to report the TRUTH. Instead, they report what they are TOLD to report and HOW to report it. Go fact check THAT.
Trust Me – I do not watch the news. I do my research online with many different sources, even FoxNews. But I do like Brian Williams. He strikes me as a credible journalist.
News sources have always chosen to report what they determine to be newsworthy. That doesn’t make them slanted. In fact, there are alot if things reported on that I wish weren’t. That’s why I don’t watch the news.
But many times FoxNews’ “reporting” consists of half-truths and exagerrations, if not out-and-out lies. That’s not fair and balanced. It’s dishonest reporting.
And if you fact check MSNBC, CNN, NBC, etc. you’ll find they have crossed the border on the absurd. And that’s the problem, your (and by extension all liberals) dissonance to the bullshit that is spewed out consistently that pushes a false narrative or Leftist agenda.
What part of I don’t watch the news do you not understand? I don’t need to watch the news to know what to think. That’s the problem with the right. They need FauxNews to tell them what to think.
Libby, you are much like the apparently departed Ron and gather your info from left leaning sites or our wonderful government who really stretches the truth on just about every issue confronting the country. How many lies has Obama told this country in the past 6 years? How has that worked out for the country.
Cliven, you get your news from a tin foil hat. It usually comes from your fellow Texican Alex Jones. My question to you is how good of a reception do you get while you are in your bunker? There is a lot of metal there between the cans of dog food, the bunker itself, the metal plate in your head, etc. Don’t you every think that maybe you are getting some of your signals crossed?
Yeah Libby, how can you say that Fox News isn’t fair and balanced? All their “journalist” come from tabloid papers and tv shows like Current Affair and MTV or magazines like Maxim. Man I just want to get some blow and watch those short skirts right now. Oh that’s right, they have short skirts because when you do blow all day your attention span goes away and they wouldn’t be able to get anyone to watch that “dribble”.
At one point, on Fox News, they were criticizing the movie “Noah” because it showed Noah drinking alcohol. They said that, according to the Bible, Noah never drank. They actually said that. The Fox News Bible-thumpers don’t even know what’s in their own Bible. Then again, most Bible-thumpers don’t.
Allow me to correct you:
The bible thumpers you choose to focus on don’t know the bible.
We choose not to focus on them at all.
No. You basically bring them up all the time.
You focus on them quite a bit. The only reason you just said what you did is yet again, to feel good about yourself.
You are the zealot. Not the bible thumper so to speak.
Apparently, you know nothing about history. Water was not safe to drink back in the day. That is why they drank wine. I do agree that Noah was a bad movie and took big liberties with the truth of what really happened back then.
Apparantly FoxNews knows nothing about history. They are the ones that said it.
The only things growing thicker than the polar cap are the skulls of the Gaia-worshipping global warming enthusiasts. I say BRING IT ON, SUN! I want to grow grapes in my backyard and host a luau in my backyard in January.
Speaking of ridiculous predictions that have repeatedly failed to come true, how about that rapture? Now that’s something you can really believe. The predictions may have been wrong 100 times, but that 101st time will definitely be correct. Any day now, the chosen ones will float up into the sky (and they won’t even need oxygen masks), and the savior will descend from his sky-throne and burn all those evil scientists.
The bible states no one knows the day of the rapture, so all predictions will be false.
And, finally, we’ll have the place to ourselves. Amen brother.
What is this nonsense?
Shirley, the rapture is meant to happen once. The predictions haven’t failed to come true 100 times. The fact that the end of the world hasn’t happened, does not prove it may or may not happen, either side.
People have ignorantly been wrong 1000’s of times trying to predict the rapture. That doesn’t reflect on the prediction itself, if it were valid. This is the most illogical argument I have ever seen what seems to be an atheist make.
So if I predict Romney will beat Obama in a landslide and that doesn’t happen, the prediction is still valid? Are you kidding me? Go back to reading Revelations and leave the real world to the sane people.
Is bob the guy that flipped his car on a bridge after having contact buzz from weed, then went gay for a while and found God?
Yup! That’s him in a “nut”shell.
This here Libby?
Is bullying. It is clique style arguing. That’s crazy ol’e him.
The car flipping happened. They went off a bridge. Contact highs do for a fact cause tunnel vision. To say it doesn’t affect driving is bull crap.
I have used the drug. It does not enhance your ability to focus. It limits it. This is not an opinion.
All he asked is if that was you and I confirmed. All the other stuff you post confirms your nuthood.
No. Just hell no.
You don’t get to insult me, and say that’s the nut job there!
Then say all you did was confirm. You joined the insulting band wagon. You will apologize immediately. ENOUGH!
Do I need to report you?
Uh oh. I’m on report. Are you going to ground me, too?
Do you have any idea how immature you are?
You’re basically saying “na na na na na na, I can insult you all I want, what are you going to do?”
I have tried to keep this peaceful. You’re acting like an inhuman jerk.
Knock it off. Seriously. It doesn’t make you the cool kid to start talking like this.
Look up bullying. Seriously. Look up gay bullying.
You and booger just did it.
You brought up my sexual orientation in an insult to call me a nut.
You’re so open minded and accepting though. It’s those “other” republicans and zealots who attack people right?
As long as I’m the bad guy it’s ok to attack me right?
Look in the mirror kiddo! It’s you! You’re the issue.
You’re the person who doesn’t seek peace. You’re the one who seeks the labels. You’re the one who insults after you establish them.
This is old. I’m tired of it. If you would like I can just report this based on sexual harassment. You know this is wrong.
Bob – you have been attacking me for years. And I have tried to reach some kind of amiable existence with you several times. Yet you continue to insult me and call me names. Now, I just beat you to the punch and that angers you.
You think you are the be all and end all of debating. Newsflash, pal, this isn’t a debate forum. It’s a blog. People’s opinions and emotions come out on a blog. Saying I am dishonest in my “debate” style is ludicrous. I’m not debating. I’m giving my opinion and many times back it up with facts, other times it’s just an opinion. Guess what? I’m entitled to it and on this blog, SO ARE YOU. Don’t like it? Move on. It’s that simple.
First of all, report it. I didn’t say anything about sexual orientation in regards to you. It’s your flip-flopping and tortuous path to find peace that make you a nut in my eyes. You shouldn’t have shared so much if you didn’t want people to come to their own conclusions. I am not bullying you. I’ve tried to talk civilly to you about this very issue and you refuse.
Report whoever you want.
You are NOT being bullied. Everything that was said was true and it came from your own mouth.
This is funny. The bully complaining about being bullied.
First:
I am not a bully.
Second:
Yes. I. Am.
I did make comments about my background.
That does NOT give you the ability to call me a nut.
Is it morally right to call me a nut?
Did I start out insulting people?
Who started this, me or you?
Does a bully act, or react? Because in all circumstances I know, they ACT.
So tell me, how did this bully find problems from you, when reacting to your actions?
Libby,
The way you debate is dishonest. I won’t keep saying how.
I have not been attacking you.
I have always responded to an attack from you pissed off. I have been reaching out to you. You have not been reaching out to me. And I have done so constantly lately.
In your other post you also blame agent for your attacks. This goes on a lot with you.
It is not ok to belittle people while you give an opinion. Such as calling someone insane for example, they usually reply back calling you an idiot, (as I did).
Then if you continue, they usually call you more names.
This is how we fight every time.
You belittle me.
I bash your head in.
You are trying to claim you now attack first to adjust to my aggressive behavior?
No. You’re saying that because you finally realize how aggressive you look when I don’t really fight back as hardcore. Whereas before you could rely on me swearing at you in reply, which you need in order to spearhead your hate.
You aren’t a good person. This is old. It’s your choice to stop.
Ok Fine, we are doing it this way.
Was it ok to start out calling me insane, and a nut?
Was that ok behavior, and should my reply have been nice to you?
Then you try to link it to my “arrogance”. As if I always think I debate well.
I do debate well. Do I need to demonstrate submission to you and say I am bad at debating to be considered a human?
I think not. When people take an argument they always absolutely believe themselves to be correct. To expect me to argue believing I am wrong is a rather unrealistic expectation.
You say things like that when I’m right in a debate. You can’t win the debate on points, so you try a “you always think you’re right” as a method to take away any actual points on the topic at hand.
It is a dishonest method of debate.
I do not say “you always think you’re right” to you. I say every time, “stay on point, do you disagree here or not?” and then ask for proof.
On one occasion I said I needed proof regarding a Bush W statement and there was no way I believed it. You pointed to the book, I said thanks, and I went on my way.
When I am talked to as a debate, and not as a point for character belittling spree I am always respectful.
It is not a lot to ask, for you to stay on point and refrain from character attacks. Is it?
Really that is a literal question. Is what I’m asking too much to ask?
Bob – I DON’T WANT TO DEBATE WITH YOU. I DON’T WANT TO TALK TO YOU. YOU SUCK. YOU ARE A NUTJOB. LEAVE ME ALONE AND YOU WON’T GET ATTACKED. Is that any clearer for you? I despise you. I will never be nice to you. LEAVE ME ALONE.
Libby,
What in the world is your issue?
You are getting angrier the nicer I get. I am not swearing. You are. I’m not going in a rage. You are.
What seems to be getting you mad, is that I’m pointing out how mean you are.
You can’t yell all caps that I need to leave you alone and I won’t get attacked. This post right here isn’t an attack either.
What you need to do, is stay on point on debates, and not insult my or other people’s character.
End of story. It’s called respect. You can’t just try to justify it again and again and say you will attack us even if we speak because you despise us.
Someone has anger issues here and it isn’t me.
I do have anger issues. But only with you. I will address those issues by not responding to your constant needling and berating.
For the last time Libby, no, it is not just with me, and no, I don’t belittle and degrade.
You seem to think that your little zingers and insults you throw out are harmless.
They aren’t. It is why people fight with you.
When you insult my background, my religion, my party, and those who are affiliated with it, I will respond. And I do not berate. I do not belittle.
When I call you names, that is not belittling. It is insulting. You have a hard time dealing with semantics.
You have a problem knowing what is ok to say, and then you have a problem with wondering why people fight with you. The answer is that what you say isn’t ok.
I go over the top in response. But I do NOT randomly berate and belittle you.
Ever.
You need to stop.
I didn’t have any weed whatsoever. And the car did flip. Get over yourself.
As for going gay for a while I never once said that.
I said I had a disgust toward the vagina, and vastly preferred anal sex.
I explained I knew aversions and sexual growth and how it occurred.
If you aim to call me crazy, we can talk but you won’t like it.
Nut.
If you say so.
You really are a bad person. Do you look up and say these things and feel proud about it?
You are literally mocking a real scenario on that one I might add.
You are wrong. End of story. It happened. Does it make you feel good thinking you could mock an accident that could have left people dead?
Who’s mocking an accident? I’m mocking you.
The accident was part of that mockery.
And it’s not ok to mock me either.
Bob, not making sport of your afflictions at all, but your post reminded me of the old story about the young dentist who had a fear of “lady parts” because his mother had always told him that they had teeth down there. Well, he confessed this fear to a smitten young lady who invited him back to her place to have a look for himself and so prove that there were no teeth.
After his inspection he remarked: “Well, no wonder you have no teeth. Just look at the condition of those gums!!”
Bob, not making sport of your afflictions, but you did remind me of the old story about the young dentist who had a fear of the lady parts because his mother told him that they had teeth down there. In time, he confessed this fear to a smitten young lady who invited him to have a look for himself and so prove that there were no teeth. After his inspection he remarked: “Well, no wonder you have no teeth. Just look at the condition of those gums!!”
TMI
Sum dem dang near venus fly traps right Agent?
KY:
If he had said that to a gay man, would you still hold to it having absolutely no insulting things that the gay man should pay attention to?
Not only was I mocked for my sexual orientation, I was called a blatant liar, and was called a born again Christian as an insult.
No. These are not the types of things that should be ignored, and you would never do so if someone on the right was doing such an attack to someone on the left.
bob – the “right” police. LOL!
If you are mocked and insulted here, why don’t you leave the site? Or. Put on your big boy pants, dry your tears, and man up. But your constant snivelling is really annoying.
Yes, my constant defending myself from you must annoy you Libby.
If you are so offended by me you could leave if you choose.
You don’t have a lot of consistency do you? Just vitriol and hate.
bob – brush up on your reading skills. I’m not offended by you. Just annoyed.
And you, Booger,
90% of the comments you make to agent are about either his butt, or sucking on another guy, or about his masculinity.
I don’t know why you’re so obsessed with using gay behavior as an insult while saying the zealots hate on gays.
My “finding god” so to speak was not irrational or crazy behavior. Though you saw it that way because I finally realized I dealt with people like you on a regular basis. Religion was frowned on. Kids was frowned on. Hell, where I’m from, taking a relationship seriously from the get go and thinking of marriage is frowned on. Monogamy is frowned on. People that attack like you are why I changed to believe.
You are talking to a Catholic, turned (militant) Atheist (I hope you know what that is. This is why I know all the arguments against the bible, I MADE these arguments over 15 years ago myself kid), turned Agnostic, then turned Christian. Note the changes there and the order.
I could explain the reasons I turned Christian, but you would call me a nut, yet again.
Everyone who saw what happened in my life called me lucky, and said that what has happened in my life leaves absolutely no doubt there is a god. I converted my (girlfriend at the time, now wife). She actually said to me, “I don’t know why you don’t believe in God. I watched you come to me, and tell me you somehow knew your father was going to die, as if you were being told, how, and when. I watched you tell him a week before he died that you would read a book he liked to your daughter. I watched you tell him goodbye a week before his death. I watched you tell me you think I was put in your life because my dad died the same way, before your dad even died. I watched you before that time frame say you didn’t believe and argue against God. And let me tell you, I BELIEVE because of seeing all that has happened with you.”. Those aren’t exact words, but it’s darn close, and then we started going to Christian classes.
I didn’t choose to be Christian. It happened. I feel sorry for you. I’ve been where you are. If you want to talk without mocking the hell out of me, I can go into more detail about what she meant, what happened, and details of my life.
There are few examples of God working clearly in someone lives that match what happened to me. And I’m not going to continue to deny it. That’s why my change seemed hardcore.
“New Christians” seem to be the most vocal about politics and the first to call out everyone else. This is the biggest bang for the buck for the Right. Convert as many as you can, reap that first year commission and keep flipping them over and over as each new tactic ensues. You are wrong about 90% of my posts as I try to keep it in the neighborhood of 94%. I will make sure any hint of masculinity associated with the Right is brought down to Earth, especially in colonies such as Texico. My goal is to made every “rodeo clown” just an extra in Brokeback Mountain 2. So far I’ve identified several candidates on IJ and they will be receiving calls by the casting director soon.
Booger, that post didn’t even make sense.
I’m not running around being vocal about it.
You basically insulted my coming to God, so I explained it.
The people converting around me weren’t told. They TOLD ME. As in with my wife.
I was still an agnostic.
As for the 90% to 94%, that’s some serious attitude right there. You do what I said you do. And then you say the right deserves it. THAT is a preacher zealot. The type who has to attack the unjust, in your righteous manner. I was raised Catholic do you not remember? I know when I see a self righteous jerk.
Please note I am refraining from attacking you. But you aren’t with me, and I seldom see you do it.
I have even said I wish better for you.
But you, you don’t wish better on your enemies. You want to attack, and attack, and attack,
And the reason I said people like you make me believe more,
You constantly want to bring my religion into it, and degrade me for it.
When you have seen this enough, you see it for what it is. You will figure it out eventually Booger.
But until then, try to at least practice some self control, and respect for others.
bob, don’t you get that txmouthbreatherboogereatertx says what he (she?) says to be funny and obnoxious on purpose? It works for him (her??).
Why do you make a big deal out of it?
Libby doesn’t debate. txmouthbreatherboogereatertx doesn’t always make sense.
KW:
I responded to you in the wrong spot regarding Booger.
But regarding Libby:
Yes. She debates. That’s what her comment was. Unless you are admitting that her comment was just an insult to belittle the comment I had just made as being insane, with that being the sole comment and not to spark a debate on the comment I made.
I actually at that point would be thinking higher of Libby calling it a debate rather than believing it was solely made to insult me.
Are you aiming to say she only meant to insult me and that is ok?
Yes, I was aiming only to insult you. And it’s OK with me.
Then you are lacking basic morals.
I don’t ever just start a comment with you just to insult you.
I go for the debate. I can’t believe you think this is ok Libby.
I guess responding to debate my comment by saying “Are you an idiot?” is not trying to insult me in bob-land?
Look. I don’t like you. I will insult you if you continue to needle me. You can point out that it is wrong and tell me I don’t have morals all you want. You are going to get what you have been dishing out for over 2 years to me.
You set the tone. Live with it. Or, you can leave me alone and debate in peace on here.
Libby,
When you call me insane, I typically call you an idiot.
I guess when you called me insane it wasn’t trying to insult me eh?
You said yourself, the only purpose from your comment was not to debate but to attack me.
See above when KY JW joined in. And I said unless you mean to say her goal was to insult me. And you said it was.
It is the only insult I have said thus far.
And trust me Libby, Idiot is not the worst thing to be called when you come in and say something that is absurd.
A: I did not dish out on you for two years. You just in a recent post yet again talked about “shutting down Texico”. You make politics against entire states. I don’t consider your hate to me a problem, nearly to the degree that you hate sects of people.
B: Following A, you have started this with me. I constantly try to make an end. I say things I feel I did wrong. At no point do you feel you did anything wrong.
C: Following B, it is how you treat people you don’t agree with that make you have morals, not your friends. So when you say you just don’t like me, hello Christian zealot who you hate, that doesn’t practice love, just reasons to hate. That’s you.
D: If you have a problem with C which followed B and A, then maybe you should change B and A and C, and try to treat people well that you disagree with, which explains your hostility to anyone who questions your absurd insults and commentary on politics, that you all too often make into a bullying spree and make fun little one liners and zingers. You aren’t a good person. Good people don’t do this. If you have a problem, say it. Throwing in a zinger at the same time doesn’t make you any better a person than the person you say doesn’t respect you.
Texas:
I was fairly vocal in politics before I became a Christian.
I have been posting here 7 years. I specifically didn’t turn Christian until recently. I was told to turn Christian. My wife pulled me into it. But the change did not happen until recently.
When I was agnostic and told Agent he was acting far too much a religious guy in some of these posts, I was just as active in politics.
You like to label all types of people, and it’s not ok.
All of this bullshit resulted from a simple question:
“Is bob the guy that flipped his car on a bridge after having contact buzz from weed, then went gay for a while and found God?”
Just what is disparaging about that? I’ll tell you. Nothing.
First:
Booger’s question was an incredibly insulting question, reflecting poorly and insanity on every aspect of my character.
Second:
You joined in, on the bully spree saying a zinger, “in a NUT shell”.
Third: THAT IS BULLYING. Making it fun and pulling everyone in to the zingers and insults. I DO NOT DO THIS.
Fourth:
You made another comment, calling me insane implying I believe in prophecies. Not ok.
All of this came from you refusing to admit it was wrong, and treat me like a human being.
You are used to bullying people and getting others to say it’s ok.
Well, it’s not.
I’m not going to swear about it any longer, even though I’m mad, but I’m still going to say it’s wrong Libby.
It may be wrong, but it feels so right when I do it to you. You should reflect back on your own past behavior on this forum. Maybe then you will take some responsibility for the circumstances in which you find yourself. Until then, expect more of the same from me.
Bob, it appears that you are having a run in with Libby, Booger, Planet and Shirley. They are the resident trolls on this forum using nasty, name calling posts because they don’t want to debate the issues. They don’t have a leg to stand on, most voted for Obama twice and think he has done a swell job. They also don’t watch any news and prefer to get it on left wing sites slanted horribly to the left. The chickens are coming home to roost on Obama and he has no clue.
Libby, It sounds like you are having a run in with Cliven. Cliven is the resident choad in this forum spreading false information, and copy and pastes from his leaders because he doesn’t want to debate the issues. He doesn’t have a leg to stand on because he’s in a rascal scooter all the time. He votes his party line because he is brain washed from all those men in uniforms that he idolizes. His best friend is the local dog catcher and is doing a swell job. He’ll have his hand out like all Texicans writing off any expense he can because he is an entitled mcjob creator. Even though if he is buying his business on a land contract because he can’t finance it any other way, he’s a swell guy. Just ask him. He has to watch fox news because they yell and scream which works for him due to being deaf because he’s been kicked by a mule too many times. I have no idea what chickens coming home to roost has to do with anything, but it sounds like something an inbred from Texico would say.
Agent – you don’t need to stir the pot. That’s what trolls do.
LOL, boog!
Libby,
Have you noticed I’m ignoring agents comments?
And I’m not agreeing with them or joining on a band wagon of insults with a horde of friends to bash on another person?
He doesn’t need to stir the pot and he can’t stir the pot.
This is you. Any comments I say are linked to you. I don’t care about agent. I don’t care about other people (I dealt with Booger separately but that is another story). Our conversation here is you. Let’s try not to drag agent into it.
And agent, please try to make comments that sound a little less…Conservative extreme. We have to be representatives of common sense if we want people to like us. We can’t say someone was so stupid they voted for Obama. We can say why Obama was bad, but to call them stupid for voting for him isn’t the right way of doing things…
Are you an idiot? That is not comparable. At all.
The bible has never once stated a time. It has stated a circumstance. The fact that the circumstance has not happened, says nothing to the prophecy itself.
The bible never said the name of the anti christ, even says “not even the son knows the hour”. It even says only two witnesses will know it is the end of the world. You are talking about a prophecy that hasn’t happened. Not a prophecy that people say has happened.
Example: The bible DIDN’T say “And Romney will win in a landslide” and it didn’t happen. The bible would say something a lot more like “A republican who is an a hole will win against a man from the east”. Could that be Obama and Romney? Yes. If it was not though, could that be another circumstance entirely it is talking about? Yes.
That would be the equivalent.
You can’t say the bible was wrong about the prophecy unless you mean to say the prophecy happened to date and didn’t happen how you thought it would. You can’t confirm or deny a prophecy that hasn’t happened.
1 Samuel, 15:3. Do not spare them, put to death all men and women, children and infants. The bible says a lot of things. How many children and infants have you killed today? How many would Jesus kill? Nice book you have there.
I know more on the bible than you. Until I was 18 I read that thing all the time. After I was 18 I tried to work it against itself all the time.
You’re trying to have a biblical debate though, because you cannot discredit my original argument. And that is a dishonest way of debating with me. What was the purpose of your bible quote above? The answer is why I am religious. You feel a need to attack and degenerate religion or those associated with it. Identify this need and you will realize there is no evolutionary reason you would have that need. It isn’t evolutionary. It is biblical. You are being pulled by another to do this. Guess who?
I don’t care what the bible says on the issue. I care about the logic on this. I didn’t aim to argue on prophecy. That is a childish argument to have.
You are aware the prophecy he is referring to says that no one knows the hour of the end of the world.
He says 100 people incorrectly predicted the end of the world so the prophecy itself is wrong. Well…In order for the prophecy to be right the 100 people would have to be wrong as the prophecy said no one knows the hour.
That’s a separate argument though. My original point is still correct:
No amount of someone trying to say the end of the world is coming disproves a prophecy about the end of the world. Whether Christian, Muslim, or hell, the Mayan calendar. The only reason you are trying to discredit the bible is to insult me and link that to insanity believing in the bible to side step my original argument. That is not proper debate.
Do you want a debate on the bible? You aren’t a Christian. Should we talk about 1 Samuel 15:3?
1 Samuel 15:3 is talking about a supposed “incident”. This supposed “incident” of God telling Saul to destroy a town which was evil according to you never happened. So why do you ask me if I have killed children and infants today? At which part of the bible does God tell me to kill infants and babies? There is no section. Assuming the bible were all real (I doubt this), then yes, someone at some point would have killed some babies and men and women. At that point though you can’t be mad because it was God’s will. I’m sure he knew the fate of the ones he had killed. At which point: It wouldn’t matter.
So either that scripture you quoted was real, happened, and didn’t matter because God knew what he was doing.
Or, it was fake, and didn’t happen, and doesn’t matter because it didn’t happen.
In either case, at no point in that scripture does it say to kill your enemies, nor does Christ say that.
Christ tells me to do things you yourself don’t and won’t do. So if we want to have a talk about how often you disregard people for sexual pleasure like a monkey, you won’t like the talk. I want to hear you explain to me how as an atheist, you would care about your selfish desires with sex less than a Christian who is told to abstain until marriage, and dedicate until death.
Just as an FYI on that one:
http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/healthscience/2010/march/sexually-indulgent-now-marriage-ruined-later/
So in this way, humans are actually acting in a way that really harms themselves. The more sexual partners you have, the less you bond and less dopamine you produce to keep you connected to a future mate. But Christians are actually trying to abstain. Albeit failing often. Atheists are not. They go by impulses and the fact that they are a human. How they “feel” so to speak. The filter of religion is a good thing. I used to hate it as a Catholic. But at the same time, I had and still have a very very different set of rules as to what is ok and what is not than an atheist. There is no way around that. And this set of rules is a higher standard than my atheist peers.
So I would say this is one situation in which the bible is benefiting many people, while you want to insult the bible for being “barbaric” and “regulated” ways of living, I prefer to look at the benefits.
As an atheist why should you forgive your parent, who abused you for life?
You might say because having a good relationship makes you happy. What if it doesn’t make you happy though? What if you can’t be happy because of the severity of what your parents did? But what if, due to religion, you are told that you simply must fix this relationship with your parent, and must forgive them, and as the bible says “sacrifice yourself” as Jesus did himself, for your enemies? People you have no gain from for doing said sacrifice?
I would say you would be more likely to make this sacrifice. Yet another benefit of Christianity, not linked to whether or not the religion itself is correct.
I’m all about benefits. And I see none in being a non believer.
I didn’t used to see any benefits to being Christian either. Until I realized I’m just different from having been raised Catholic and I want my daughter to have the same chance, albeit with a more lenient father and mother.
My daughter was born first, and that’s why I said I needed to have her have the same chance of being assured a life where she could look past herself and be totally selfless.
I realized it then. I also of course applied that to my second child later on.
Farmer John,
Let me ask you a question. What would your opinion be if I told you the Muslim faith was a violent religion?
Most democrat atheists would defend the Muslim religion.
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/quran/023-violence.htm
This does a good job of explaining Muslim quotes of violence. Like I said to you, the quote you used was historical. It was not asking you to kill babies and children. The Muslim violence quotes instruct you to do that to this day. 109 quotes telling you to kill.
Yet atheists typically defend the Muslim faith.
There are roughly 10 different Al Qaeda groups, ISIS, and several other violent Islamic sects.
If I were go up to you, and claim the Muslim religion was evil or barbaric, you would almost certainly defend the faith and call me an ignorant right wing zealot. I have seen it happen. It always happens. Why? Why do you want to defend a literally violent religion and not a peaceful one?
Being a Christian was illegal in Rome until AD 313. Before then, the Christians were persecuted for about 300 years.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Christians_in_the_Roman_Empire
Yet you and other atheists state that Christianity has a special type of persecution. You ignore Christianity’s suffrage, and pay attention to the suffrage of let’s just say, the Muslims being killed by ISIS right now.
Why?
It’s a legitimate question to ask an atheist.
Why is Christian suffering ignored?
Why are the people in the U.S. more likely to defend Muslims than Christians who are in current day not murdering? Based on a “supposed” violent past during the crusades? (which if you look into it most historians agree was more about land than religion).
The only answer is something is causing people to focus more on Christians than Muslims. Consistently.
The answer, when faced with a tangible real world statement that has no reason such as “Christians are attacked while Muslims are defended”, is that some force is causing it.
Is it media?
News didn’t exist in 1 AD. Yet Christians were persecuted then, and other religions were not in Rome.
What force Farmer?
There’s only one: Satan.
Pay attention to the attacks, and your word vomit that got you off topic when I was not making a religious debate. You then quoted the bible, in defiance of God.
You had no reason to. You just felt compelled. That is being compelled to hate.
It’s that simple.
And Farmer:
When I say why do we not focus on Christian suffrage and why do we focus on the crusades, you should note that in a world without a god,
300 years of Christian persecution,
Would be about equal to the Crusades and Inquisition.
But instead you guys have a habit of focusing on just the areas of history that are Christian leaning, and not the ones against Christians.
It would have to be equal in the absence of a god. But it’s not. The nature against Christianity for no reason at all, proves the existence of something that is causing that bias.
It’s simple logic.
I’m not often convinced of the existence of God by “and in the beginning, there was nothing” or other bible quotes.
Like you, I consider most that to be far too likely to be a load of crap. Do you really think I believed in a bible first and a God second?
I actually believed in Evil first, God second, bible to a degree third, after I did more studying of it and found it was more consistent than I thought in some areas.
Let me state this better for you Libby:
He talks about the rapture itself. The rapture itself is a prediction.
You are talking about a person. Not the bible.
If a person takes the rapture (a prophecy) and says “The world will end 2008.”. That is a person being wrong. The prophecy has not been proven wrong 100 times.
100 people took the prophecy to mean something. It doesn’t reflect at all on the prophecy itself. It reflects on the people. The prophecy wasn’t wrong 100 times. Were each of the 100 people saying the world would end the same day? The same anti christ? I think not.
The prophecy itself still remains unproven.
This is logic. I am tired of you acting like that had to do with my religious beliefs.
You don’t even know my opinion on the rapture. At all. I wasn’t making an argument for it. Only against his logics.
That’s all.
Argue his logic with him, not with me. I don’t believe in an anti-Christ or a rhapsody. So it’s all nonsense to me.
As I said:
The point was not to argue it was true.
The point was to argue against the logic that 100 people being wrong is proof the prophecy itself it wrong.
You are the one who argued with me. You butted in. If you don’t want to argue on it, DON’T BUTT IN.
You said I was insane for suggesting that 100 people saying the world would end is evidence against the prophecy.
Let’s keep this civil, is my comment or is it not correct, that whether people are wrong or right about a prophecy it doesn’t affect whether or not the prophecy is real?
And if your answer is that I was right,
A: You chimed in and were wrong in your comment
B: You chose to make that comment just to harass me
C: Now you’re upset I responded and you have no reason to be.
Don’t act like I randomly argued with you. You chose this conversation.
Yes, your comment was correct (I will not say it’s “right” as I don’t believe in the rhapsody.)
I was not wrong to butt in, this is a blog.
I am not upset that you responded. I don’t give a rats ass.
You clearly do. That’s why you made the comment.
Act human. We don’t need to fight, and you just caused us to have one for no reason. Especially true because now you get that your comment was just so far off base.
I don’t like fighting with people Libby.
Libby, why are you talking about rhapsody and Bob is talking about rapture? Are you so screwed up you don’t know the difference? What do you believe in, if anything?
What I believe in is nobody’s business but mine. I don’t feel a need to pontificate on public forums about my religious beliefs. And I think that is pretty much appreciated by all.
“Bohemian Rhapsody”
Is this the real life?
Is this just fantasy?
Caught in a landslide,
No escape from reality.
Open your eyes,
Look up to the skies and see,
I’m just a poor boy, I need no sympathy,
Because I’m easy come, easy go,
Little high, little low,
Anyway the wind blows doesn’t really matter to me, to me.
Mama, just killed a man,
Put a gun against his head,
Pulled my trigger, now he’s dead.
Mama, life had just begun,
But now I’ve gone and thrown it all away.
Mama, ooh,
Didn’t mean to make you cry,
If I’m not back again this time tomorrow,
Carry on, carry on as if nothing really matters.
Too late, my time has come,
Sent shivers down my spine,
Body’s aching all the time.
Goodbye, everybody, I’ve got to go,
Gotta leave you all behind and face the truth.
Mama, ooh (anyway the wind blows),
I don’t wanna die,
I sometimes wish I’d never been born at all.
I see a little silhouetto of a man,
Scaramouche, Scaramouche, will you do the Fandango?
Thunderbolt and lightning,
Very, very frightening me.
(Galileo) Galileo.
(Galileo) Galileo,
Galileo Figaro
Magnifico.
I’m just a poor boy, nobody loves me.
He’s just a poor boy from a poor family,
Spare him his life from this monstrosity.
Easy come, easy go, will you let me go?
Bismillah! No, we will not let you go. (Let him go!)
Bismillah! We will not let you go. (Let him go!)
Bismillah! We will not let you go. (Let me go!)
Will not let you go. (Let me go!)
Never, never let you go
Never let me go, oh.
No, no, no, no, no, no, no.
Oh, mama mia, mama mia (Mama mia, let me go.)
Beelzebub has a devil put aside for me, for me, for me.
So you think you can stone me and spit in my eye?
So you think you can love me and leave me to die?
Oh, baby, can’t do this to me, baby,
Just gotta get out, just gotta get right outta here.
(Oh, yeah, oh yeah)
Nothing really matters,
Anyone can see,
Nothing really matters,
Nothing really matters to me.
Anyway the wind blows.
Agent,
I’m fairly sure she was mocking the rapture by saying rhapsody. I think it was intentional…I might be wrong.
Libby,
There you go again basically implying people who put religious opinions online are somehow bad people.
Sharing religious beliefs is a good thing. Fighting about them isn’t.
You can’t form a good believe without sharing alternate beliefs. This actually reflects more on your unwillingness to expand beliefs than it reflects on you being a very open minded individual to facts and points of views.
“There you go again basically implying people who put religious opinions online are somehow bad people.”
There you go with your good and bad, black and white. I never said, or implied, that people who post religious opinions are bad. Just annoying. It’s not necessary or welcomed, especially on an insurance forum.
Bob, so Libby now admits she is a troll. Good for her. Admitting her problem is the first step to finding a cure. She must have be going to Troll Anonymous meetings now.
Where did I do that?
You technically did Libby, when I asked what the point of your comment was if it wasn’t to debate, and you said to insult me.
I expect that means you wanted a response to that insult.
And then we have the definition of a troll.
No reponse was needed. I just want you to go away.
I answer your question and no response was needed?
Apparently you don’t even like hearing your own statements.
A response was needed to your question which was designed to make agent look extreme.
Bob, every few years, there is some nutjob who predicts the end of the world, gathers up a few followers and holes up in a cave somewhere for a while until they run out of supplies and have to come out. Man will not know when this is going to happen, only God knows.
Wow, I don’t read “Bob”, but something surely stirred him. And, I’m guessing it isn’t global warming. Let me guess, some of you were called names. Heck, maybe even me.
“Something stirred him.” It was the Rhapsody. And yeah, I called him some names. None that he didn’t deserve. I just wish he would go away. I’m sure there are all kinds of religious websites he could rhapsodize on all day long. I don’t even think the guy works in insurance. He’s never once mentioned anything insurance related. I’m thinking troll.
None I didn’t deserve?
Hello religious zealot.
Label what people deserve and then punish them with the righteousness of (god) Libby.
No, I’ve kept this civil.
I always keep on topic, and you always throw in insults about my debates. When you do that I generally insult you back. This time I have chosen not to.
And am working on that.
And you still throw out insults.
Don’t tell me what I deserve. No human deserves to be treated like crap.
Good. I guess Chrisianity is rubbing off on you with the old turn the other cheek thing. I’ve already told you I will continue to insult you as long as you talk to me on this blog. You have been forewarned.
Ah as long as I debate properly and ask to be treated fairly,
I have been amply warned about the beatings that will ensue.
Libby, you know darn well that’s poor behavior.
And don’t say “finally” as you yourself aren’t practicing turning the other cheek yourself right now.
You think so highly of yourself.
You are content throwing out insults and forcing others to turn the cheek.
You can’t debate with one liners and zingers and “burns” and expect people to be ok with it.
It’s not ok.
P.S.
Stop censoring me with the dislikes Libby!
(obviously I’m not serious)
Have you noticed even still, not one dislike from me on your comments?
While we are on the topic of respecting people…
What’s with that disrespectful guy not doing that eh?
“Ah as long as I debate properly and ask to be treated fairly” No. As long as you don’t talk to me. If you do, you have been forewarned about my likely response.
“And don’t say “finally” as you yourself aren’t practicing turning the other cheek yourself right now.” I wasn’t talking about me. I was talking about you. Check out your prior posts up until this week. You’ll see what I’m talking about.
“You are content throwing out insults and forcing others to turn the cheek.” I’m not forcing anyone to do anything. You have your own choices to make. I have only explained the consequences.
“You can’t debate with one liners and zingers and “burns” and expect people to be ok with it.” Again, for the feint of hearing, I don’t debate. I express an opinion. Sometimes based on facts I source, sometimes not. And you don’t know what I expect. If you aren’t OK with it, oh well. I will keep on keepin on.
Why do you think it is me disliking you bob? I’m certainly not in a minority in that category on here! I venture to say your only fan is Agent. And that’s because he kisses your ass and vice-versa.
“Ah as long as I debate properly and ask to be treated fairly” No. As long as you don’t talk to me. If you do, you have been forewarned about my likely response.
Being forwarned about being unjustly attacked doesn’t make the attack any more just.
“And don’t say “finally” as you yourself aren’t practicing turning the other cheek yourself right now.” I wasn’t talking about me. I was talking about you. Check out your prior posts up until this week. You’ll see what I’m talking about.
You missed the point. If you’re going to say it, you better practice it. You basically don’t do what you just told me I finally do. Very very ironic comment from you. Also, my comments before this week were always 100% of the time responding to your insults and zingers, as you degraded me. While they were wrong, I shouldn’t have to practice turning the cheek to your rude attacks. But I have now chosen to do so, and now that I have, it doesn’t reflect well on you that you have chosen in consistent fashion not to turn the other cheek. Whether or not I started it is then irrelevant. You’re still continuing now if I even speak. That is abusive behavior. If I talk I am suddenly causing the wraith you will give? No.
“You are content throwing out insults and forcing others to turn the cheek.” I’m not forcing anyone to do anything. You have your own choices to make. I have only explained the consequences.
You have explained horrible consequences of your own choices, not mine. I can speak without having the expectation be that I will be attacked.
Because talking to you whatsoever is punishable by being insulted, no matter how respectful I am. If I don’t accept your one liner and insults, I have to suffer your wrath right? This is a paradox argument, where again, if we don’t accept your zingers and argue back you will give us consequence. This is not a peaceful line of thought.
“You can’t debate with one liners and zingers and “burns” and expect people to be ok with it.” Again, for the feint of hearing, I don’t debate. I express an opinion. Sometimes based on facts I source, sometimes not. And you don’t know what I expect. If you aren’t OK with it, oh well. I will keep on keepin on.
This is a bully. You will insult and insult. Find someone who is eh? Zingers involving slurs and insults based on someone’s religion, or republican affiliation are bullying and basically hate issues, akin to being against gays. It’s not ok for the religious right, it’s not ok for you.
You keep talking to me….
“Being forwarned about being unjustly attacked doesn’t make the attack any more just.” I don’t attack. I insult you. You have always been the attack dog “bashing my face in” “slapping my face” and many other graphic hints of violence towards me. I only mock and insult.
“You missed the point. If you’re going to say it, you better practice it.” You missed the point. I was mocking you again. You really aren’t too bright, are you?
“You have explained horrible consequences of your own choices, not mine. I can speak without having the expectation be that I will be attacked.” Horrible consequences? Being attacked? A little melodramatic there aren’t we? Why would you WANT to talk to someone that has already told you they intend to mock and insult you? Are you a masochist in addition to being batshit crazy? The consequence will be of your own making. That’s all I can say about that.
“If I don’t accept your one liner and insults, I have to suffer your wrath right?” You don’t have to suffer anything if you just don’t talk to me. Again, why would you want to?
“Zingers involving slurs and insults based on someone’s religion, or republican affiliation are bullying and basically hate issues, akin to being against gays.” Wrong. It is not your religion I mock, it’s your miraculous transformation and constant proselytizing. I have nothing against religion. I have something against people that feel a need to preach about it to me. Again, it only bolsters my claim that you are a nut.
And bob – reread the post. I didn’t say “finally.” YOU DID.
Thought I’d bring up that I too am a fan of Bob’s posts. He’s about the only coherent regular commentator on here. Most others just degrade to childish name calling. While I may not always agree with Bob, at least I understand his views as he explains them civilly.
Figured you could use a breather from all the negative attacks you’ve had lately Bob.
Libby,
As another side comment:
I know you have disliked my comments. I didn’t just accuse you of all dislikes. That’s a nice try at earning some “holier than thou” points against me.
I just said that I have not disliked any of yours. Not once.
It was a comparison stating that any dislikes are not forms of censorship.
I was pointing out how absurd your likes comment was. I personally don’t care.
Thanks getyourfacts straight.
Much appreciated.
I think we all need a breather including Libby. She is angrier than usual.
Just a side comment to all of this Libby:
Stay focused. Who talked to who here? I’ve avoided a lot of your posts.
You talked to me. On one of my posts. And are now infuriated I responded, and are warning me if I ever talk to you I will be insulted.
How is that not bully? I avoided you, you called me insane, I replied to that, and you started fighting with me saying not to talk to you, or you would insult me.
You also said the only reason you put the comment to my original statement was to insult me.
So if I comment at all on this site, you will reply to it, and then state I never have the right to reply to your reply, and that doing so means I have been warned of the insults I will receive.
You aren’t acting logical. You’re in the wrong.
Realize it. Change it. Be a better person.
Libby, you are so stupid you don’t know the difference between Rhapsody and the Rapture. You really need to do some research before making stupid mistakes. I almost think you got that from Planet or Booger.
Funny guy.
I didn’t start or go on any spree to be stirred as a side comment.
Libby already admitted to having started this fight, and having no culpability in it’s end because she despises me.
Apparently that’s all that matters to be a respectful person.
Giving people what the deserve and despising them for their evil.
Apparently this is what makes her different from a “judgmental” christian giving whose goal is to:
Give people what they deserve
And
Despise them for their evil.
This is too rich.
I should have been nicer earlier and just controlled myself from your and Libby’s bullying behavior. I now realize I was feeding into it.
Because Libby is going really off the rails since I’ve removed insults.
She is finally being forced to self reflect, and her image won’t allow her to believe she contributed to or caused our fights.
I personally said I shouldn’t have insulted, and allowed myself to go to that level.
But in Libby’s case, she seems to want to go even further, and create reasons to do so.
Culpability for what? It takes two to “fight.” Regardless of who started it.
And I’m not fighting currently.
I’m talking.
Further more no, it does not.
All it takes is one insulting another to the point where they fight back.
This is how bullying works. The bully pushes the person they know will fight back.
If I didn’t fight back, you would then blame me for the abuse as well until I did.
Are you done yet?
How about rather than pushing your crud onto me, saying I’ll try to be nicer.
Just a thought.
Who does that hurt exactly?
Further,
Culpability for your comments and their “consequences”
Remember that little line for you?
I guess it works for you, but not for me right?
Things tend to mold whenever they apply to you.
This is really really two faced and you know it. You can take the right path here and stop attacking me.
Even then, I am not giving you consequences currently.
I’m giving you a talk about how wrong this is, and giving you the chance to end it.
You’re the one dragging this on, not me. Whether I’m right or wrong is besides the point. The fact that you are now deciding to act civil does not negate your past behavior. You can’t just insult and bully me for 2 years, find Jesus, and expect to be forgiven. It doesn’t work that way.
You have said horrible things to and about me. You have never once apologized. I have. What did my olive branches to you get me? Nothing. More abuse.
So, no, I’m not ready to kiss and make up with you just because you’re a sanctimonious blowhard that has just found Jesus. I will forgive, but I will not forget. You were despicable then and you’re despicable now. Now you’re just into a different kind of bullying.
Bob, Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned. Libby is the prime evidence of that. I am afraid she has not forgotten all the times you wore her down and she ended up screaming – LEAVE ME ALONE as she has done on this blog once again.
Again Cliven, your recaps make us feel we are right back at the scene. I can not express how much I appreciate your play by play analysis. The simpleton point of view makes it much easier for your kind to undertand. The screaming of “LEAVE ME ALONE!” are just spine tingling. For a moment, I thought Howard Cosell was in the booth, but he’s a Jew and we know how you feel about them.
txmouth,
That last line might be the best one liner you have ever wrote. I was driving away from the office at lunch yesterday, repeating it, and crying.
And, the only reason I use the buttons are because it grays out the green and red and I can then easily find new posts. It becomes more difficult as the blog gets longer. The Notify me of comments button doesn’t work with my computer. Not that I owe you an explanation.
Libby, your computer is so outdated that it doesn’t even have sound to listen while videos are playing. Perhaps you need an upgrade.
Perhaps. But I’ll keep my old computer if it helps my company stay profitable. I’m a team player.
Libby, if you like your old computer, you can keep it. Sean Hannity, Drudge, and Agent can’t change that.
Apparently the IRS was unable to keep their computers when they liked them. They had that incinerator going full blast to hide all their emails.
It reminds me of those Texicans that ran Enron. Remember that episode Cliven?
Bob, take it down a notch, bro. There is no God. Relax and enjoy teh gheys. Its no big deal. Really.
At what point did I bring up the gays, and at what point did I originally even want an argument about God?
This wasn’t an argument about gays. My notch isn’t up there, bro.
I’m asking to be treated fairly. Not for Libby to accept God. We talked about a prophecy, and whether or not people being wrong on it makes the prophecy wrong 100 times, or the people who were wrong wrong 100 times.
It’s simple “dude”.
You all really want to pull my religion into this, which as I have said several times really just proves to me the existence of God.
Do you try to pull Muslim religion into fights with people who are of Muslim religion?
Do you even honestly try to mention the 109 sections of violence in their bible?
Again, something causes you to revolt against Christianity.
I am treating all here fairly, including you. I didn’t just imply you are a bigot who hated gays now did I?
Bob, I was always told by my parents not to argue about Religion or Politics. It seems to bring out the worst in people, particularly with the Atheist crowd and left wing trolls like we have on this site. They must have a very sad life with nothing to look forward to. In the back of their mind, they have to wonder – is this all there is? Perhaps they are ok with that reality.
I actually very much doubt at this point they want to debate politics.
They just want it there to attack more.
Libby insulted me, then told me screaming to never talk to her.
I didn’t randomly talk to her. I was randomly insulted for no reason at all.
And I responded to that insult.
Apparently if I meet the requirements she has to declare a human worthy of being degraded, she can then insult and insult and insult.
This is beyond the point of insanity.
The folks on here after me I am convinced are specifically doing so because of their lack of Christian faith, and are being compelled to seek my words as more proof of why Christianity is so bad.
I don’t think it has to do with anything of substance. Just some evil, sent from my personal buddy Mr Lucifer, not necessarily for me. More so to entrap the people he clearly already has.
I know evil when I see it, and nonsense. This is evil and nonsense. When something is horribly immoral and keeps coming back to religion and insulting God and religion, I tend to think it has a reason behind it.
Don’t you guys have jobs?
No. I’m a liberal so I am on government assistance, food stamps, and housing. Oops gotta go. My Obama iphone is ringing.
Hey WTF, these people have jobs but their employer is not getting much bang for their bucks. They blog incessantly all day on every subject that comes up on IJ. According to them, this is an entitlement that their employer allows.
Exactly Cliven. And as a wonderful owner of a beautiful insurance agenstry/fire works tent, you are all the busier. Funny how in insurance, the “owner” is still selling policies rather than managing, developing new business, and training your slaves. By the way Cliven, businesses on land contracts are more of a hobby farm than an actual business.
Agent,
Were you at the Palin Pumpkin Family Funtime Brawl? Sarah actually asked at one point, “Don’t you know who I am?” Oh, I cannot wait for the video of this to come out. It’s also being reported she was wearing tall white pumps with the American flag on them. This is why God created the video feature for our phones. What happens when Alaska goes Texico-style? Oh yeah, the Palin Pumpkin Family Funtime Brawl, baby! Bristol is going medieval!
Hi Captain, I wish we could say that was a funny political cartoon but unfortunately it is reality. Can you imagine if this stripper trash lead our nation? I mean he people already do, but her in particular. I wonder how the Assembly of God, Inc feels about her antics. I know she is absolved with her 10% tax deductible “misgiving” to a church corporation, but they are a good family just look at their family tree. Like they always say, a family that plays together stays together. Pray tell.
Txmouth, she really demonstrates those family values she gets all preachy about, eh? Bristol was a
real hit at the party, Willow was weeping, Track was racing, Todd was teetering, and Sarah was DBing like she always does. Looks like this family wants their reality show back.
I wonder how many more babies were made after the make up session at the pumpkin farm. Word is Sultry Sarah is still fertile and probably has room for at least 3 more in her tadpole trap. Let’s all come up with 3 possible names for the “Palin Klan” additions.
Field. So we can have Track and Field. Or Sally, so we can have Sally Field.
Myers. So we can have Bristol Myers. Or Race, so we can have Bristol Race (middle name Knight).
Good thinking Libby. I was thinking there would be a “Reagan” in there somewhere. One of those Uni-Sexual names. I bet if Sarah would have 5 more, she could name them after the Fab Five University of Michigan Basketball Team. Or was it the Baseketball Team?
I think their names are predominantly “T” – so how about Trash (obvious here), Tumor (family is a cancer on society), and Texas (seems fitting for a family who likes to drunken bawl).
“T”ouche!!!!
Agent,
Sorry to inform you, but even if you do get your hands on one of those all black burgers from Burger King, consuming it will NOT put more soul in your pole.
Planet, if you are not too busy planning your next company picnic, I suggest you schedule a visit to your psychiatrist and see what can be done about your dysfunction. You and your soul mate Booger need a lobotomy. Try not to get caught peeing on Chick Fil A’s building. That might be hard to explain to your family when they are bailing you out.
Oh Agent, I am actually too busy planning your picnic when I am going to eat your lunch!
That will be the day Planet. You haven’t made an intelligent post on this forum in three years. I am sure you and Booger have gotten together and try to outdo each other on insults to me, steal my moniker to post your hate. Everyone can see what you are doing so you might as well stop now and keep your posts on the subject matter.
Cliven-Lee Harvey Oswald, when are you going to keep your posts on the subject matter? Go back to each article, search the comment section, notice how quick you are to post, read how many of those posts mention “rule by the pen”, Benghazi, taxes, as well as all the other Fox Comedy Soup du Jour. This is why your “moniker” was stolen. You are right though Cliven, it’s a blast insulting you. There’s no outdoing one or the other, it’s complementary.
Agent, what was your plea deal when you got busted for jizzing on the Chic Fil A building the day you went and bought your I-Hate-Homos sandwich?
Hi Captain, I read a funny but true article in the Texican Repulican Aristocratic Sun Times. It was about an insurance agent that did exactly what you were describing. Turns out he had to perform a few dirty deeds with the DA in order to get out of trouble. He enjoyed it so much, he kept going back for more.
You remember it Agent so don’t deny. It was the last time you had a little hope in your rope.
Agent,
Given AP’s indictment, I am starting to understand why you are the way you are. Were you a victim of the rule of thumb as well? If so, I don’t agree with it and am sorry. Texico-tude is like the Catholic Church, 25 years behind the times and willing to abuse little kids. AP cites his Eastern Texico upbringing is the reason why I ask. Does this make Peterson a “Branch Davidian”?
Have you made that appointment yet Planet? From your posts, you appear to have not and perhaps smoking those corn stalks and made you go off a very deep end.
Peterson would rather fight than switch, Captain.
Hey Bob, keep the faith. Now shut up, me and my dad hate you.