Obama's picks: 3 quitters, 3 tax cheats and 2 more conflict of interest. by AURaptor

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
Quote:

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Clinton's lies weren't about sex, they were about perjury.

God, you just can't stop reaching, no matter how stupid it makes you look.

The lies were about sex, that WAS the perjury. He didn't lie about perjury, you halfwit.

Trying to make a point are we?
Trying to imply Slick was not Impeached for Perjury? Trying to get sheeple to infer Clinton's Impeachments were for petty sex?
Sorry, you failed.

And just so folk won't get confused: Perjury is lying under Oath. Not lying to the press, or lying to other politicians, or having sex, or screwing the People, or revealing inconvenient truths. It's Lying under Oath.

Aw, it's cute to see you rush in to protect ol' AURhetoric, but you need to brush up on your reading skills, because I didn't say any of the stuff you're implying I did. I implied nothing at all, just corrected dipshit on a factual error (one of them things he's wholly incapable of recognizing in his own writing).

Actually, the only point I was trying to make was that Rappy was talking out his ass.

See, I know what perjury is. I'm not saying Clinton didn't perjur himself.

But Rappy said Clinton lied about perjury, not sex. Which is, quite simply, factually wrong. He lied about sex, which ammounted to perjury.

But thinks for trying.

Are you really this dumb? Really? This dense? Or is this just more diversionary tactics, telling more lies to cover your other lies? I had hoped you were at least able to see how much your were talking out of your bung, and allow you reflection and opportunity to correct your errors, but you just seem off on your own verse and ignoring the facts.
For you to so blithly claim AuRap to be factually incorrect and then blather on with your absolutely factually incorrect claims strains the bounds of hypocrisy. Although it can be argued, and I could agree that AuRap was factually incorrect ONLY in the category of incompleteness and ommission, YOU on the other hand have no reserve of excuse because YOU claimed absolute falsehoods to be truths.
I can agree that AuRaptor stated that Clinton was Impeached for LYING ABOUT PERJURY.
I can agree that AuRaptor said this (posted above).
I can agree that AuRaptor is correct in this statement.
I can agree that AuRaptor was incomplete in his statement, because that was not the sole Article of Impeachment, nor the sole Article he was Impeached for, nor the sole charge under this Article, nor the sole category of charge under this Article. And that he did not state that every charge was not about "lying about sex".
As long as AuRaptor did not identify every single charge under every single category of charges within every single Article which Slick was Impeached for, I can agree that AuRaptor was incorrect only through ommission.
However, AuRaptor did correctly state that Slick was Impeached for LYING ABOUT PERJURY. As long as AuRaptor did not state that this was the sole offense for which Slick was Impeached, AuRaptor remains factually correct. I have not seen AuRaptor make this claim - if I have missed this post, please point me to it. Without AuRaptor making this claim (which would be false), I did not see a need to judge which of you was playing more word games than the other. I would have erred on the side of AuRaptor because it would be less reasonable to itemize EVERY SINGLE CHARGE of all 4 Articles of Impeachment, or even the 2 which Slick was Impeached for, and it may have appeared to be biased (in favor of facts, which liberals translate to "conservatives" or somesuch.)
Also, Auraptor appears to have never claimed to have listed every single charge of every single category of charges within every Article of every Impeachment trial or vote.

You, on the other hand have clearly and obviously stated the falsehood that Slick was NOT Impeached for LYING ABOUT PERJURY, and this leaves you no wiggle room for your normal denials of being wrong.
I can agree that, of the mountains of Impeachable offenses committed by Slick, not all were for Lying About Perjury. I can also agree that most of these charges were not Lying About Perjury. I can also agree that not every Article, nor even every Impeached Article included Lying About Perjury. But you DID NOT SAY THIS. You have falsely claimed that Slcik WAS NOT IMPEACHED for LYING ABOUT PERJURY, and so you are, absolutely and without reservation, WRONG.
Slick's First Article of Impeachment, which made him the ONLY elected U.S. President to ever be Impeached, was for Perjury. One of the multitudes of Perjuries commited by Slick was Perjury to the Grand Jury (on 17 Aug 1998) repeating his Perjury, and denying that he Perjured himself during his Perjury in Civil Deposition Proceedings (on 17 Jan 1998). All of these Perjuries committed by Slick were proven during Impeachment Trial, and he was Impeached upon the proof of all these Perjuries.
This is PERJURY about PERJURY. Your claims are not saved by the inclusion that this IMPEACHMENT is for PERJURY about PERJURY about Crimes about sex.

If you are really so dense, Perjury about Perjury is the same as LYING ABOUT PERJURY, which is exactly what AuRaptor stated truthfully and accurately numerous times above, and although you were given numerous opportunities to correct your false statements, particularly when you may have been merely incomplete in your claims, you have lied by falsely claiming that Slick was not Impeached for LYING ABOUT PERJURY.
Many lies told in this forum are delusions from which liberals can hide behind excuses of disinformation, redefining definitions, or situational rationalizations. But your clear and obvious lies have shut you off from these despicable refuges in this case.

You are down to 2 options at this point.
You can try ritual suicide, lambytoes.
Or you can offer your sincere apology to AuRaptor not only for his being factually correct, and for you being absolutely incorrect, but also for your lies and claims that he was incorrect when he was in fact correct and truthful.

I'm kinda assuming you'll choose the suicide. If you choose Virtual Suicide, I would expect it only to apply to this forum, and we shall see you no longer in this forum. I would accept Kirkules ruling on this. In that light, should you not apologize gracefully, I bid you goodbye.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, February 4, 2009 9:25 PM

CITIZEN

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
For starters, I've never said anything "racist" . You claiming such does not make it so. Second, exactly how many times does one have to say they're not racist before it settles into your noggin? See, where I'm from, folks who constantly are apologizing for things they're not guilty of or pleading innocence for that which.....well, you get the picture.

It's sad you think it's funny that you can accuse others of being racist, when in fact, you're only making matters worse. Maybe when you grow up, you'll understand.

And where I'm from if folks are constantly saying "I'm not racist" while constantly making racist statements, that just makes them delusional racists. You see, most racists honestly think they're not racist, which hardly makes you unique in your racism. When are you going to get it through your tiny mind that making racist comments then saying "but I ain't a racist yeah" doesn't magically expunge your actions?

It's sad that you think you can redefine reality by a statement, while doing nothing to actually deal with your own bigotry, and it's not funny when you make gross racist statements and think saying "but I'm not racist" makes it so, but not standing up to bigoted little twerps like you really wouldn't help.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, February 4, 2009 10:56 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:

I win!

Yep, you win the complete and utter respect of everyone here. But then, you've always had that! ... and...

you have to declare yourself the winner,

After reading the whole thread, gotta admit it's nice to see AuRaptor and Geezer batting a thousand, albeit against halfwits.
Thanks for filling in for those of us with less time. Or less patience for suffering fools.

Oh, and I will state that None of those nominated for Cabinet jobs this year should be allowed in.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 5, 2009 12:15 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

And yet you can't produce a single, solitary comment which shows I'm racist, you just insist on it being so, so you can claim some sort of hallow victory , when all else fails you.

Pathetic.

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 5, 2009 12:20 AM

FREMDFIRMA

Oh please, put the sock puppet away - no one buys it anymore, if they ever did in the first place.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 5, 2009 3:04 AM

CITIZEN

Quote:
Originally posted by jewelstaitefan:

After reading the whole thread, gotta admit it's nice to see AuRaptor and Geezer batting a thousand, albeit against halfwits.
Thanks for filling in for those of us with less time. Or less patience for suffering fools.

Oh, and I will state that None of those nominated for Cabinet jobs this year should be allowed in.

Well you see, RacistSockpuppetFan, you're as pathetic racist and delluded as your master. It's sad you can't understand that.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 5, 2009 4:35 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Rapo-

Quote:
Well, huckleberry, the rest of us are living in the 21st century, while your buddies, the Towel heads, are eager to return us to THEIR glory years, the 7th century.

www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.asp?b=18&t=24317

But the bigger message in that thread is that rapo would sacrifice habeas corpus on his altar of fear. And he never DID answer my question: The Founding Fathers were traitors to the established order. Their cause was unpopular at first. There were "traitors" in their midst. Their lives, families and homes were at stake. They had more at stake than we do, and yet they wrote a breathtaking document not about fear, but about FREEDOM. But conservative authoritarian lapdogs would throw it all away and claim that is being a "real" American. How?

heh heh heh heh

---------------------------------
It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 5, 2009 4:37 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

BTW, Rapo, I'm prolly the only one left who even bothers to answer you civilly. Might wanna ask yourself why.

---------------------------------
It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 5, 2009 5:41 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by jewelstaitefan:
are you trying to say that you do not know what Clinton was Impeached for?

I heard it was for perjury.

The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 5, 2009 5:43 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
HEY CHRIS!!!. You think it's OK to confirm cabinet members who don't remember to pay their taxes until they're audited or being vetted?

No, call me radical, but I kinda like the peeps IN government to abide by the rules they force upon us little people, but maybe that's just me.

The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 5, 2009 5:56 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
BTW, Rapo, I'm prolly the only one left who even bothers to answer you civilly. Might wanna ask yourself why.

Clearly, he's paying you.

The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 5, 2009 6:16 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
Clearly, he's paying you.

Nah.... obviously, I'm just one of rapo's sock puppets!!!!

---------------------------------
It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 5, 2009 6:21 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by jewelstaitefan:
Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
Quote:

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Clinton's lies weren't about sex, they were about perjury.

God, you just can't stop reaching, no matter how stupid it makes you look.

The lies were about sex, that WAS the perjury. He didn't lie about perjury, you halfwit.

Trying to make a point are we?
Trying to imply Slick was not Impeached for Perjury? Trying to get sheeple to infer Clinton's Impeachments were for petty sex?
Sorry, you failed.

And just so folk won't get confused: Perjury is lying under Oath. Not lying to the press, or lying to other politicians, or having sex, or screwing the People, or revealing inconvenient truths. It's Lying under Oath.

Aw, it's cute to see you rush in to protect ol' AURhetoric, but you need to brush up on your reading skills, because I didn't say any of the stuff you're implying I did. I implied nothing at all, just corrected dipshit on a factual error (one of them things he's wholly incapable of recognizing in his own writing).

Actually, the only point I was trying to make was that Rappy was talking out his ass.

See, I know what perjury is. I'm not saying Clinton didn't perjur himself.

But Rappy said Clinton lied about perjury, not sex. Which is, quite simply, factually wrong. He lied about sex, which ammounted to perjury.

But thinks for trying.

Are you really this dumb? Really? This dense? Or is this just more diversionary tactics, telling more lies to cover your other lies? I had hoped you were at least able to see how much your were talking out of your bung, and allow you reflection and opportunity to correct your errors, but you just seem off on your own verse and ignoring the facts.
For you to so blithly claim AuRap to be factually incorrect and then blather on with your absolutely factually incorrect claims strains the bounds of hypocrisy. Although it can be argued, and I could agree that AuRap was factually incorrect ONLY in the category of incompleteness and ommission, YOU on the other hand have no reserve of excuse because YOU claimed absolute falsehoods to be truths.
I can agree that AuRaptor stated that Clinton was Impeached for LYING ABOUT PERJURY.
I can agree that AuRaptor said this (posted above).
I can agree that AuRaptor is correct in this statement.
I can agree that AuRaptor was incomplete in his statement, because that was not the sole Article of Impeachment, nor the sole Article he was Impeached for, nor the sole charge under this Article, nor the sole category of charge under this Article. And that he did not state that every charge was not about "lying about sex".
As long as AuRaptor did not identify every single charge under every single category of charges within every single Article which Slick was Impeached for, I can agree that AuRaptor was incorrect only through ommission.
However, AuRaptor did correctly state that Slick was Impeached for LYING ABOUT PERJURY. As long as AuRaptor did not state that this was the sole offense for which Slick was Impeached, AuRaptor remains factually correct. I have not seen AuRaptor make this claim - if I have missed this post, please point me to it. Without AuRaptor making this claim (which would be false), I did not see a need to judge which of you was playing more word games than the other. I would have erred on the side of AuRaptor because it would be less reasonable to itemize EVERY SINGLE CHARGE of all 4 Articles of Impeachment, or even the 2 which Slick was Impeached for, and it may have appeared to be biased (in favor of facts, which liberals translate to "conservatives" or somesuch.)
Also, Auraptor appears to have never claimed to have listed every single charge of every single category of charges within every Article of every Impeachment trial or vote.

You, on the other hand have clearly and obviously stated the falsehood that Slick was NOT Impeached for LYING ABOUT PERJURY, and this leaves you no wiggle room for your normal denials of being wrong.
I can agree that, of the mountains of Impeachable offenses committed by Slick, not all were for Lying About Perjury. I can also agree that most of these charges were not Lying About Perjury. I can also agree that not every Article, nor even every Impeached Article included Lying About Perjury. But you DID NOT SAY THIS. You have falsely claimed that Slcik WAS NOT IMPEACHED for LYING ABOUT PERJURY, and so you are, absolutely and without reservation, WRONG.
Slick's First Article of Impeachment, which made him the ONLY elected U.S. President to ever be Impeached, was for Perjury. One of the multitudes of Perjuries commited by Slick was Perjury to the Grand Jury (on 17 Aug 1998) repeating his Perjury, and denying that he Perjured himself during his Perjury in Civil Deposition Proceedings (on 17 Jan 1998). All of these Perjuries committed by Slick were proven during Impeachment Trial, and he was Impeached upon the proof of all these Perjuries.
This is PERJURY about PERJURY. Your claims are not saved by the inclusion that this IMPEACHMENT is for PERJURY about PERJURY about Crimes about sex.

If you are really so dense, Perjury about Perjury is the same as LYING ABOUT PERJURY, which is exactly what AuRaptor stated truthfully and accurately numerous times above, and although you were given numerous opportunities to correct your false statements, particularly when you may have been merely incomplete in your claims, you have lied by falsely claiming that Slick was not Impeached for LYING ABOUT PERJURY.
Many lies told in this forum are delusions from which liberals can hide behind excuses of disinformation, redefining definitions, or situational rationalizations. But your clear and obvious lies have shut you off from these despicable refuges in this case.

You are down to 2 options at this point.
You can try ritual suicide, lambytoes.
Or you can offer your sincere apology to AuRaptor not only for his being factually correct, and for you being absolutely incorrect, but also for your lies and claims that he was incorrect when he was in fact correct and truthful.

I'm kinda assuming you'll choose the suicide. If you choose Virtual Suicide, I would expect it only to apply to this forum, and we shall see you no longer in this forum. I would accept Kirkules ruling on this. In that light, should you not apologize gracefully, I bid you goodbye.

Wow. It's waaaaay too easy to get you wingnuts riled up.

I just have to giggle at the thought of your furiously pounding that tome out.

I'm glad to have given you something to do with your day.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 5, 2009 6:32 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Ahhh America...land of the free, home of the brave...

Free to say what you like as long as it doesn't offend anyone...*sigh

Offending a person is important. We arn't Nazis, and people are going to disagree. Its a good thing.

And at the risk of ire,its ALSO a good thing to point out stereotypes. Stereotypes don't just happen. They have at least SOME truth to them. So, work to change that negative aspect of said stereotype and no one can say shit.

Asians, for example, have a good stereotype. They are "good at math". Nothing wrong with it if you KNOW its just a stereotype and not EVERY Asian is going to a math professor.

If you know its a stereotype, then work to increase it, or decrease it.

For example, my friend REFUSES to eat watermelon. He likes it, so do I. Its a good melon. BUT, he doesn't like the "monkey-on-the-porch-eating-watermelon" stereotype, and doesn't want people to be able to say shit. Same reason he won't eat fried chicken.

Each of us, if we feel strongly about it, can work to decrease our own stereotypes.

Whether we want it or not, one group is always going to stereotype another. Its a human condition. Wishing and trying to force it to not be so won't change that.

All you can do is work to change the stereotype, and if nothing else, don't let it apply to you.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 5, 2009 6:35 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:

All you can do is work to change the stereotype, and if nothing else, don't let it apply to you.

I personally take offense at the Irishmen-drink-a-lot stereotype. I find it repulsive.
*OOOPS*
Heh, spilled my beer....

The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 5, 2009 6:37 AM

DREAMTROVE

Quote:

Wow. It's waaaaay too easy to get you wingnuts riled up.

Lefties too, apparently, don't know if you noticed but a slice in the middle here is laughing at all of y'all. Just in fun. When you guys take your meds it'll all be right as rain, aight?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 5, 2009 7:01 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Meanwhile, Rapo has deserted yet another thread.

Rapo, you gotta realize man... hardly anyone takes you seriously. You're a ditto-head caricature. You really do have to give SOME thought to the opinions you post. They're not yours, their Limbaugh's, and you can't even defend them properly. Name-calling and getting loud and angry might get cheers from other ditto-heads, but that doesn't play to THIS crowd. So excavate your head from Limbaugh's *ss and smell the coffee. You're not in Kansas (or Auburn) anymore.

---------------------------------
Don't bring that weak sh*t to MY kitchen.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 5, 2009 7:03 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Then you have assholes like THESE playing UP the stereo-type....

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/6247438.html

Its biased because you have to be able to READ the test...

So...for these fake-ass "firemen"...who at this point probably only got their jobs thru affirmative action....heres a song for you. (As sung by Carlos Mencia)

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

Dee Dee Dee doesn't mean mentally retarded,
It means stupid,
This song goes out to all the stupid people out there,
You're going to find this song hilarious,
And you don't even know, it's about you.

(singing)

You dropped out of school because you're smarter than everybody,
I've got three words for you dumbass 'Ding fries ready!',
You try to outrun a bull, nobody's that fast,
That's how you end up with a horn stuck up your ass,
He won't help me 'cuz he's a star,
.... he got hit by a car,
If you wanna go hunting for quails someplace,
Don't go with Cheney; he'll put a fucking shot in your face,
If you bungee jump so you can fly through the air,
That's how you ended up in that wheelchair,
You ignore all the warnings you light up a smoke,
Then you have to talk with a machine in your throat,

CHORUS:

How many idiots can there be?
Some say that it's 1 out of 3,
If you don't know then take it from me,
You're the Dee Dee Dee

(talking) You! You! You! Dee dee dee!

CHORUS:

And if you are a Dee,
Please don't marry a Dee,
'Cause then your kids will be,
Dee Dee Dee

Carlos Mencia (talking): Dee Dee Dee!

You cry about the price of gas and war in Iraq,
But you voted Bush twice, what were you smoking crack?
Didn't get a preenup, though you knew she was a skank,
Know you've got her .... and she's got half your bank,
You were on top of the world, with 'Baby Hit Me One More Time',
Only a stupid bitch would marry Kevin Federline,
You drink and drive, and you think it's okay,
Know your cellmate's going in and out of the hershey highway,
You put tigers in your show and they can't be free,
They'll bite your neck off and then you'll say Dee Dee Dee,

CHORUS:

How many idiots can there be?
Some say that it's 1 out of 3,
If you don't know then take it from me,
You're the Dee Dee Dee

And if you are a Dee,
Please don't marry a Dee,
It's genetics don't you see,
Your kids will be Dee Dee Dee.

Carlos Mencia (talking): That's what they'll be! DEE DEE DEE!

Parents are to blame for all these Dee Dee Dees,
Lettings their kids drop out and not get GEDs,
Get your kids inside, 'cause there's freaks on the loose,
But you're letting them drink from Michael Jackson's jesus juice?
You don't care when your kids come home with Ds from class,
What you need to do is get some balls and beat that ass,
'He isn't stupid', you say 'He's got ADD',
It's that his mom and his dad are both Dee Dee Dee!
'This test is too hard'
So we lower the standards,
'I'm not good at sports'
So we give him a trophy,
'My dad used to spank me',
So we lower the standards,
'I'm too fat for this seat'
So we lower the standards,
'They say no 'cause I'm black'
So we lower the standards,
'They say no 'cause I'm white'
So we lower the standards,
'They say no 'cause I'm Asian'
So we lower the standards,
'No hablo Ingles'
So we lower the standards,
And you wake up one day, no you don't have the skills,
To get up at your job, so you're stuck at the grill,
And you're wondering who took your job,
You're as dumb as a knob,
Now you're ass is too fat to get out of the house,
And you're eating more food, trying to figure it out,
Why they give my job, to some guy named Abhib,
'Cause he work harder and he's got 5 degrees,
And you're asking yourself, how could this happen to me?
I'll tell you why, homie, 'cause you're ... Dee Dee Dee.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 5, 2009 8:11 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Yeah, thats what I fucking thought.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 5, 2009 8:11 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Yeah, thats what I fucking thought.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 5, 2009 8:39 AM

DREAMTROVE

Dude. chill. Lay of the steroids or something. You're like angry at the surrounding air.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 5, 2009 8:50 AM

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:

All you can do is work to change the stereotype, and if nothing else, don't let it apply to you.
I personally take offense at the Irishmen-drink-a-lot stereotype. I find it repulsive.
*OOOPS*
Heh, spilled my beer....

The laughing Chrisisall

Hey Chris - you know what an Irish seven-course meal is?

A potato and a six-pack.

Mike

"It is complete now; the hands of time are neatly tied."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 5, 2009 8:54 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

"Dude. chill. Lay of the steroids or something. You're like angry at the surrounding air."

Yeah. Lol That is the truth.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 5, 2009 8:54 AM

Quote:

Then you have assholes like THESE playing UP the stereo-type....

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/6247438.html

Its biased because you have to be able to READ the test...

Oh, I get it - you have to be able to read, and black people can't. Right? Is that your point?

Tell me again how racist you aren't, 'cause that never gets old.

Mike

"It is complete now; the hands of time are neatly tied."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 5, 2009 9:00 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Quote:

Wow. It's waaaaay too easy to get you wingnuts riled up.

Lefties too, apparently, don't know if you noticed but a slice in the middle here is laughing at all of y'all.

Yeah, but you're not very entertaining, so no one pays attention.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 5, 2009 9:02 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Thats what their lawsuit says you backbirth.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 5, 2009 9:06 AM

FREMDFIRMA

Actually Wulf, if we ever do happen to run into each other personally, I'd love to introduce you to Gus, he's a former E-6 and black socialist* who kept going round that circle till he hit Anarchism, and runs a black bloc in detroit, and the guy Looooves mocking the shit out of racist stereotypes.

Being friggin huge and combat vet, he can damn well get away with it too - if someone mocked his eating habits in such fashion, without a doubt he'd show up for lunch that day with a bucket of KFC in on arm, a watermelon on his shoulder, and a 2 litre of grape soda stickin out his cargo pocket.

And he'd SMILE at you while he was eatin it too.

*There's still a lotta leftover socialist leanings in the black community, and the reason for that is a quite natural counter-reaction to hardline right/imperial racism over the years, and to understand why that can naturally come around to Anarchism so easily, I've provided a handy, although oversimplified, visual aid for ya.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 5, 2009 9:23 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:

Hey Chris - you know what an Irish seven-course meal is?

A potato and a six-pack.

LOL, that's great, how is it I've never heard it B4?

I mean, you're askin' fer it, buddy!!!

The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 5, 2009 9:31 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Yeah so the answer is to lower the standards, right? Let everyone play. Whether they can do the job or not.

Fuck off.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 5, 2009 9:34 AM

And someone said if Rappy left, we'd be without a villiage idiot.

Thanks for pitching in, Wulf!

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 5, 2009 9:37 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Yeah so the answer is to lower the standards, right? Let everyone play. Whether they can do the job or not.

I get from that lawsuit that the test is (possibly) skewed towards White peeps. There are ways of making multiple choice tests culturally exclusive, even by accident. Best let a civil case decide, it's too easy for peeps not involved to judge (meaning U & Me, son).

The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 5, 2009 9:46 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Yeah, like making the test in English. That'll teach them.

*sigh

You guys don't really know whats going on out here do you?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 5, 2009 9:55 AM

Well, okay, but seriously, what IS a fleet of yachts called?

That's a rather common question on tests, and a rather famous example of how standardized testing may be unintentionally skewed towards a demographic.

Who the hell knows that who isn't a little bit waspy?

I think there was another one I encountered once about tea serving customs, and I thought, erm, what?

Sorry if this isn't at all what you guys are talking about, knee-jerk reaction to the last three posts I read here as I was trying to catch up.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 5, 2009 10:04 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Fair enough, I have no clue what a fleet of yahts is called.

And Im white as the day is long.

Their lawsuit stems from the idea that a black cannot do well in a written, timed test. I say fuck you very much. No lowering the standards to placate some misplaced inferiority.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 5, 2009 10:07 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

and to Fred. You know more about the jungle than I can ever preach to these "Romans".

So be it.

I would meet your friend.

And damnit if he and I couldn't come to some understanding.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 5, 2009 10:26 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Yeah, like making the test in English. That'll teach them.

*sigh

You guys don't really know whats going on out here do you?

Way to jump to the simplest, least challenging conclusion, Bravo!

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 5, 2009 10:35 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Well, Story, I thought the least challenging conclusion would suit you.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 5, 2009 10:42 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
Well, okay, but seriously, what IS a fleet of yachts called?

It's called a fleet.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 5, 2009 11:00 AM

PIZMOBEACH

... fully loaded, safety off...

What's funny about this is that Bush's nominees probably weren't any different, they were just better at covering their f-ups, more experienced.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 5, 2009 11:00 AM

Actually it was something different. Something weird like how a bunch of crows is called a murder of crows. I have no idea what it was right now... All I know is that in the prep classes I took for the tests, they told me to watch out for that question.

And apparently I learned it really well. XD

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 5, 2009 11:08 AM

In any case, no, I don't think making tests easier will solve any of our problems. I propose more careful selection of questions to avoid the problem that resulted in this lawsuit, not an easier test.

Although, I've long thought that the way we give tests may be more of a hindrance to education. You've got to challenge kids some way, and yes, sometimes they have to be able to memorize and regurgitate facts. But I also think it's possible that tests may cause some students to give up in school, and sometimes early on. Of course, you also have to look at how supportive the parents are, too...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 5, 2009 11:31 AM

Flotilla? Armada? Regatta?

A "fleet" or "armada" generally implies military connotations, though. You can have a fleet of warships, but generally not a fleet of yachts.

Does that make sense?

Mike

"It is complete now; the hands of time are neatly tied."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 5, 2009 11:34 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
You can have a fleet of warships, but generally not a fleet of yachts.

Does that make sense?

You fail. No Captaincy for YOU!

The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 5, 2009 11:36 AM

And, you know, when a firefighter responds to an emergency, the FIRST thing you want to make sure of is that he can read and write English, right? I mean, if he can't write about the fire, how is he ever going to be able to put it out?

How 'bout an oral exam? You ask the guy questions, he tells you answers. If he's right, he's your guy.

Wulf, you seem hung up on the idea that the black firefighters don't seem as capable of doing the bureaucratic paper-pushing and filling out the forms correctly. I thought you were AGAINST more bureaucracy and paper-pushing, and wanted men of action to save your world. Do I have this wrong?

I may be oversimplifying, but I find it more important that we have firefighters on the scene who know how to put out fires, rather than firefighters who know how to take a written exam or file a report.

Just sayin'...

Mike

"It is complete now; the hands of time are neatly tied."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 5, 2009 11:37 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
You can have a fleet of warships, but generally not a fleet of yachts.

Does that make sense?

You fail. No Captaincy for YOU!

The laughing Chrisisall

Dang, and I was SOOO looking forward to that. Guess I'll have to go back to sailing my own li'l boat solo, just like I've been doing for 30-odd years...

Mike

"It is complete now; the hands of time are neatly tied."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 5, 2009 11:48 AM

It might be regatta, the online dictionaries say that has to do with yachts and I've actually encountered the other two words.

Sorry for the off-topicness! It's been bothering me since the standardized testing came up.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 5, 2009 7:57 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
LOL, that's great, how is it I've never heard it B4?

The laughing Chrisisall

How many Irishmen does it take to change a light bulb?
51. One to hold the light bulb, 50 to drink til the room spins (they were light drinkers).

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 5, 2009 8:08 PM

When working as a team, or as teams, as firefighters are supposed to do, one must be able to effectively communicate in a common language. So that "homie be da KFC" does not send the next Fire Engine to the Knights of Columbus where there is no fire.

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:

How 'bout an oral exam? You ask the guy questions, he tells you answers. If he's right, he's your guy.

Mike

I would think an oral exam would allow much greater discrimination, but the written exam can isolate the status of race, color, creed and allow the answers to be compared equally.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 5, 2009 8:18 PM