Look at this sort of debate among these few Nobel Laureates:
>>> Comments about article, “Assault outside Bay Ridge Dunkin Donuts” by Helen Klein, 12/5/14, Home Reporter [http://homereporter.com/assault-outside-dunkin-donuts/][hklein@homereporternews.com]) The assault was upon an 85 year old man; and it allegedly involved two unidentified “teenagers” as perps, one of whom was apprehended. <<<
__________________
“Scarlett NY • 4 days ago (from 12/9/14), commenting on the article
I am sure they are both sweet, gentle giants. [[[ We all know who and what that means. Wink-wink !]]]
__________________
Ohboyonecanobi responding to Scarlett NY • 4 days ago (from 12/9/14)
Uh ... so maybe they should be killed in the streets rather than sent through the justice system? Not sure what you're trying to say here that isn't gross. [[[ Now there's a penalty for unnecessary roughness....]]]
__________________
The Cap'n responding to Ohboyonecanobi • 3 days ago (from 12/9/14)
YEah exactly - they should be killed in the streets rather than sent through this joke of a justice system. They'll only be back on the streets in no time and go on to commit worse crimes. What kind of feral subhuman un-evolved savages violently assault an 85 year old man? this is exaclty why NYC needs concealed carry and stand your ground laws. Funny how u find her comment gross and not the actual crime committed...were these perps friends of yours? [[[ Talk about gasoline on the fire....]]]
__________________
ScarlettNY responding to Ohboyonecanobi • 3 days ago (from 12/9/14)
What are you trying to say? Who is "they"and what makes you think whoever "they"are should be killed? I have no description of the perps. Do you happen to know who they are? Or, Are you assuming to know the demographic of the perp? What are you saying about your own prejudice? [[[ Nice riposte, but "Frankly, Scarlett, I ...." ]]]
__________________
commenting anew:
brooklynn1 • a day ago (from 12/9/14)
OK Tough guys. Please do not throw out the rule of law, which means not calling for people to be killed in the streets, as in comments below. Frankly some would call that incitement. We do not need vigilante justice. We need well trained, smart officers who know their community. Some officers clearly need to be weeded out. This is not a job for just anyone. [[[ What you mean "WE," Kemosabe ?"]]]
__________________
18 comments:
We need men to be men. And the good ones should be armed.
We need more john Waynes and fewer John Boehners.
Sorry to disappoint you but John Wayne was no "men are men" knuckle dragger that seems to be favored around here. John Wayne spent his entire adult life madly in love with Irish America's most outspoken Feminist icon: Maureen O'Hara . .. so much for men need to be men and all that stuff.
That's a load of Irish potatoe salad peddled by a well known harpy in these parts
Its potato not potatoe, and dont give the BS response that it was spelled potatoe in the 18th century.
That excuse didnt work for Dan Q
btw, Gale, who was just named Times Person of the Year?????Didn't you write bout her right here at this blog?
Ha ha ha . . .
Now I understand why more people read this blog than Time.
BTW: More people in the US have died in Ted Kennedys car than from ebola.
RESPONSE: THE "SECRET TIME 'MAN' OF THE YEAR" AWARD
EVERYBODY KNOWS THE REAL [NOW SECRET] NAME OF TIME'S ANNUAL HONORARIUM IS >>> "MAN OF THE YEAR"
ONE MAN STANDS OUT ABOVE ALL THE OTHER MEN
If the standard announced by Time, "the person or persons [man] who most affected the news and our lives, for good or ill, and embodied what was important about the year..." were actually applied, the hands down winner would have been BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA.
First and foremost, Obama single-handedly remade the Republican Party into the single issue anti-Obama party. This reincarnation of the GOP has virtually resulted in the complete GOP takeover of various levels of government across the United States -- with generally improving prospects for taking back the White House in 2016. All of that GOP success was in reaction to the words, actions and policies of the transformative presidency of BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA.
Second, and intentionally missed by Time Editor Nancy Gibbs, several of the "persons" considered for the "Man of the Year" were functionally enabled to be considered only by the words, actions and policies of the transformative presidency of BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA.
Third, even the real number two for Time Man of the Year candidate, Vlad Putin, was completely enabled to do his worldwide mischief by the words, actions and policies of the transformative presidency of BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA.
So stop listening to the hysterical nonsense from the nominal editor of that failed nominal magazine, Time, and wake up and smell the coffee about the real MAN OF THE YEAR --- BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA.
btw, BHO should also be the hands down winner of the "Behind Enemy Lines... Fourth Annual... BUFFOON OF THE YEAR AWARD" ....
Since Man of the year effectively excludes half the human race, they had the good sense to change it to Person of the . . .
Not true. Man of the year excludes 55% of the human race.
Furthermore, the only part of a womans body that is larger than a mans is the brain. A womans brain is 6% larger than a mans.
^^^^^
By golly, I think we've reached a detente. Will it last? Historicaly, if Reaganism and Soviet relations are any measure, probably not.
RESPONSE: THE "WISHIN' 'N HOPIN' 'N PLANNIN' 'N DREAMIN' " EDITION
THE WOMYN OF THE 21ST CENTURY WORLD MAKE SHARIA ISLAM LOOK BETTER
Listening to womyn only makes real men realize what annoying whiners most womyn are. The 50-55% of the population that are biologically/ genetically/ anatomically correct females, and who don't know their proper place in society and behave indecorously, make about 90% of the background noise in most settings.
And as for womyn's larger brains, if it is so, there is far more utility for a similar sized Idahoe potatoe.
^^^^^
Whomever you are, I know who you're trying to be but it's not believable.
a short lived detente. cold war again.
RESPONSE: THE "PEDANTIC PEDANT" EDITION
The two comments above, "Anonymous...2:04 PM" and "Anonymous...2:14 PM" contain serious errors in syntax that make the specific meaning(s) difficult to discern.
However, both are somewhat emotive; and I was moved and removed in rapid succession.
COMPARISON: THE “TIME EDITOR’S OWN WORDS” EDITION
DOES WHAT THE TIME EDITOR SAID REALLY MAKE SENSE TO YOU ?
TIME'S EDITOR'S COMMENTARY GOING ALONG WITH ITS "PERSON OF THE YEAR" SELECTION IS IDEOLOGY POSING AS SCIENCE AND SOME NOTION OF GOOD MEDICINE — IT MAKES EVEN LESS SENSE THAN ANY OF THE COMMENTS TO THE HOME REPORTER QUOTED IN MY MAIN POST ABOVE
"... ‘Ebola is a war, and a warning. The global health system is nowhere close to strong enough to keep us safe from infectious disease, and “us” means everyone, not just those in faraway places where this is one threat among many that claim lives every day,’ wrote [Times’s Editor Nancy] Gibbs. *** She continued, ‘The rest of the world can sleep at night because a group of men and women are willing to stand and fight. For tireless acts of courage and mercy, for buying the world time to boost its defenses, for risking, for persisting, for sacrificing and saving, the Ebola fighters are Time's 2014 Person of the Year.’... " ( See “Ebola fighters are Time's 'Person of the Year' ” by Eliott C. McLaughlin, 12/10/14, CNN [http://www.cnn.com/2014/12/10/world/time-person-of-the-year/]).
Pedantic commenter: The correct words to the song is "All you need is love" not "love is all you need" If you are quoting the Beatles, do so correctly please.
If the only part of a woman body that is larger is the brain, maybe that is why they keep telling us to move our eyes up?
And thats supposed to be funny?
RESPONSE: THE "ALL WET COMMENTER 'ANONYMOUS 5:29 PM' " EDITION
THE LYRIC QUOTED IS CORRECT
FYI, the last ump-teen lines of the song that you correctly recognized as a Beatle tune are as follows:
"...Love is all you need
Love is all you need (Love is all you need)
Love is all you need (Love is all you need)
Love is all you need (Love is all you need)
Love is all you need (Love is all you need)
Love is all you need (Love is all you need)
Love is all you need (Love is all you need)
Love is all you need (Love is all you need)
Love is all you need (Love is all you need)
Love is all you need (Love is all you need)
Love is all you need (Love is all you need)
Love is all you need (Love is all you need)
Yee-hai! (Love is all you need)
Love is all you need (Love is all you need)
Yesterday (Love is all you need)
Love is all you need (Love is all you need)
Love is all you need (Love is all you need)
Love is all you need (Love is all you need)
Oh yeah! (Love is all you need)
She loves you, yeah yeah yeah (Love is all you need)
She loves you, yeah yeah yeah (Love is all you need)"
So when it comes to trying to be more pedantic than the pedantic pedant, just put a sock in it !
Post a Comment