FiredMotorCompany Posted February 19, 2014 Author Share Posted February 19, 2014 The link bomber objecting to link bombing...LOL I'll take my case as far as you like. My links are references for my comments. His had none that were distinguishable from a quote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langston Hughes Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 I'll take my case as far as you like. My links are references for my comments. His had none that were distinguishable from a quote. That's bullshit. You throw one line comments in with links that have little to do with your past comments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiredMotorCompany Posted February 20, 2014 Author Share Posted February 20, 2014 (edited) That's bullshit. You throw one line comments in with links that have little to do with your past comments. You're the B.S. expert. All you see, hear, smell, think is B.S. It seems you may have a fetish for it. But, please show me where he put ANY comment on his post. Edited February 20, 2014 by FiredMotorCompany Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langston Hughes Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 You're the B.S. expert. All you see, hear, smell, think is B.S. It seems you may have a fetish for it. But, please show me where he put ANY comment on his post. You don't want to get into my fetishes eagle scout. It would hurt your little goody goody mind. Suffice it to say that i'm not a scat freak, nor ever have been, but it's true that reading your posts has allowed us all to learn more about bullshit than we'd ever wanted. Like telling us your 5-8 word blurbs constitutes a well written opinion, and going after Ed's few link posts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiredMotorCompany Posted February 24, 2014 Author Share Posted February 24, 2014 You don't want to get into my fetishes eagle scout. It would hurt your little goody goody mind. I'll save my old tennis shoes for you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langston Hughes Posted February 25, 2014 Share Posted February 25, 2014 I'll save my old tennis shoes for you. I don't need them thank you. Your not female and the laces don't go around your feet if you must know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiredMotorCompany Posted February 25, 2014 Author Share Posted February 25, 2014 I don't need them thank you. Your not female and the laces don't go around your feet if you must know. So you're into female foot binding? You said I'd be shocked by your fetishes. You're right. Here, this is for your library. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langston Hughes Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 So you're into female foot binding? You said I'd be shocked by your fetishes. You're right. Here, this is for your library. Nope, not at all. But thanks for playing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiredMotorCompany Posted February 26, 2014 Author Share Posted February 26, 2014 (edited) Nope, not at all. But thanks for playing. You suggested it. Ashamed of your Freudian Slip? Remember, you asserted your fetishes were "too much for an eagle scout." I think you really wanted to reveal that little tidbit. Edited February 26, 2014 by FiredMotorCompany Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langston Hughes Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 You suggested it. Ashamed of your Freudian Slip? Remember, you asserted your fetishes were "too much for an eagle scout." I think you really wanted to reveal that little tidbit. I did not suggest it. Reread what I posted. Langston Hughes, on 25 Feb 2014 - 03:34 AM, said: I don't need them thank you. Your not female and the laces don't go around your feet if you must know. Damn son, what the fuck is wrong with you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiredMotorCompany Posted February 26, 2014 Author Share Posted February 26, 2014 You don't want to get into my fetishes eagle scout. It would hurt your little goody goody mind. Suffice it to say that i'm not a scat freak, nor ever have been, but it's true that reading your posts has allowed us all to learn more about bullshit than we'd ever wanted. Like telling us your 5-8 word blurbs constitutes a well written opinion, and going after Ed's few link posts. I'll save my old tennis shoes for you. I don't need them thank you. Your not female and the laces don't go around your feet if you must know. So you're into female foot binding? You said I'd be shocked by your fetishes. You're right. Here, this is for your library. You suggested it. Ashamed of your Freudian Slip? Remember, you asserted your fetishes were "too much for an eagle scout." I think you really wanted to reveal that little tidbit. I did not suggest it. Reread what I posted. Damn son, what the fuck is wrong with you? I know tennis shoe laces don't go around my feet. So you implied your preference for female feet and laces that DO go around her feet. I'm just reading what you wrote. But, I guess we'll keep your little secret. Son! And I guess I've lost my eagle badge for being so broadly informed and intelligent to recognize your little fetish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 Do you guys actually read what you say to each other? This thread is rambling alright... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiredMotorCompany Posted February 26, 2014 Author Share Posted February 26, 2014 Do you guys actually read what you say to each other? This thread is rambling alright... I am fairly sure I read it. He may not have intended to say it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiredMotorCompany Posted February 27, 2014 Author Share Posted February 27, 2014 (edited) The media are so messed up. Like seriously! Farrow, After Three Days on the Air, Receives Cronkite Award That, or Cronkite was inept, juvenile and unworthy of the respect he garnered over decades of journalism. Edited February 27, 2014 by FiredMotorCompany Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langston Hughes Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 Do you guys actually read what you say to each other? This thread is rambling alright... Yes, I read what he says. He's being intentionally obtuse about our current tit for tat. I'm fairly sure that even a goody goody christian like him has seen at least a picture of a women in a corset. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langston Hughes Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 The media are so messed up. Like seriously! Farrow, After Three Days on the Air, Receives Cronkite Award That, or Cronkite was inept, juvenile and unworthy of the respect he garnered over decades of journalism. It's not the media giving him the award. And your posting the NRO which is a poster child for messed up media. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiredMotorCompany Posted February 27, 2014 Author Share Posted February 27, 2014 Yes, I read what he says. He's being intentionally obtuse about our current tit for tat. I'm fairly sure that even a goody goody christian like him has seen at least a picture of a women in a corset. OH! But, you stated...... It would hurt your little goody goody mind. Hell, my mother wore corsets. So, that never occurred to me. And I may have seen and become aware of much worse than the foot binding. Not my kinda thing. But, that doesn't mean I've never become aware of the extents some people will go to. I suggest you may want to be more careful describing your little eccentricities in such obtuse manners. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiredMotorCompany Posted March 3, 2014 Author Share Posted March 3, 2014 This image struck me with insightful recognition of our favorite adversary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langston Hughes Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiredMotorCompany Posted March 3, 2014 Author Share Posted March 3, 2014 (edited) Are you having fun misrepresenting every one of those statements? Since I can't copy/paste the text above, I'll only address the last one that I can read while typing: "Taking away a woman's right to make decisions about her own body". Suicide is illegal and neither women nor men are legally allowed to do that to their own body. So, it's not so simple. Do you endorse that? However, a woman's "CHOICE" about her body, where conception is concerned, STARTS AND IS DIRECTLY RELATED TO HER CONSENSUAL PARTICIPATION IN AN ACTIVITY THAT RISKS A POTENTIALLY UNWANTED PREGNANCY. HOW ABOUT LIVING WITH YOUR DECISIONS, AS IT IS EXPECTED THAT BEING ADULT, ONE SHOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR OWN DECISIONS ENOUGH TO RESIST BASE INSTINCT, UNLIKE ANIMALS WHO ARE UNABLE TO DO SO. That's why minors are not supposed to have sex. And having sex with a minor is considered criminal. What if the child WANTS to have sex and a baby in Junior High, or Elementary School? It's her body!!! Anti-abortionists are defending the life that was the consequence of consensual sex, between adults. Where abortionists CHOOSE to devalue the life they consensually created in the name of enabling reckless behavior and wanting a "Get Out Of Jail Free" card do-over. Well, MAYBE we could argue SHE gets (1) freebie. But, the father, if she even knows who it is, gets to decide IF he wants to ever be held responsible for raising the child. Granting the woman 100% of the decisions and 100% power over the father, is not equitable. It took both of them. And if the father is not allowed to "force" an abortion to avoid child support, then the mother should not be allowed to mandate support for a child the father did not want.....even after conception. Edited March 3, 2014 by FiredMotorCompany Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langston Hughes Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 Are you having fun misrepresenting every one of those statements? Since I can't copy/paste the text above, I'll only address the last one that I can read while typing: "Taking away a woman's right to make decisions about her own body". Suicide is illegal and neither women nor men are legally allowed to do that to their own body. So, it's not so simple. Do you endorse that? However, a woman's "CHOICE" about her body, where conception is concerned, STARTS AND IS DIRECTLY RELATED TO HER CONSENSUAL PARTICIPATION IN AN ACTIVITY THAT RISKS A POTENTIALLY UNWANTED PREGNANCY. HOW ABOUT LIVING WITH YOUR DECISIONS, AS IT IS EXPECTED THAT BEING ADULT, ONE SHOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR OWN DECISIONS ENOUGH TO RESIST BASE INSTINCT, UNLIKE ANIMALS WHO ARE UNABLE TO DO SO. That's why minors are not supposed to have sex. And having sex with a minor is considered criminal. What if the child WANTS to have sex and a baby in Junior High, or Elementary School? It's her body!!! Anti-abortionists are defending the life that was the consequence of consensual sex, between adults. Where abortionists CHOOSE to devalue the life they consensually created in the name of enabling reckless behavior and wanting a "Get Out Of Jail Free" card do-over. Well, MAYBE we could argue SHE gets (1) freebie. But, the father, if she even knows who it is, gets to decide IF he wants to ever be held responsible for raising the child. Granting the woman 100% of the decisions and 100% power over the father, is not equitable. It took both of them. And if the father is not allowed to "force" an abortion to avoid child support, then the mother should not be allowed to mandate support for a child the father did not want.....even after conception. If it was actually a misrepresentation of what is happening, then I would be having nearly as much fun as you do while misrepresenting my statements on a daily basis. So you spend how many sentences suggesting that the female must be responsible for her actions and not have an abortion, but at the end you then backtrack and suggest that if we allowed potential fathers to not be responsible it would all be good. Your morals and honesty are as always, very flexible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiredMotorCompany Posted March 3, 2014 Author Share Posted March 3, 2014 (edited) If it was actually a misrepresentation of what is happening, then I would be having nearly as much fun as you do while misrepresenting my statements on a daily basis. So you spend how many sentences suggesting that the female must be responsible for her actions and not have an abortion, but at the end you then backtrack and suggest that if we allowed potential fathers to not be responsible it would all be good. Your morals and honesty are as always, very flexible. Demonstrating your argument's fallacies. If you've read my other opinions you'd recognize that. Edited March 3, 2014 by FiredMotorCompany Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langston Hughes Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 Fired, I can understand your feelings, but as I've said before i don't feel that you have the right to force women to carry a fetus till birth. A women is not a broodmare and whether or not she is being responsible or sound in her decision does not give you the right to control her body. That said, i don't agree with partial birth or late term abortions as the child could live on it's own with minimal care and then be adopted. However that doesn't give you or any other outsider the ability to take away her rights early on. RU-48 and Plan B should be readily available and 1st and 2nd trimester abortions should be legal. By the way who pays for the necessary pre-natal care that a women who doesn't want a child but is forced by you to carry it to full term? Are you going to do this? The ironic part of outlawing abortion is that it would increase the amount of children who live near or below poverty level at the same time that conservatives want to cut funding for ADC and SNAP. If you believe there are a million abortions or some number nearby and a large majority are by poor women then you must accept that their will just be more poverty stricken children from this and they will need good pre-natal care and food through out there life to reach their full potential. Rorcing a women to carry a child and then not standing behind her would be morally wrong. And don't give me the bit about charity. If the government makes her carry the child it should help provide for the child. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiredMotorCompany Posted April 3, 2014 Author Share Posted April 3, 2014 (edited) More than a little bit ironic that residents of Colorado, one of the new "legal pot" states, are possibly suffering from paranoia. They think all the cops are out to stop them because they're from Colorado. More People Claiming They’ve Been Targeted For Their Colorado Plates More people are claiming they are being pulled over out of state to see if they have marijuana simply because they have Colorado license plates. They strongly suspect it’s because Colorado stores now legally sell marijuana to those over the age of 21. The Colorado Drug Investigators Association says there have been a lot of seizures of marijuana from cars leaving Colorado and going out of state. Drivers are complaining they are being stopped for no good reason. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=VFGXC1jgOdY#t=104 Edited April 3, 2014 by FiredMotorCompany Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.