LOL internet tough guy talking about someone ELSE threatening over the internet? This fucker has truly lost it…
[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
The shooter turns out to be a TSA employee.[/quote]
I am wondering if they ran criminal background checks on the TSA agents.
[/quote]
The media is reporting the shooter had strong anti-government literature on him, yet he worked for them. Weird.[/quote]
Lets go all tin foil hat right now. This is an Obama plant to get the discussion back on assault weapons, and off the Healthcare.gov website.
[/quote]
He managed to get a rifle into the terminal area, you ain’t hiding that thing in your shoe. [/quote]
Weird, the article I read does not mention that he as a TSA employee, nor was he “inside the terminal” (he was actually at the checkpoint)…Could Maxipad possibly be wrong about a matter of national news? That would truly be a first, and I for one would be shocked…
The LA Times WAS reporting it to be a former TSA employee.
[quote]2busy wrote:
The LA Times WAS reporting it to be a former TSA employee.
[/quote]
That wouldn’t surprise me, given how awful and reactionary journalism is nowadays. that very article that you linked claims the shooter was killed, except he wasn’t and is still alive in the hospital. Just awful reporting all the way around.
Although nothing changes my original statement.
[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:
[quote]2busy wrote:
The LA Times WAS reporting it to be a former TSA employee.
[/quote]
That wouldn’t surprise me, given how awful and reactionary journalism is nowadays. that very article that you linked claims the shooter was killed, except he wasn’t and is still alive in the hospital. Just awful reporting all the way around.
Although nothing changes my original statement.
[/quote]
So…
Max reports what he hears on local news, since he’s in the LA area.
Turns out that info is wrong.
You blame Max.
That explains a lot.
[quote]2busy wrote:
[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:
[quote]2busy wrote:
The LA Times WAS reporting it to be a former TSA employee.
[/quote]
That wouldn’t surprise me, given how awful and reactionary journalism is nowadays. that very article that you linked claims the shooter was killed, except he wasn’t and is still alive in the hospital. Just awful reporting all the way around.
Although nothing changes my original statement.
[/quote]
So…
Max reports what he hears on local news, since he’s in the LA area.
Turns out that info is wrong.
You blame Max.
That explains a lot.[/quote]
Are you his mommy? Of course I am going to get a dig in a that idiot because it’s too easy and I’m a huge meanie internet stalker bully…He didn’t exactly cite a fucking source, now did he? But it is reactionary journalism all the way around, from the LA Times to the idiots that eat it up and can’t wait to jump on the internet to spread it…idiocy all the way around…
At least it wasn’t from an accountant…
Now tell the truth, did you even know the shooter was still alive before I told you? lol
[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:
LOL internet tough guy talking about someone ELSE threatening over the internet? This fucker has truly lost it…[/quote]
Careful, if you had seen half the things he has seen you would not be so bold. Of course, if you have Netflix or something similar you can catch up.
Push,
I had similar thoughts as well, that Baller was a closet homosexual, he sure has a lousy way of hiding it.
Baller - I don’t care if you are gay, just know that I am not.
Zecarlo - I have met some of your people, certainly not on Netflix, although they probably should be. I thought Rosario Gambino was truly interesting.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
.[/quote]
Play it again Bradley!!
LOL only in the wasteland of PWI can someone make a claim that is 100% false and have 3 nuthugging white knights come to his rescue. So which one of you ended up eating the cracker anyway?
[quote]Sloth wrote:
I find it absolutely hilarious how many of the guys here just LOVE polls now, but just a year ago eschewed every single one of them.
[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
I find it absolutely hilarious how many of the guys here just LOVE polls now, but just a year ago eschewed every single one of them.[/quote]
this poll is skewed ±3% so Obama’s numbers could be 36% approval.
[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
I find it absolutely hilarious how many of the guys here just LOVE polls now, but just a year ago eschewed every single one of them.[/quote]
I wouldn’t say anyone loves polls. I would say however, even if you double the margin of error, it simply points out what we’ve been saying for awhile now. Obama isn’t doing a particularly good job.
Seemed like the best place to put this…made me laugh.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
I find it absolutely hilarious how many of the guys here just LOVE polls now, but just a year ago eschewed every single one of them.[/quote]
I wouldn’t say anyone loves polls. I would say however, even if you double the margin of error, it simply points out what we’ve been saying for awhile now. Obama isn’t doing a particularly good job. [/quote]
who cares what a bunch of overpaid out of touch voters think?
[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
I find it absolutely hilarious how many of the guys here just LOVE polls now, but just a year ago eschewed every single one of them.[/quote]
I wouldn’t say anyone loves polls. I would say however, even if you double the margin of error, it simply points out what we’ve been saying for awhile now. Obama isn’t doing a particularly good job. [/quote]
who cares what a bunch of overpaid out of touch voters think?[/quote]
Lame cross thread joke, you’re better than that.
As to reconcile why the two opinions are different:
One is the singular opinion of some pampered ego who wouldn’t likely understand the day-to-day life and struggles of a typical “average joe” if they have been “famous” for a significant amount of time.
The other gives us a general idea, at least within some reason, what the “population” thinks of a particular matter. Both average Joe’s and those oh so wonderful elites too.
Polls aren’t perfect, and in a vacuum certainly tend to be “poor”. However even averages are showing significant negative spreads in approval ratings. Something some of us have been saying for awhile now.
I guess you guys are just the trail blazers…what will you do when they start going up again?
[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:
what will you do when they start going up again?[/quote]
Assuming it is because he is doing a good job? Be happy.
This story is kinda sad, Loyal Obama Supporters Cancelled by Obamacare.
The couple ? Lee, 60, and JoEllen, 59 ? have been paying $550 a month for their health coverage ? a plan that offers solid coverage, not one of the skimpy plans Obama has criticized. But recently, Kaiser informed them the plan would be canceled at the end of the year because it did not meet the requirements of the Affordable Care Act. The couple would need to find another one. The cost would be around double what they pay now, but the benefits would be worse.