But it does give us and opportunity to understand and appreciate friendship. Hope that ‘might’ turns out to be a ‘does not.’ I’ve had to wait for an answer twice–for two different family members–as you are doing now. It’s not easy. Well wishes to you and your friend.
[/quote]
Its in the 60% way is area.
Fortunately, if he has it we caught early because he was in so much pain.
Thank you too, and of times like these make me appreciate anything it is that with my families history I will simply die of a heart attack or something similar.
Since we all will die anyway, I prefer a stroke or a heart attack to cancer, thank you.
Fortunately, if he has it we caught early because he was in so much pain.
Thank you too, and of times like these make me appreciate anything it is that with my families history I will simply die of a heart attack or something similar.
Since we all will die anyway, I prefer a stroke or a heart attack to cancer, thank you.[/quote]
Aye, fortunately for my brother, it was a benign tumor on the thyroid. Had to have part of it removed anyways, as it made swallowing difficult. Takes a thyroid med now, but is otherwise perfectly fine. My grandfather wasn’t so fortunate. He had pleural mesothelioma. Exposure to asbestos as a welder in shipyards, apparently. So, genetically it doesn’t seem to be a family problem. I too, am grateful for that. Spent a lot of time helping with him, and took him to a number of chemo treatments, where I met other patients. It’s tough on the person, obviously. But, it’s also tough for everyone around them. Let us know if things turn out ok. Take care.
[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
A liberal friend of mine just sent me this. Perhaps it is appropriate:
[/quote]
I stopped reading after about the tenth time the condescending, liberal prick referred to him as ‘kid’. [/quote]
Then I suppose you missed the point. As a side note why is it that when conservatives on this site refer to people as “kids” they are champions but when this author does it he’s a liberal prick?
[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
A liberal friend of mine just sent me this. Perhaps it is appropriate:
[/quote]
I stopped reading after about the tenth time the condescending, liberal prick referred to him as ‘kid’. [/quote]
Then I suppose you missed the point. As a side note why is it that when conservatives on this site refer to people as “kids” they are champions but when this author does it he’s a liberal prick?[/quote]
Yeah well, if you do it once or twice it is kind of funny, if you do it 10 times with a “kid” that has twice the balls you have you are a condescending prick.
But it does give us and opportunity to understand and appreciate friendship. Hope that ‘might’ turns out to be a ‘does not.’ I’ve had to wait for an answer twice–for two different family members–as you are doing now. It’s not easy. Well wishes to you and your friend.
[/quote]
Its in the 60% way is area.
Fortunately, if he has it we caught early because he was in so much pain.
Thank you too, and of times like these make me appreciate anything it is that with my families history I will simply die of a heart attack or something similar.
Since we all will die anyway, I prefer a stroke or a heart attack to cancer, thank you.[/quote]
But it does give us and opportunity to understand and appreciate friendship. Hope that ‘might’ turns out to be a ‘does not.’ I’ve had to wait for an answer twice–for two different family members–as you are doing now. It’s not easy. Well wishes to you and your friend.
[/quote]
Its in the 60% way is area.
Fortunately, if he has it we caught early because he was in so much pain.
Thank you too, and of times like these make me appreciate anything it is that with my families history I will simply die of a heart attack or something similar.
Since we all will die anyway, I prefer a stroke or a heart attack to cancer, thank you.[/quote]
[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
A liberal friend of mine just sent me this. Perhaps it is appropriate:
[/quote]
I stopped reading after about the tenth time the condescending, liberal prick referred to him as ‘kid’. [/quote]
Then I suppose you missed the point. As a side note why is it that when conservatives on this site refer to people as “kids” they are champions but when this author does it he’s a liberal prick?[/quote]
Yeah well, if you do it once or twice it is kind of funny, if you do it 10 times with a “kid” that has twice the balls you have you are a condescending prick.
[/quote]
Interesting. Do you know either the author or the person in the image? How can you make a claims that he has “twice the balls” of the author? Seems more likely that the hate is directed at the fact that he is a liberal than anything. These two sets of beliefs (liberal and conservative) possibly divide this country more than racism.
[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
A liberal friend of mine just sent me this. Perhaps it is appropriate:
[/quote]
I stopped reading after about the tenth time the condescending, liberal prick referred to him as ‘kid’. [/quote]
Then I suppose you missed the point. As a side note why is it that when conservatives on this site refer to people as “kids” they are champions but when this author does it he’s a liberal prick?[/quote]
There’s a big difference between calling people kids because you’re talking about a group of young people andsaying ‘look, kid’; ‘listen, kid’. The guy who wrote the letter was using it in a very condescending way and you know it. As someone who gets judged on my age by people who do stuff stupid enough for me to not want to even trust them with a slot machine, I have no interest in putting up with it.
[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
A liberal friend of mine just sent me this. Perhaps it is appropriate:
[/quote]
I stopped reading after about the tenth time the condescending, liberal prick referred to him as ‘kid’. [/quote]
Then I suppose you missed the point. As a side note why is it that when conservatives on this site refer to people as “kids” they are champions but when this author does it he’s a liberal prick?[/quote]
There’s a big difference between calling people kids because you’re talking about a group of young people andsaying ‘look, kid’; ‘listen, kid’. The guy who wrote the letter was using it in a very condescending way and you know it. As someone who gets judged on my age by people who do stuff stupid enough for me to not want to even trust them with a slot machine, I have no interest in putting up with it.[/quote]
I’m not arguing that he doesn’t use “kid” in a condescending tone. Several times since I have started reading this thread I have heard “Oh you’re a student, well that explains it all” and that is equally condescending. Why is it ok for them to do it but not this “liberal prick” to do it?
[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
A liberal friend of mine just sent me this. Perhaps it is appropriate:
[/quote]
I stopped reading after about the tenth time the condescending, liberal prick referred to him as ‘kid’. [/quote]
Then I suppose you missed the point. As a side note why is it that when conservatives on this site refer to people as “kids” they are champions but when this author does it he’s a liberal prick?[/quote]
There’s a big difference between calling people kids because you’re talking about a group of young people andsaying ‘look, kid’; ‘listen, kid’. The guy who wrote the letter was using it in a very condescending way and you know it. As someone who gets judged on my age by people who do stuff stupid enough for me to not want to even trust them with a slot machine, I have no interest in putting up with it.[/quote]
I’m not arguing that he doesn’t use “kid” in a condescending tone. Several times since I have started reading this thread I have heard “Oh you’re a student, well that explains it all” and that is equally condescending. Why is it ok for them to do it but not this “liberal prick” to do it? [/quote]
As far as I know that is mostly Zebs MO and and he mostly resorts to it when he runs out of arguments.
Having said that, sometimes it is true that you cannot see or gauge some things clearly because of age.
That leaves some room for misunderstandings, but if you use it in the way it was used in this article you are well past the grey area.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
I’m not reading all of the garbage that’s posted here because I’m sure it’s mostly anti-protest… but these are truly beautiful things. They nearly bring tears to my eyes… I’ve been waiting so fucking long for this country to wake up, and the finally, they stir from slumber…
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
I’m not reading all of the garbage that’s posted here because I’m sure it’s mostly anti-protest… but these are truly beautiful things. They nearly bring tears to my eyes… I’ve been waiting so fucking long for this country to wake up, and the finally, they stir from slumber…
GTFO[/quote]
Fuck, you.[/quote]
I am sorry, I cannot really hear you over the sound of your willful ignorance.
Go to DailyKos and plan how to spend other peoples money.
Being ignorant of basic economics is one thing, to proudly announce it yet another, but very few people deliver the hatrick of doing all that AND trying to insult those that actually have a working knowledge of how the world works while cheering on imbeciles who would reform the whole US in the Peoples Republic of California if they possibky could.
There is only so much aggressive stupidity I can handle you ignorant, loud mouthed retard.
"But there is no justification, in a civilized society, for the kind of mass civil disobedience that involves the violation of the rights of othersâ??regardless of whether the demonstratorsâ?? goal is good or evil. The end does not justify the means. No oneâ??s rights can be secured by the violation of the rights of others. Mass disobedience is an assault on the concept of rights: it is a mobâ??s defiance of legality as such.
The forcible occupation of another manâ??s property or the obstruction of a public thoroughfare is so blatant a violation of rights that an attempt to justify it becomes an abrogation of morality. An individual has no right to do a â??sit-inâ?? in the home or office of a person he disagrees withâ??and he does not acquire such a right by joining a gang. Rights are not a matter of numbersâ??and there can be no such thing, in law or in morality, as actions forbidden to an individual, but permitted to a mob.
The only power of a mob, as against an individual, is greater muscular strengthâ??i.e., plain, brute physical force. The attempt to solve social problems by means of physical force is what a civilized society is established to prevent. The advocates of mass civil disobedience admit that their purpose is intimidation. A society that tolerates intimidation as a means of settling disputesâ??the physical intimidation of some men or groups by othersâ??loses its moral right to exist as a social system, and its collapse does not take long to follow.
Politically, mass civil disobedience is appropriate only as a prelude to civil warâ??as the declaration of a total break with a countryâ??s political institutions."
I suppose I shouldn’t be surprised that the only criticism of what I posted is about the “tone.” But I had hoped at least one person would address the substance.
Condescending it was, but then again, so are many of the posts on this thread… “Mom and dinner” and the like.
