 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeArticlesDiving DestinationsLearning Scuba DivingMarine LifeMiscellaneousDiscussion GroupsGeneralScuba EquipmentScuba LocationsAustralian ScubaUK ScubaDirectoryScuba Clubs |
Scuba Forum / General / September 2006we need car control
With a waiting list, and some sort of psych testing http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/08/29/BAGAEKRCO55.DTL  Signature“TANSTAAFL” “All I can say is there had better be some cheese at the end of this maze……” ____________________________________________________________________________ "A prudent man foresees the difficulties ahead and prepares for them; The simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences." - Proverbs 22:3 > With a waiting list, and some sort of psych testing Now you're starting to see the light. Any thoughts on what form the psych testing should take? JF >> With a waiting list, and some sort of psych testing > > Now you're starting to see the light. Any thoughts on what form the > psych testing should take? Easy: 1. Are you Canadian? Lee >>With a waiting list, and some sort of psych testing > > Now you're starting to see the light. Any thoughts on what form the > psych testing should take? > > JF For starters: You can't be a liberal. It's proof of poor judgment Signature“TANSTAAFL” “All I can say is there had better be some cheese at the end of this maze……” ____________________________________________________________________________ "A prudent man foresees the difficulties ahead and prepares for them; The simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences." - Proverbs 22:3 > >>With a waiting list, and some sort of psych testing > > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > You can't be a liberal. > It's proof of poor judgment I'm not sure that nationality and political persuasion are considered psychoses, although the way people go on about politicians (and in certain cases Canucks) one could have cause to wonder. Of course the wondering may be more about the ranter than the rantee. I think we need to take a more traditional approach to the psychological testing criteria. Even that may well eliminate a lot of liberals. Heaven knows most of them are headcases anyway. JF >>>>With a waiting list, and some sort of psych testing >>> [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > JF so you have the urge to run over liberals makes it ok to operate a car? Signature“TANSTAAFL” “All I can say is there had better be some cheese at the end of this maze……” ____________________________________________________________________________ "A prudent man foresees the difficulties ahead and prepares for them; The simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences." - Proverbs 22:3 > so you have the urge to run over liberals makes it ok to operate a car? No no no. You misunderstood what I said. Liberals are the ones who fight to save the whales, the seals, the pandas, the trees, the sharks and the farm animals. Furthermore, Popeye's already offered loads of evidence, purportedly irrefutable, that Canucks and liberals are too cowardly, haven't the cojones to kill. All this would seem to qualify them for the right to drive, if vehicular mayhem is the main concern. Conservatives, on the other hand, being the ones willing and able to stand up and kill as they see fit are the ones who should be carefully scrutinized before allowing them a permit to drive. Isn't there an elegant logic to all of this? JF > Liberals are the ones who fight to save the whales . . . Every conservative here supports care for marine mammals. > the seals . . . Say what? Seems to me it's the liberals in the group that think clubbing them to death is fine or did you perhaps think that Scott, Popeye and I are liberals? > the pandas They're communists. Who gives a damn. > the trees Are trees endangered? > the sharks Wrong again, it was Mike, Bullshark and me that went to the shark feeding meetings. > the farm animals Big deal. Everybody tries to protect their loved ones. > Popeye's already offered loads of evidence, purportedly irrefutable, > that Canucks and liberals are too cowardly, haven't the cojones to > kill. No, I think it was Canuck liberals he was referring to. Lee >> Liberals are the ones who fight to save the whales . . . > > Every conservative here supports care for marine mammals. Don't be so certain. I've heard lots of manatee-eating jokes here. > Wrong again, it was Mike, Bullshark and me that went to the shark feeding > meetings. I've never seen bullshark spout off much conservatism here. Did he vote for Bush & Bush? >> the farm animals > > Big deal. Everybody tries to protect their loved ones. More conservatives have sex with farm animals, that is true. Cattle ranching and sheepherding have always been conservative pursuits. Liberals farm organic vegetables and have their hands full keeping their women out of the cucumber patch. >>> Liberals are the ones who fight to save the whales . . . >> >> Every conservative here supports care for marine mammals. > Don't be so certain. I've heard lots of manatee-eating jokes here. You've heard jokes about a lot of things. Manatees are only endangered because a bunch of liberal idiots, who haven't a clue about what is really good or bad for manatees, insist on maintaining them on the list. The numbers have long since increased to the point where they are no longer endangered. Personally, I don't consider manatees to be marine mammals. I know that that's how they're classified, but I almost never see one in salt water and only in coastal waters. Their aquatic for sure, but marine seems like a stretch to me. >> Wrong again, it was Mike, Bullshark and me that went to the shark feeding >> meetings. > I've never seen bullshark spout off much conservatism here. Did he vote > for Bush & Bush? The fact that he doesn't run at the mouth, uh, fingers, like the rest of us, doesn't make him a liberal. Of course I could be wrong. Maybe he is a liberal. That's still two conservatives to one liberal. The fact that conservatives support conservation does not mean that there are no liberals doing the same. I haven't a clue who he voted for. The question isn't a particularly good one. In my personal opinion, Bush got elected because Kerry is a completely unacceptable alternative. I've never voted for a Bush for anything, ever before, but I voted for GW over Kerry. Even with my very low opinion of GW's performance since elected, I'd do it again. >>> the farm animals >> > Big deal. Everybody tries to protect their loved ones. > More conservatives have sex with farm animals, that is true. You didn't hear that from me. I conceded the point on farm animals. > Cattle ranching and sheepherding have always been conservative pursuits. That's true. We raising them for food and clothing. Somebody has to. Just like in other things, the liberals sit back and wait for someone else to do it for them. We do, however, try to protect them from non consentual sex with liberals. You have to draw the line somewhere. Liberals sneaking into the cow pasture is one of the reasons that most farmers have guns. > Liberals farm organic vegetables and have their hands full keeping their > women out of the cucumber patch. If you liberals can't keep your women happy without vegetables, us conservatives will be glad to help. Lee > >> Liberals are the ones who fight to save the whales . . . > > > > Every conservative here supports care for marine mammals. > > Don't be so certain. I've heard lots of manatee-eating jokes here. "Care for marine animals" could just mean not overgrilling them. > More conservatives have sex with farm animals, that is true. Cattle > ranching and sheepherding have always been conservative pursuits. Liberals > farm organic vegetables and have their hands full keeping their women out of > the cucumber patch. or their men... > Every conservative here supports care for marine mammals. Especially the tasty ones... > > Every conservative here supports care for marine mammals. > > Especially the tasty ones... There's room for all of God's creatures... right next to the potatoes. >> so you have the urge to run over liberals makes it ok to operate a car? > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > that Canucks and liberals are too cowardly, haven't the cojones to > kill. Incorrect as always, but at least you're consistent. As many times as you've denied it, I've told you that being a killer is in your basic nature. >All this would seem to qualify them for the right to drive, if > vehicular mayhem is the main concern. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > JF > I'm not sure that nationality and political persuasion are considered > psychoses, although the way people go on about politicians (and in [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > criteria. Even that may well eliminate a lot of liberals. Heaven knows > most of them are headcases anyway. Stop it, you're killing me. >> >>With a waiting list, and some sort of psych testing >> > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > I'm not sure that nationality and political persuasion are considered > psychoses, No doubt. > I think we need to take a more traditional approach to the psychological > testing criteria. We already discussed this at length. It's one of the mindless, worthless mantras that you repeat. > > I think we need to take a more traditional approach to the psychological > > testing criteria. > > We already discussed this at length. > > It's one of the mindless, worthless mantras that you repeat. Sheesh. Where's yer sense of humour? No wonder you're always so grumpy. JF > Sheesh. Where's yer sense of humour? No wonder you're always so grumpy. Hilarious. > For starters: > > You can't be a liberal. > It's proof of poor judgment Now you know why we call you all gun nuts. It's not because you're nuts about guns, it's because you all voted for Bush. Greg "I am the NRA" Mossman Vote Hillary in 2008! > > For starters: > > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Now you know why we call you all gun nuts. It's not because you're nuts > about guns, it's because you all voted for Bush. *Anyone* but a sack of sh.t like Kerry. BTW, arent you going to address all the lies, accusations and millions of dollars you all wasted on Haditha and the Plame/Wilson affair? > BTW, arent you going to address all the lies, accusations and millions of > dollars you all wasted on Haditha and the Plame/Wilson affair? What's millions compared to hundreds of billions? > > BTW, arent you going to address all the lies, accusations and millions of > > dollars you all wasted on Haditha and the Plame/Wilson affair? > > What's millions compared to hundreds of billions? Just wanted to see it in print. It'll all come up in 2008. > > With a waiting list, and some sort of psych testing > > Now you're starting to see the light. Any thoughts on what form the > psych testing should take? You really do have a talent for satire. >With a waiting list, and some sort of psych testing > >http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/08/29/BAGAEKRCO55.DTL With a name like Omeed Aziz Popal, can we make any guesses? Signaturedillon If you can't figure out how to unmunge my address, email me and I'll explain it. >>With a waiting list, and some sort of psych testing >> >>http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/08/29/BAGAEKRCO55.DTL > >With a name like Omeed Aziz Popal, can we make any guesses? Hey ! it's San Fran, not like he was running over real people |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.