GreatWhiteNorth

I found it to be an interesting exercise. Just for fun, maybe take a swing at it...

...and then Husker_"Zero substance"_Du chimes in with the usual silliness. Pointed out the lack of a rebuttal, even though the rebuttal was actually produced 2 hours prior. Shhhhh... let's keep a safe distance away and watch this creature in its natural habitat. Amazing really. Best not to disturb it, it can get quite angry very quickly. And is perilously unpredictable. Doesn't have a lethal bite but is equipped with very sharp teeth. Wouldn't want to accidentally trip over this one.

Did I miss your post with your suggestion(s) for Music Mount Rushmore?

Ummm... you seem to be sinking lower. Seriously. Alex Jones is a verified nut. The 'suck' thing you posted about liberals is just angry and weird.

Good advice. The back-and-forth insults escalate into nothing good, yet we all seem to get caught up in them sooner or later. Discussion is the only reason I'm here... but it's difficult to avoid the insults. And there it is, just as we are speaking of civility.

The fact is, that I didn't say that. You are posting nonsense and it is disturbing how bad you are at this. Calm down. Read my post again, more carefully.

you're... <insult> you're... <insult> you're... <insult> Listen, it's a discussion board. We're here to discuss... kind of the point of the board to begin with. I really do expect more from you. Your posting recently has been truly disappointing.

Bongino is a nut. Reality isn't a dumb action movie. The Secret Service won't be murdering a floor of civilians. Just crazy talk.

So, your actual name is Felicia? Cool.

"So many words"? What? You give an excuse why you can't read a short post - then, proceed to post one just about the same length in response? I'm very much OK with discussing topics, but if you want to jump around the topics like a politician to avoid actually discussing any of them. Well, that's your choice. You be you. If you get to the point where you want to honestly discuss a topic, look me up... or don't. Discussion, as a catalyst to mutual understanding, is something I appreciate. But not everyone needs to think that way.

If you don't follow him much, you might not know it - but Willie Nelson has been a prolific songwriter. Wrote pretty much all his stuff, and then some. List of songs written by Willie Nelson - Wikipedia Ever heard of Patsy Cline's "Crazy"? It was written by Willie. There's a pretty interesting story about that one, in particular. I don't regularly listen to Dylan, Jackson, or Elvis. But that doesn't get in the way of my attempt at unbiased perspective. It is, after all, not about my favorites. Being worldwide celebrities, changing what music and musical performance is for future generations, etc. These are the things that weighed heavily on my choices.

I'm not defending Ban - he's doing his thing. You're doing yours. I'm doing mine. My take here is that you are referring to THE POLICY as if it were a real thing. It's not. I just isn't. Democrats don't think criminals should be getting a free pass - except the fringe. The rest don't at all. It isn't a "lower class obstacles" issue for the majority of D's. It's a crime problem we need to rectify. D's aren't that far from R's. We're all living the same way. It shouldn't surprise anyone to realize that we all feel basically the same way about issues and policies. Sure, some R's believe in flat-earth, ivermectin, fake moon landing, etc. But just the fringe. Most are levelheaded. It is weird that you insist on making this a blue vs red standoff. When it isn't one. Moderate R and D basically agree. Fringe R and D don't... but they are both kooks.

Way to chime in like some weird kid spectator who is a little too infatuated.

Way to man up and take responsibility for insulting me. You are a beacon of good will.

More nutty conspiracy theory garbage... "documents, emails, and his own words"... as if it's some kind of proof. Does anyone else realize that you just asked me to find the proof you don't have? That is a terrible way to make an argument. Imagine that in a court of law - "I've got all kinds of proof - photographs, cancelled checks... well, just not with me. But you just look into it." Pffff... your argument is a just pathetic. (Which would explain your name calling. Always the lowest common denominator.)

Don't purposely be obtuse, you know what my post meant - and if others don't, they can read it again. It was clear. Posters here sometimes purposely hide their gender. Which is 100% cool. It's an anonymous BBS. When other posters refer to them using gender-specific terms based on what they read from their posts, how the heck are these other posters supposed to know they are using incorrect terms? Answer = they can't possibly know. And it's "over the line" to accuse them of wrongdoing when they can't possibly know. So - who here thinks it's a good idea to attack posters for not knowing someone's hidden gender? Answer = nobody. But, for whatever reason, you've decided it's a cause you should take up. So, just you on the attack. You are posting exactly like someone who is "woke"... mad as a cut snake because the wrong pronoun was used. Ooof.

Great, more dumb conspiracy theory posts... Just what we all need.

That's juuuuuust a bit over the line. Many of us know posters here who are women, but who don't openly share that information. Makes sense to me. I have no problem with anonymous posters remaining anonymous - including not sharing their gender. But it isn't quite fair to call others out for not "knowing" another poster's gender. And if you want to start with the "you should use the recommended pronouns", don't look now - but you're starting to sound like a progressive liberal. Pretty "woke" of you.

Fauci and Osterholm were not a small part of what got us through the pandemic. They were instrumental. Weirdo groups will be weirdos. It's what they do. Doesn't change anything in the real world. We should all check Osterholm if we have any questions. No better source.

Really good post! I'll use this story (and the 'Overgrown Pocket Watch' part in particular) again.

So, what's with the checkered background? Does that represent your 'checkered' past? Or just that the original was a PNG with a transparent background that could have been cool, but you butchered it into a lame JPG to post it here. I don't know. I'm guessing the latter. C'mon Ionel! If you're going to go the humor route, go 100% or don't go at all. Presentation matters. On a silly BBS like this - it's all you've got.

After considerable thought, I'm locking this one down in stone... my Mount Rushmore. It doesn't look too shabby. I've dropped the mic, tripped over the cord, and fell of the stage. Unable to update my choices further. Willie Nelson Bob Dylan Michael Jackson Elvis

In some countries, don't even think about using the thumbs-up hand gesture unless you want to say "up yours!" As I have said, it is all about perspective. But - to put a finer point on it - it boils down to being mostly about "intent." If the intent is to insult, then it is insulting communication. (Just like a little kid calling you a 'big stupid head' to hurt your feelings.) Unfortunately, it can be difficult to know what the actual intent is - and it can so easily be misinterpreted. (Just like that little kid, who may actually be using that phrase as a term of endearment.) It's not the 'word', 'phrase', or 'hand gesture' that is the problem. None of these needs to be banned. That's lazy thinking (copyright WKN.) It's the intent that is the problem... or... not the problem. Like sarcasm, can be tough to interpret.

We're definitely veering off from the OP. But I do think that's what we do best.

You said the Russian people and government are inextricably bound together, and tried to use “reports” as basis for your argument. I did not. Not at all. Those were separate topics. The Russian people and government are inextricably bound, that is true. The report I posted was in regard to your claim that the "vast majority" of Russians are not in favor ... a claim that hasn't proven to be factual. Two separate topics - one was not the basis for the other. WrestlingRasta - You missed what I posted completely. Perhaps you should read through the posts again, carefully. Further, what civilized countries have done is a plan that will allow those athletes, who have nothing to do with what is going on, the ability to pursue their dreams (you know, that who love life and the pursuit of happiness stuff). While those who either support or receive support from the aggressors will not be able to. The Russian Federation will not participate in the world events. Innocent athletes from the country will. I trust in no such plan. Concepts of "innocence or guilt" don't apply. No athletes are "innocent" or "guilty" - none are being punished. That is misdirection/nonsense. Just as athletes from Nazi Germany were banned from competition, so should Russian athletes today. Russia is no better than a Nazi state. Would you want your individual earned right to compete for a world title taken away because of something Trump and his cronies did….? I would feel no desire to compete for my country if it were committing war crimes and atrocities as Russia is doing today. There would be no glory to win.