User Profile: Papadoc

Papadoc

Member Since: September 02, 2010

Comments

123 To page: Go
  • February 2, 2016 at 9:57am

    Ok, now all YOU are doing is spreading rumors. On the hand, if a candidate goes down the drink with a single rumor, they don’t have much of a game going on.

  • [31] January 8, 2016 at 12:48am

    Obfuscated left handed answer, meant to sound like an answer, acknowledging that it wouldn’t but presuming it might prevent some other unspecified problem. Kind of like anytime anyone says his effort on something failed, he suggests it would have been worse without his effort. If the Muslims nuke a city, he will declare it could have been 5 cities. If your premium went up instead of down $2500, he declares it went up $2500 less than it otherwise would have. The guy is constantly selling his anti-lion spray.

  • [18] January 8, 2016 at 12:43am

    If it doesn’t matter, then why mention it? What the heck does that have to do with either his career, his run for Congress, or the questions he asked?

  • January 3, 2016 at 12:42pm

    It’s a field. Probably not much for water spigots out there maybe, huh? :)

  • January 3, 2016 at 12:40pm

    провести свое пиво и смотреть на это
    provesti svoye pivo i smotret’ na eto

  • [1] December 15, 2015 at 12:24pm

    They have no interest in enlightening anyone. This is how you know with 95% certainty that they are looking for Muslims with an agenda. Anything else and they would be calling it “another Tea Party bomb threat”. If they ever do come clean, the WH will issue a statement condemning yet another “Lone Wolf threat” and blame the NRA, some Jewish filmmaker, the occupation of Palestine… and a stiff warm breeze from the west that Republicans are responsible for… and George Bush.

  • [21] October 2, 2015 at 1:26pm

    While it is true that more people die from alcohol related accidents and in swimming pools as well, you can’t defend your nation with a beer or a breaststroke, so they don’t count. It’s not that anyone in Washington cares whether anyone dies from guns or violence. If they did, they wouldn’t be planning on bringing in unknown Middle East nationals who haven’t been vetted. It’s simply about your ability to fight back. Its about putting you at risk from threats and making you dependent on the government for safety. Once the citizens depend on the government for that, they own every moment of every day and you dare not disobey or they will remove your safety.

  • [3] July 7, 2015 at 12:52pm

    There has never been any advance written “permission” for a colony or state to leave the union, whether that be British [as in 1776], Mexican, or European succession. Succession happens anyway.

    There are several things however, that need to happen in TX for succession to become popular enough to carry the day. First, a realization that there are inherent forces in TX that understand their benefits would be greatly diminished under an indep TX. TX needs to become the antithesis of the welfare state, thus forcing those who generationally live on it to seek shelter elsewhere. That alone will cut 30% out of those who would vote against succession.

    Second, you need a strong leader who advocates for such. Perry thought about it once, but then realized it might conflict with his presidential aspirations.

    Third, TX needs to realize that the threat of Union force to keep it a state isn’t as fearsome as Union forces would like them to imagine it to be. At least half the remainder of the country would just as soon lose TX because it increases their power in Congress, and many conservatives would be cheerleading the successionist movement with envy. Only [the few] liberal economic realists and those who would be politically embarrassed would fight against it. Though it is logical that many more would try to economically strangle TX as much as possible by trying to force payment for Federal lands and assets. I think it would become more of an economic fight than anything.

  • [9] March 16, 2015 at 4:23pm

    That’s just the point factsobill. There is no chance. Chances they wouldn’t even get a majority of Democrats to vote for it other than those that are from loony left districts.

    Which begs the question then, why? To keep it front and center? To give themselves talking points for next election with their bleeding heart constituency? Because they had to push the camera op showing themselves to do something more than just sit there as obstructionists? Or is it more nefarious?

  • [34] March 16, 2015 at 4:19pm

    Keep in mind that these are the same people who don’t know the difference between a cartridge, a clip, and a magazine. They flaunt their non-existent expertise about subjects they don’t understand, and their primary debate tactic is to create straw men to knock down in an effort to convince others who don’t know what they are talking about that they have an answer to a problem that doesn’t exist.

  • [22] March 16, 2015 at 3:37pm

    Purple pantaloons could also be used to strangle a cop, even though nobody has ever tried. Perhaps they should be banned as well. Call this out for the straw man that it is.

  • [49] January 28, 2015 at 11:38pm

    If she doesn’t understand the question, then she’s not qualified to be AG. Actually, that would make her unqualified to eat noodles, but I digress.

  • [4] January 14, 2015 at 12:53am

    It’s Brits talking here. And you should take the word of a gun “expert” who uses the word “reactivated” when talking about guns.

    Responses (1) +
  • [3] January 14, 2015 at 12:50am

    There’s nothing waterproof forever. The guy probably did the best he could with what he had and intended on coming back sooner than never at all. Given that he never recovered them, one has to wonder if he died shortly afterwards. Makes you wonder how many more guns are in England that nobody knows about.

  • [14] January 14, 2015 at 12:43am

    Pretty sad, isn’t it? And in other news ISIS just learned which country is ripe for takeover because all their men start crying like Boehner in a news conference at the first sight of a gun. This is the future liberals have in mind for this country.

  • [7] January 14, 2015 at 12:38am

    Daggum straight! And if the truth be known, probably each of those guns could easily be salvaged if they could find a Brit that knew how to clean them up and the government didn’t go into complete meltdown. And no, we wouldn’t be reporting it to the government either.

  • [24] January 14, 2015 at 12:35am

    You should see what happens to his underwear when shown a Poptart chewed into the shape of Oklahoma. Stupid Brits!

  • [2] November 29, 2014 at 12:32pm

    Of course they don’t have jobs. Every single one of these fools is either on the government dime or their parents. There’s nothing here here that can’t be fixed with 6 little words, “You’re on your own now sweetie.”

  • [2] November 8, 2014 at 11:39am

    Arson is covered if “someone else” does it. You’re not being creative enough. Every parent out there knows from their children that “somebody else” and “not me” do an awful lot of really bad things.

    You’ve got a thief and a liar staying in your house who probably has a criminal record and likely a drug issue. If then the police think that YOU are a far more likely suspect than the squatter/criminal/addict doing it accidentally or on purpose, you’re doing a lot of things really wrong.

    Make up a story about how your confrontation with the guy ended with a threat that he’d burn the place to the ground before letting you kick him out and you left fearing for your life. Daggummit if the somuvabich didn’t do exactly what he promised.

  • [3] November 8, 2014 at 11:25am

    Agreed! While being honest in legal situations is generally preferred, this is not one of those times when being on the up and up will actually benefit you. But you have to have all your bases covered and think it through before executing any plan. You’re going up against thieves and liars, and you need to be able to out-lie and give enough credible evidence to turn this from a civil case into a criminal case, with the other guy being the criminal and having all the risk.

    I had a rental they were doing the same thing. Against my better judgement, I rented to a family despite the fact that the information he gave me at age 40 showed he had no credit history whatsoever. Yeah, I know… but it was my first rental and first tenant. Even his deposit and first month’s rent check bounced.

    I knew that both of them had jobs they simply couldn’t avoid going to, so I told him to be out by Saturday or when they were at work, I’d bring up a dump truck and remove all their belongings to the landfill, move my stuff back in, change the locks, and shoot them dead as burglars if they tried breaking in. But that if somehow he lived, his only option was to take ME to court and I wasn’t worth much.

    He said he’d call my bluff, but I guess he decided that there were other opportunities and it just wasn’t worth the risk. He moved out Friday. Everyone has something they aren’t willing to risk. You just have to figure out what it is and convince them that you are willing to go there.

123 To page: Go
Restoring Love