User Profile: Wilbur D Pig

Wilbur D Pig

Member Since: October 28, 2010

Comments

123
  • March 23, 2014 at 11:06am

    You see that black streak falling out of the sky?

    That is what a “Red Line” looks like.

  • November 3, 2013 at 3:56am

    Who is Ed Schultz?

  • June 10, 2013 at 1:29am

    So, in essence, we are raising the next generation of teleprompter readers. No critical thinking on the fly, no impromptu interaction. “You will follow the script, young man!”

  • May 6, 2013 at 5:52am

    The stupidest thing about government is their desire to “do something”… even if it has already been done before. The only valid argument she can give to a gun owner for having a nat’l registry is to help you get them back if they are stolen? There is already a pretty expensive system in place to do that. The FBI’s National Crime Information Center (NCIC) already tracks stolen guns.

    If you report to podunk PD that your gun was stolen, they will submit that to the NCIC system. If that gun is ever found by any officer nation-wide they can find you. If you gun was used in the commission of a crime it is evidence and will likely not be returned. More than likely, it will be destroyed by the persecuting agency post-conviction.

    So tell me Ms. Lee, if there already exists a way to track my stolen gun and ensure its destruction, what will your registry of my non-stolen guns be used for?

  • May 6, 2013 at 3:08am

    Sweetie, SVU is a small private college owned and operated by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (better known as the Mormon Church). If you go there you are likely not an atheist. If you are one then you learn real fast that they don’t care that you are an atheist; and as long as you are not a pompous ignoramus who thinks that tolerance means catering to your views and ideals, then you’d get along just fine.

  • May 6, 2013 at 3:03am

    Old books like the Bible are precisely the reason that there exists “civil” discourse (which leads to civil policy). Without a firm foundation rooted in moral law, we would not be a country. That “old book” as you put it, and those who adhere to its teachings, are directly responsible for the United States of America. I don’t care if you think it all to be hocus pocus, but an informed person cannot discount the judeo-christian (read: biblical) influence on real freedoms such as now exist in our country/world.

  • March 19, 2013 at 5:27am

    How many people out there would be put out of work because they are not worth $9/hr? $22? More? Milton Fiedman explained the whole thing years ago.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ca8Z__o52sk

  • March 14, 2013 at 3:05am

    How cute that he tried to blame the Tea Party for this, as if Sequester were their idea instead of Obama’s. Carney is losing his touch though, he forgot the talking-point saying the Tea Party was who assasinated MLK.

  • March 5, 2013 at 5:04am

    Oh, the condescension! Their stupidity knows no bounds!

    “Hudak claimed that for every one woman who used a handgun to kill someone in self-defense, 83 were murdered by them.”

    Notice that the stat doesn’t say the guns were taken away and used against them. THEY NEVER HAD ONE! Of course they were murdered, BECAUSE THEY DIDN”T HAVE ONE OF THEIR OWN YOU ARROGANT TOAD!

    Responses (1) +
  • October 21, 2012 at 12:23am

    Brave, brave girl.

  • October 21, 2012 at 12:05am

    Your damn right I want to “disenfranchise” a minority… that minority of the electorate (no matter what color they are, or party their with) that thinks it’s okay to vote two, three, ten times in one election. I want to to disenfranchise the hell out of them!

  • October 17, 2012 at 2:26am

    Nevermind,
    You are operating under the notion that snarky=witty.

    Are you one of those guys that thinks being a wise-a$$ means you are smart, just because it contains the word “wise” in it?

  • September 21, 2012 at 6:55am

    I agree, I call BS. Whatever dude found was thrown over the fence and the explosion was clealy not from that side (no smoke over there).

  • September 21, 2012 at 2:49am

    A preacher comes out and says homosexual acts are sinful, and that offends a great many people. So what? Let them be offended and then lets get on with life. I like my steaks, and that offends a lot of animal rights types who think it is just as sinful for me to grill up a nice 1.5″ rib-eye… mmmmmmmmmm… steaaaak…

    Sorry I zoned out there for a second. Anyway, changing gears, for one guy it is a capital crime to slander islam and for another it is okay. If we all just accept the differences then we should be good right? Not so for the Left. Their mantra is, “If it offends YOU, then it’s because you’re an unenlightened biggot; if it offends US it’s because you’re a hateful biggot.” As long as they keep the dialogue on what a biggot YOU are, they win.

  • September 21, 2012 at 2:24am

    How about a complete transcript? What is wrong with that? If you are into impartiality, you could provide a transcript and still keep the promise to your source.

  • August 25, 2012 at 5:28am

    I thought a sasquatch was a bigfoot not a big mouth. First you say no armchair quarter backing then you do, just that. The little “future use” disclaimer is a pathetic attempt to say, “Hey, I would have done this/that better.” Well, Mr. Know-it-all, this began and ended in seconds. You say you are ex-military, but don’t understand that collateral damage is a possibilty? Every incident has a debrief and you ask what could we do in the future, but you can’t call these guys morons and think others might not say the same about you (moron). Everything about you SCREAMS K-mart security guard.

  • August 15, 2012 at 5:47am

    Personally, I say we give Califorina to the Red Chinese as payment-in-full for our debts. The place is already a commie paridise, so why should we be on the hook for them?

  • August 8, 2012 at 6:38am

    Once again Mick, you missed it. He isn’t saying, “[W]hat if saying that makes somebody FEEL bad.” He’s saying, “What if YOU saying it in THAT way, makes someone else reject the glorious message you are trying to convey?”

  • August 8, 2012 at 6:32am

    Congrats Mick, you just proved his point. Your disjointed rebuttals are filled with big names to back you up, but presented in a way that makes you look more the fool than “Prattle.” You quote all the Greats, but do so in a way that they would wish you’d just left their names out of it.

    Now, I only read the list of 9, but I can tell you that presentation matters. You seem very learned, and throw out how others should read as you have; I may take you up on some of those (always wanted to read The Screwtape Letters). Meanwhile I’d recommend One of Lewis’ contemporaries: GK Chesterton. His presentation via humor can persuade much more adeptly than your vehemence does.

  • August 8, 2012 at 6:12am

    I agree wholeheartedly. Christ wants others to hear the Good News, but even He moderated his message so as to appeal to various audiences (parables, anyone?). If you treat everyone with the forcefulness that He used on the Pharisees and Sadducees, you will lose them not because they rejected the message, but because they rejected the way the messenger delivered it. They had already rejected Him and knew they were every bit the vipers he said they were.

    Someday, many people will stand before Him and say they preached of Him, but then they’ll realize they did not preach LIKE Him. Do you honestly think Christ would walk around with a sign that says, “GOD HATES ****”? All the author is trying to do is explain that in order to appeal to some people; you must be cognizant of the manner in which you present Christianity. Otherwise you appear to be a cook, and in your zeal, you have failed the Savior in sharing His gospel.

    I applaud the way that some Christians are unashamed to profess their faith, but I often cringe at how they present it. I think they are more interested in showing Christ how committed they are in their belief that they forget their JOB is to help others believe. It is all a matter of tact.

123