The ascent of the loons

Veer_G

Beware of the Dildópony!
Full Member
Minuteman
Jun 15, 2008
12,971
15,279
SEPA
Robert Redford makes 'Pinhead' of the week list | Fox News Video

We're arrived at a strange point in time, when people, about a half a generation to a generation older than me, who embraced radical ideals and undertook criminal actions in support of them in the past, have suddenly found themselves pardoned, forgiven, empowered, and at the pinnacle of their influence.

Take the case of Weather Underground radical Kathy Boudin. She was the getaway driver in a 1981 armored car heist in Rockland County, NY, in which two cops and a security guard were killed, for which she did 22 years. Her specific contribution to the crime? She convinced responding police to lower their weapons, allowing her accomplices to get the drop on them. Real nice, lady. Now, she's suddenly rehabilitated, and an adjunct professor of social work at Columbia, as well as a Scholar-in-residence at NYU's School of Law. Check out her sparkly CU web page: Kathy Boudin | Columbia University School of Social Work

We need this like we need a hole in the head. Time marches on, and we need the current crop of patchouli-smelling, Constitution-trampling dinosaurs to keep on marching forward with it into the boneyard, but quickly.
 
Her being at NYU's School of Law, doesn't come as any surprise, law schools in America are cesspools of Anti American, anti 2nd Adm, pro marx, scum. The ACLU, a piece of crap anti American org if there ever was one, claims to be all about Civil Liberties, yet in real life, they spend most of their time dragging schools local govt. to court (or threatening them to do so) if they don't remove any vestige of Christian art, regardless of its historical signifigance from public property. How does this square up with protecting the 2nd Adm a Civil Right? No one knows, yet very few lawyers have the stones to take them on, and when I say very few, I mean VERY few. Most lawyers in the U.S. are in fact card carrying members of the ACLU (and a good chance they have a membership card for the commie party, too). The problem with lawyers working hard to destroy the country they work in, is not new, in England a guy named William Shakespeare wrote, "The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers",Henry The Sixth, Part 2 Act 4, scene 2, 71–78!!! If they [lawyers] had any balls at all, the first thing they would do is clean up their own schools, getting rid of the weather underground's kathy boudin would be a good place to start!
 
Last edited:
You're problem, Veer, is that you really need to learn to spell. Its not 'lawyers', its 'Liars'. Once you make that distinction it all becomes clear.
 
You're problem, Veer, is that you really need to learn to spell. Its not 'lawyers', its 'Liars'. Once you make that distinction it all becomes clear.

In the first sentence, it should be your (possessive pronoun), not you're (contracted 3rd person singular of to be), and, if you re-read that, you'll see that I came no closer than "School of Law" to writing out the word lawyers in the post. Your placement of punctuation outside of quotation marks in the second sentence is a stylistic choice, although you failed to punctuate the contraction of It is at its beginning. Also, in the third sentence, you missed an obligatory comma after a temporal clause, between distinction and it. Your spelling is spot-on, though, you magnificently dynamic eliminator of putrescence.
 
In the first sentence, it should be your (possessive pronoun), not you're (contracted 3rd person singular of to be), and, if you re-read that, you'll see that I came no closer than "School of Law" to writing out the word lawyers in the post. Your placement of punctuation outside of quotation marks in the second sentence is a stylistic choice, although you failed to punctuate the contraction of It is at its beginning. Also, in the third sentence, you missed an obligatory comma after a temporal clause, between distinction and it. Your spelling is spot-on, though, you magnificently dynamic eliminator of putrescence.

Thankx4that.
 
In the first sentence, it should be your (possessive pronoun), not you're (contracted 3rd person singular of to be), and, if you re-read that, you'll see that I came no closer than "School of Law" to writing out the word lawyers in the post. Your placement of punctuation outside of quotation marks in the second sentence is a stylistic choice, although you failed to punctuate the contraction of It is at its beginning. Also, in the third sentence, you missed an obligatory comma after a temporal clause, between distinction and it. Your spelling is spot-on, though, you magnificently dynamic eliminator of putrescence.

holyshit!! you english professor you!!!
 
hahahah Veer, you reminded me of something I found on my TOC whiteboard a few years back:



DISCOVERED AT 12 0632L AUG 10, ON THE WHITEBOARD IN THE OPERATIONS ROOM

IF YOU READ THIS YOUR GAY
(ARROW POINTING TO ABOVE STATEMENT)
THIS IS THE INCORRECT USAGE OF "YOUR", WHICH IS A POSSESSIVE PRONOUN USED TO DENOTE OWNERSHIP, IE: "YOUR DILDO FITS IN YOUR ASS NICELY". WHAT YOU MEANT TO SAY WAS "YOU ARE", WHICH IS A PRONOUN AND VERB THAT TOGETHER DENOTE A STATE OF BEING FOR THE SECOND PERSON SINGULAR AND IS NORMALLY SEEN AS THE CONTRACTION "YOU'RE", IE: "YOU'RE STILL GAY FOR READING THIS".

-Excerpt from "Big Mike's Happy Book of recorded things"

please forgive the CAPS LOCK, big letters make things easier to read in a hurry, so all of our TOC computers were on permanent caps lock.
 
I did have a laugh, yes, but truthfully I was thinking in Spanish (I spend half my time doing so), and brain-farted the error — it was second person, and not third person. Modern English lacks a formal second person subject pronoun in common use (we connote respect through tone, rather than verb inflection in 2P), unlike Spanish, which has both formal and informal ones, so I sort of hit the shift gate going from L1 to L2.

Yeah, yeah, I know, day job, etc., etc. ... :D

... and down deep, Maggot, I see your point, and Anvil, funny, funny stuff.