Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#33888 Jan 29, 2013
Makin bacon wrote:
<quoted text>
What makes you think your plan has worked? There's almost four more years, a lot can happen good and bad. You know you have to take the bad with the good. Literally, it's a crap shoot either way.
I would rather take the crap shoot with Obama than with Romney. So, the plan has already worked from my point of view. You can watch the results from a foreign country, so, no need for you to worry.
Allen

Penrose, NC

#33889 Jan 29, 2013
Makin bacon wrote:
<quoted text>
Allen, there's two ways of looking at how or why he has already given his children their inheritance. You guys crucified my grandfather for not giving money to my dad when he needed it. So wouldn't it be prudent to give your children their money when they're starting their families, purchasing a home, may come up on a financial rough patch and the money would come in handy or even have a sick child and it could help with medical bills? Maybe it has nothing to do with avoiding inheritance tax at all. It could be he has given them some financial foundation to start out with instead of them waiting around for him and his wife to die to get the money. I'd say it shows he's not selfish. There's nothing wrong with wanting to see your children and grandchildren enjoy a good life. As a parent, I think it's great thing to do. If they blow it all, then they'll have to learn the hard way about being good stewards of your money. It's like he said, there's no more, nada, nothing and coming from Silver I believe that's what he means.
What would/will you do?
Bacon, allow me to crucify my own grandfather. He was by no means wealthy by todays standards but he had money. He never gave us anything and we did not ask. I loved my grandfather but always thought him to be stingy. I am sure it was because he lived through the "Great Depression". He always referred to "The Hoover Times". There were six boys and one girl in that family. Two uncles and the Aunt took everything my grandparents had and against their wishes. Which left hard feelings and a divided family. I have no biological children. I will leave nothing behind and no one to fight over it.
Whutevr

Orlando, FL

#33890 Jan 29, 2013
Allen wrote:
<quoted text>
Terror and rape are acts of violence and with intent. An alcoholic yes has the potential of becoming violent but, his only intent is to have another drink. In the case of the football player maybe not an alcoholic, just an occasional display of irresponsibility and an ego the size of Texas. He also by driving drunk could have had an accident that may have killed four or more but not out of intent but impairment of good judgement.
Let me now set the record straight on myself. No I DO NOT do drugs reguardless of what Silver thinks and I have NO criminal background whatsoever. Furthermore, I have NEVER even had a traffic violation in all my years of driving. Every great now and then I will have a beer with my meal or a mixed drink but it is in the privacy of my home. It is because I am responsible that I am a menace to the courts. No crime no dime.
Hey Allen, why don't you take a hike!
Whutevr

Orlando, FL

#33891 Jan 29, 2013
Oh, I'll take that back. Why don't we go for a drink and smoke cigarrets. You can take a jelly shot and I'll do the same.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#33892 Jan 29, 2013
Allen wrote:
<quoted text>
Where the hell is Mike;0
Who cares!?!

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#33893 Jan 29, 2013
Arnold-Ziffel wrote:
<quoted text>
Obviously, your plan did not work. You should have gone with ours.
Your plan worked this time, hope you don't see the repercussions when you reach the pearly gates!:)

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#33894 Jan 29, 2013
Arnold-Ziffel wrote:
<quoted text>
And now, the Republican value system is so warped that one legislture wants children of rape victims to be born for the only purpose being that they can get the DNA of the child to convict the father of rape. This is just TOO Republican to even think about. Think that this child may be on (God help us) Welfare with dad put away for life?
Arnold, what does this have to do with my post you're responding to?

Since we're veering off topic, what do you think about the post TSF posted earlier about the school children and my post back to him about it?

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#33895 Jan 29, 2013
Arnold-Ziffel wrote:
<quoted text>
I would rather take the crap shoot with Obama than with Romney. So, the plan has already worked from my point of view. You can watch the results from a foreign country, so, no need for you to worry.
Make no mistake, I don't worry.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#33896 Jan 29, 2013
Pro-American wrote:
<quoted text>Who cares!?!
You know you love sparing with him.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#33897 Jan 29, 2013
Makin bacon wrote:
<quoted text>
Arnold, what does this have to do with my post you're responding to?
Since we're veering off topic, what do you think about the post TSF posted earlier about the school children and my post back to him about it?
It is new subject matter. Several topics can go on at the same time. We are capable of that, aren't we? I missed that post to TSF. Sorry
Allen

Penrose, NC

#33898 Jan 29, 2013
Makin bacon wrote:
<quoted text>
Allen, we'll have to agree to disagree. Now you say you have a drink in your home, nothing wrong with that and the other night you said when you go to a bar and start drinking you like to have a cigarette. Of the latter of the two, you HAVE to know, that when maybe not you, but some people that go out for a night of drinking and don't designate a driver, there is intent the minute they get in the car turn the key and could possibly kill someone 2 miles down the road. Alcohol has the ability to impair the thought process and ability to make sound judgment. Therefore, there is intent IMO when a person drinks and does not get a designated driver knowing full well his body reflexes and judgment could be impaired and result in the death of another. For instance, if my daughter were killed in an automobile accident by someone that over corrected, hit her head on and killed her, that I could understand because it was an accident. However, if my daughter was killed by a drunk driver, because being drunk and driving is no accident, it's intentional from that first drink and making the decision to drive, that I could never accept because it could have been avoided.
Let's get back to the football players or anyone with an ego regarding rape, he could just say she said "no" but meant "yes" or we were fooling around and whoopsy daisy penetration just happened there was no intent. It's always about semantics and in the end EVERYONE is sorry, yada, yada yada.
I believe (know) what I said was,"I don't go to bars anymore because it is hard to sit there and have "A" drink while trying to curb the urge for a cigarette." Go back and read it again.

“physics is your friend”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#33899 Jan 29, 2013
Makin bacon wrote:
<quoted text>
Arnold, what does this have to do with my post you're responding to?
Since we're veering off topic, what do you think about the post TSF posted earlier about the school children and my post back to him about it?
I had an absentee drunk father.My mom raised us, working two jobs.I don't have a damn bit of sympathy for someone who feels sorry for themselves, because their father was gone.MINE WAS, I made it.Quit blaming the world for your problems, and do your best.

“physics is your friend”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#33900 Jan 29, 2013
Bacon, I can only respond to TSF, as I didn't see your response, and I can't go back on this phone to find it.I know you were addressing Arnold, but the situation was similar to mine, so I put my two cents in.
TSF

Kenly, NC

#33901 Jan 29, 2013
Yes 4 months ago the pres said that the Benghazi attack was a terrorist act. I still claim he said it was a terrorist act as you are also claiming. As you pointed out, we are both saying the same thing. Being republikan, what you just do not seem to understand is that if it was a terrorist act, then by definition it had to have been done by terrorists.
Another thing escaping the limited republikan mentality is that there were riots in EGYPT (a different country) during the same time as the Benghazi attack. Those rioters were angry about the Hollywood film slamming Islam.
Just FYI, Libya and Egypt are two different countries
Pro-American wrote:
<quoted text>There is a reason I'm playing semantics with you. If WE ALL REMEMBER back to late Sept/early Oct (around page 1150 or so of this thread) of last year, we,(myself, Bacon, TEW, and others), claimed The Ruler and his administration blamed the attacks in Benghazi on a YouTube video. It was at least Mike for sure, and possibly you too, that claimed the Ruler said the very next day that it was "an act of terror." We claimed he never said that terrorist were responsible for the attacks to which your side said no, he said it was an "act of terror." It was ok for your side to play semantics 4 months ago but how dare we try the same play now. You can't have your cake and eat it too! Your side claimed then it wasn't the same thing and now you're claiming it is? Now in Mike's world, and probably yours too, this all falls into that "grey area" but in my world it's called a contradiction!
There is a reason the symbol of the Republican Party is an elephant, they have good memories.
There is also a reason the symbol of the Commucrat Party is a Jackass, no explanation needed.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#33902 Jan 29, 2013
Allen wrote:
<quoted text>
I believe (know) what I said was,"I don't go to bars anymore because it is hard to sit there and have "A" drink while trying to curb the urge for a cigarette." Go back and read it again.
Allen, I don't care to go back, if you say it was in the past, it was in the past, my bad. Either way you had "A" drink, some people have "MANY" drinks and drive and kill people. I still think the intent is there whether you have "A" drink or "MANY" to get in the car and drive after doing so. Unfortunately "MANY" people think they can drive after "MANY" drinks, just as you could after "A" drink. I'm aware the law allows for some alcohol consumption and being able to operate a vehicle or they wouldn't have set a limit on what is legal or what is considered illegal to drive.
Allen

Penrose, NC

#33903 Jan 29, 2013
Arnold-Ziffel wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks, Allen that comment inspired a song from this here darkie.
(Sung to Sam Cooke's song "Chain Gang")
"That's the sound of Silver's kids, working on his Chain-ge gang.
(Repeat)
All day long they work so hard with no point of view,
Bringing his liquor and coke to him is what they all do.
But,they're tax deductions in his miserable life,
And he also gets one for Katie, his black wife"
Oh don't you know....That's the sound of Silver's kids..........
LOL...Silver in a Sam Cooke song.....priceless
Rof & lmao. Good Lord, I never even thought of that. Lol. I love Sam Cooke. All those old Darkie's were priceless.
TSF

Kenly, NC

#33904 Jan 29, 2013
I simply copied what a teacher in a predominately black school had written. The rest of the article(which is long) points out that learning is the reponsibility of students and parents. That the failure to learn is not a teacher failure but a student and parent failue.
There are are probably more failing white sudents living in single parent homes than failing black children living in single parent homes simply as a result of the fact that there are consideraby more white chldren and white families. So blaming white people for the failure of black children is certaily unreasonable if you consider the number of failures. Looking at percentage of failues by race gives a higher value for the blacks, which tempts simpletons to attribute that higher percentage ony to racial bias. The problem is infinitely more complex than that. However, there are no arguments that I am aware of that claim children fom single parent out perform other students---they dont and the difference is glaring, regardless of race. And there are obviousy exceptions for all generalizations like this one.
Makin bacon wrote:
<quoted text>
TSF, that's a very nice story; however, I'm at a loss how to respond. Are you saying black children are at a greater risk to fail because there's no father in the home? if so, as I, you'll be labeled a racist. I'm going to post a link that shows the statistics that even this mathematically challenged Republican can understand and again, I'll be labeled a racist for pointing out the unusually high % for whatever reason black children are raised in a single parent family.
http://datacenter.kidscount.org/data/acrossst... #
More importantly to me, it's not about the percentage, but why are so many black children raised in single parent families and why daily are Caucasians, if this forum is a sampling of the difference in opinions, are crucified because of the failure of the black children in school?
Now I know there are plenty of families black and white where mom and dad are working to make ends meet, but surely as we all learned, there has to be time for our children and material things don't always matter, but one on one time does.
Allen

Penrose, NC

#33905 Jan 29, 2013
Whutevr wrote:
Oh, I'll take that back. Why don't we go for a drink and smoke cigarrets. You can take a jelly shot and I'll do the same.
Don't you mean jell-o? Hike back to your cave neanderthal man.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#33906 Jan 29, 2013
TSF wrote:
Yes 4 months ago the pres said that the Benghazi attack was a terrorist act. I still claim he said it was a terrorist act as you are also claiming. As you pointed out, we are both saying the same thing. Being republikan, what you just do not seem to understand is that if it was a terrorist act, then by definition it had to have been done by terrorists.
Another thing escaping the limited republikan mentality is that there were riots in EGYPT (a different country) during the same time as the Benghazi attack. Those rioters were angry about the Hollywood film slamming Islam.
Just FYI, Libya and Egypt are two different countries
<quoted text>
You obviously didn't comprehend my post. Four months ago WE, the conservative side on this forum, claimed it WAS a terrorist attack. The liberal side of this forum said NO IT WASN'T, it was an "act of terror"....semantics...ba sically defending the Ruler because he had already declared "an end to the war on terror" thus meaning they were no more terrorist. Now today you're saying it WAS terrorist, hence the contradiction from your side. Now was it "you" that said it "wasn't" four months ago, I don't recall but I do recall it was your side, those that defend the Ruler.

Now are you claiming the State Dept got the two incidents, Egypt & Lybia, confused with one another when they made their rounds on the Sun morning shows blaming a video?
Wow

Chicago, IL

#33907 Jan 29, 2013
Allen wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't you mean jell-o? Hike back to your cave neanderthal man.
It took you that long to respond? No man here, girly/boy!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Charlotte Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Buh Bye All You IBM Employees (Oct '10) 16 hr remember 254
Where Did the Devil Come From? (May '08) Sat dollarsbill 419
Belmont man's art exhibit captures mill era's d... Sat Belmont Resident 3
can someone explain this to me? Sat ntheknow 4
Peter Demas-no worries (Jul '10) Sat KoK-LoL 124
Charlotte's uptown New Year's Eve party is moving Sat Anthony Holloway 1
Legit massage for wife? Sat PropertyGuyCLT 5
Charlotte Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Charlotte People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Charlotte News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Charlotte

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 6:39 pm PST

Bleacher Report 6:39PM
Loss to Carolina Must Mark End of the Mike Smith Era
Yahoo! Sports 8:39 PM
Mike Smith ends his season, and possibly Falcons tenure, on ugly note
NBC Sports 9:51 PM
Mike Smith is "absolutely done" in Atlanta
NBC Sports12:57 AM
Panthers, Falcons head in opposite directions - NBC Sports
NBC Sports12:57 AM
Panthers, Falcons head in opposite directions - NBC Sports