Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited January 17, 2017, 8:34 pm
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

$116M Georgia Powerball winner claims prize

Topic closed. 161 replies. Last post 6 years ago by rdgrnr.

Page 10 of 11
53
PrintE-mailLink
Avatar
New Member

United States
Member #98857
October 15, 2010
16 Posts
Offline
Posted: October 31, 2010, 7:20 pm - IP Logged

Listen son, I can understand now why your daddy ain't got much use for you (not that he doesn't love you, I'm sure he does).

You know what? F* you.

Don't accuse me of lying either just so you can pretend to justify your ignorant, hateful attacks.

At least (in my wordiness) I actually attempt to express a thought beyond calling ing names and getting personal. But, I can understand how that is convenient for you. Pretend to be so above it that you don't even have to address it. Just talk down to it and call it names. Yeah, that's a more convincing game... You seem to be capable of little more than seeing how many insults you can fit in one sentence and have it still resemble a complete thought.

If you weren't such a partisan, hate-monger, maybe you'd realize the last 8 years weren't exactly peachy. Doesn't take a flaming liberal to realize that one.

And, I never said anything about Reagan being terrible. Merely pointed out how un-conservative he was when it came to government spending.

--

You are far gone, man. And, I'll be glad when ignorant hate-mongers like you fall by the way side. Pretending to "know someone's game" so you don't have to actually say anything other than nazi, commnist, whacko, liberal , blah, blah. You don't know , and you don't know me. 

There was obviously no point in trying to afford you any level of respect, or engaging in a dialog with you at all... you were right about that.

That work better for you? Guess I could have saved us both the trouble and called you an ignorant hillbilly, bigot, which is what I'm sure you've been waiting for... well you've pushed me to it :) You certainly act like a hateful, bigoted, prick.

I don't mean to embarrass you, you've done that yourself.

ditto... hypocrite.

    rdgrnr's avatar - walt
    Way back up in them dadgum hills, son!
    United States
    Member #73904
    April 28, 2009
    14903 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: October 31, 2010, 7:35 pm - IP Logged

    Listen son, I can understand now why your daddy ain't got much use for you (not that he doesn't love you, I'm sure he does).

    You know what? F* you.

    Don't accuse me of lying either just so you can pretend to justify your ignorant, hateful attacks.

    At least (in my wordiness) I actually attempt to express a thought beyond calling ing names and getting personal. But, I can understand how that is convenient for you. Pretend to be so above it that you don't even have to address it. Just talk down to it and call it names. Yeah, that's a more convincing game... You seem to be capable of little more than seeing how many insults you can fit in one sentence and have it still resemble a complete thought.

    If you weren't such a partisan, hate-monger, maybe you'd realize the last 8 years weren't exactly peachy. Doesn't take a flaming liberal to realize that one.

    And, I never said anything about Reagan being terrible. Merely pointed out how un-conservative he was when it came to government spending.

    --

    You are far gone, man. And, I'll be glad when ignorant hate-mongers like you fall by the way side. Pretending to "know someone's game" so you don't have to actually say anything other than nazi, commnist, whacko, liberal , blah, blah. You don't know , and you don't know me. 

    There was obviously no point in trying to afford you any level of respect, or engaging in a dialog with you at all... you were right about that.

    That work better for you? Guess I could have saved us both the trouble and called you an ignorant hillbilly, bigot, which is what I'm sure you've been waiting for... well you've pushed me to it :) You certainly act like a hateful, bigoted, prick.

    I don't mean to embarrass you, you've done that yourself.

    ditto... hypocrite.

    Wow, when I tell you to stop being pretentious, you really follow orders!

    Now we see the real jynalog!

    Strategically speaking though, it was a bad move on your part.

    But... you're young and have many elections in your future!

    You're bound to become viable at some point, I'm sure.


                                                 
                         
                                             

     

     

     

     

                                                                                                       

    "The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing"

                                                                                                --Edmund Burke

     

     

      Avatar
      New Member

      United States
      Member #98857
      October 15, 2010
      16 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: October 31, 2010, 7:40 pm - IP Logged

      Now we see the real jynalog!

      That's the one I was waiting for... bravo... you picked up on it :)

      I have no strategy. I merely attempted to engage in a dialog (obviously a mistake... but, then... I mistook you for being an outspoken member of the "most tolerant, well-informed, etc" group of people that I will ever meet. wherever would I have gotten that idea?). Though your strategy is clear... HATE. You are quite the master at it, sir.

      Have fun in your little bubble of hate. You shall be happy to know that I leave this domain to you and your prolific hate-mongering.

        rdgrnr's avatar - walt
        Way back up in them dadgum hills, son!
        United States
        Member #73904
        April 28, 2009
        14903 Posts
        Offline
        Posted: October 31, 2010, 7:43 pm - IP Logged

        Now we see the real jynalog!

        That's the one I was waiting for... bravo... you picked up on it :)

        I have no strategy. I merely attempted to engage in a dialog (obviously a mistake... but, then... I mistook you for being an outspoken member of the "most tolerant, well-informed, etc" group of people that I will ever meet. wherever would I have gotten that idea?). Though your strategy is clear... HATE. You are quite the master at it, sir.

        Have fun in your little bubble of hate. You shall be happy to know that I leave this domain to you and your prolific hate-mongering.

        The poor soul...

        He was just too high strung is all...


                                                     
                             
                                                 

         

         

         

         

                                                                                                           

        "The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing"

                                                                                                    --Edmund Burke

         

         

          Todd's avatar - Cylon 2.gif
          Chief Bottle Washer
          New Jersey
          United States
          Member #1
          May 31, 2000
          23348 Posts
          Online
          Posted: October 31, 2010, 8:46 pm - IP Logged

          @Jyna Log:  The "problem" with everything you're saying, and the way you're saying it, is that you truly believe your viewpoint is "moderate" or "centrist".

          I'd suggest you read a book called "Bias", written by Bernard Goldberg.  He is a former CBS newsman who describes in his book the mindset of the liberal media, and how (and why) it continues to exist that way.

          The main thrust is that many -- perhaps most -- people in the mainstream media believe they are "centrist" or "moderate".  Through the prism of the people they associate with, perhaps they are relatively moderate.  But compared to the "average" US citizen, they are far left.

          From the large amount of text you have written here, I believe you are probably in the same camp as these liberals who believe themselves to be moderate.  I have no doubt that you truly believe you are taking moderate, independent positions.  There is probably nothing I can do to convince you otherwise.

          The people you keep calling conservatives are not.  The Republicans who inhabited the Congress in the mid-2000s were not conservatives.  George Bush, while having many conservative principles, is not a conservative.  He is more of a moderate.  So if you believe the Congress of the mid 2000s and/or George Bush is conservative, maybe that's a good indication of your leftward political persuasion.  As a conservative, I think I'm in a pretty good position to know one when I see one.

          Ronald Reagan was the last conservative president.  Another great example of a conservative is Paul Ryan.

          Take a look at the following link:  http://www.studentnewsdaily.com/other/conservative-vs-liberal-beliefs/

          See which positions you identify with, they are mostly accurate accountings of liberal and conservative positions.  (I would personally tweak the language of some of them, but they are very close.)

           

          Check the State Lottery Report Card
          What grade did your lottery earn?

           

          Sign the Petition for True Lottery Drawings
          Help eliminate computerized drawings!

            Avatar
            New Member

            United States
            Member #98857
            October 15, 2010
            16 Posts
            Offline
            Posted: October 31, 2010, 9:14 pm - IP Logged

            Hey, Todd... I actually don't identify as a moderate or a centrist... But, I also don't fall easily on one side of the line or not(perception acknowledged... but, it's an interesting point you raise. b/c for me, the perception is that anything left of extreme right often gets labeled as "too liberal", liberal, socialist, etc, etc). I think (in the current climate) many of these labels (conservative, liberal, etc) are counter-productive. b/c it seems to do little more than allow people to label someone as "x" and then shut out anything they have to say. It tends to discourage discourse and common ground in present day climate. People are more concerned about what to call themselves (or others), than they are really looking at the issues

            On social issues, I would identify primarily as liberal, however, and I'll make no apologies for saying that if gay people want to get married, it has no impact on me, and that the only argument against it that I have ever heard put forth is a religious moral one... And, that the government should have no role in that beyond the fact that two people are entering into a legally binding contract. That to me, though... is actually kind of "conservative"... keeping the government out of things it doesn't really belong in, in the first place. B/c when they do involve themselves in it, they tend to do silly things (like having a standing law in the constitution until the year 2000 that forbid interracial marriage in my previous state of residence). While the notion that one would support gay marriage may come across as "quacky liberal viewpoint", the movement to apply government resources towards enacting and enforcing what ultimately amounts to a "moral law" seems highly un-conservative, but was a big part of the 2004 get out the vote conservative movement.

            I agree with you that those presidents were not "conservative", but they are still primarily identified as such, and conservatives voted for them. I would be curious to hear your thoughts on what made Ronald Reagan a "conservative" in the true sense of the word, in your opinion. I cited government spending during his tenure, as well as the EIC, neither of which (to me) identify as conservative... the latter of which being more accurately identified as "socialist" under the current political "lexicon". I'd also dare to suggest that the whole "war on drugs" of the Reagan era was NOT conservative. It has been a massive government undertaking, both in terms of the use of government resources, and the use of tax payer dollars to fund it, etc. While on the flip side, our television pumps out billions of dollars in ads each year selling us the next new wonder drug approved by the FDA, which is funded by the very companies whose drugs they approve.

            anyways. I know some of my views would make some people think I'm too "republican" depending on the topic. Others will have me perceived as a flaming liberal. And, others still (my views on the role and function of religion in present day society for example) would have even most "liberals" plugging their ears :) That's fine... whatever... I don't need to defend myself against name-callers. Only my ideas, and only to be open to other (thoughtfully expressed) ideas.

              rdgrnr's avatar - walt
              Way back up in them dadgum hills, son!
              United States
              Member #73904
              April 28, 2009
              14903 Posts
              Offline
              Posted: October 31, 2010, 9:47 pm - IP Logged

              Hey, Todd... I actually don't identify as a moderate or a centrist... But, I also don't fall easily on one side of the line or not(perception acknowledged... but, it's an interesting point you raise. b/c for me, the perception is that anything left of extreme right often gets labeled as "too liberal", liberal, socialist, etc, etc). I think (in the current climate) many of these labels (conservative, liberal, etc) are counter-productive. b/c it seems to do little more than allow people to label someone as "x" and then shut out anything they have to say. It tends to discourage discourse and common ground in present day climate. People are more concerned about what to call themselves (or others), than they are really looking at the issues

              On social issues, I would identify primarily as liberal, however, and I'll make no apologies for saying that if gay people want to get married, it has no impact on me, and that the only argument against it that I have ever heard put forth is a religious moral one... And, that the government should have no role in that beyond the fact that two people are entering into a legally binding contract. That to me, though... is actually kind of "conservative"... keeping the government out of things it doesn't really belong in, in the first place. B/c when they do involve themselves in it, they tend to do silly things (like having a standing law in the constitution until the year 2000 that forbid interracial marriage in my previous state of residence). While the notion that one would support gay marriage may come across as "quacky liberal viewpoint", the movement to apply government resources towards enacting and enforcing what ultimately amounts to a "moral law" seems highly un-conservative, but was a big part of the 2004 get out the vote conservative movement.

              I agree with you that those presidents were not "conservative", but they are still primarily identified as such, and conservatives voted for them. I would be curious to hear your thoughts on what made Ronald Reagan a "conservative" in the true sense of the word, in your opinion. I cited government spending during his tenure, as well as the EIC, neither of which (to me) identify as conservative... the latter of which being more accurately identified as "socialist" under the current political "lexicon". I'd also dare to suggest that the whole "war on drugs" of the Reagan era was NOT conservative. It has been a massive government undertaking, both in terms of the use of government resources, and the use of tax payer dollars to fund it, etc. While on the flip side, our television pumps out billions of dollars in ads each year selling us the next new wonder drug approved by the FDA, which is funded by the very companies whose drugs they approve.

              anyways. I know some of my views would make some people think I'm too "republican" depending on the topic. Others will have me perceived as a flaming liberal. And, others still (my views on the role and function of religion in present day society for example) would have even most "liberals" plugging their ears :) That's fine... whatever... I don't need to defend myself against name-callers. Only my ideas, and only to be open to other (thoughtfully expressed) ideas.

              "I know some of my views would make some people think I'm too "republican"

               

              God help us.


                                                           
                                   
                                                       

               

               

               

               

                                                                                                                 

              "The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing"

                                                                                                          --Edmund Burke

               

               

                Avatar
                New Member

                United States
                Member #98857
                October 15, 2010
                16 Posts
                Offline
                Posted: October 31, 2010, 9:49 pm - IP Logged

                I'm done talking to you... go forth and spread your hate. I've had enough of a dose...

                  rdgrnr's avatar - walt
                  Way back up in them dadgum hills, son!
                  United States
                  Member #73904
                  April 28, 2009
                  14903 Posts
                  Offline
                  Posted: October 31, 2010, 9:52 pm - IP Logged

                  I'm done talking to you... go forth and spread your hate. I've had enough of a dose...

                  The poor soul...

                  He was just too high strung is all...


                                                               
                                       
                                                           

                   

                   

                   

                   

                                                                                                                     

                  "The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing"

                                                                                                              --Edmund Burke

                   

                   

                    Avatar
                    New Member

                    United States
                    Member #98857
                    October 15, 2010
                    16 Posts
                    Offline
                    Posted: October 31, 2010, 10:20 pm - IP Logged

                    <yawning>

                      Todd's avatar - Cylon 2.gif
                      Chief Bottle Washer
                      New Jersey
                      United States
                      Member #1
                      May 31, 2000
                      23348 Posts
                      Online
                      Posted: October 31, 2010, 10:24 pm - IP Logged

                      Hey, Todd... I actually don't identify as a moderate or a centrist... But, I also don't fall easily on one side of the line or not(perception acknowledged... but, it's an interesting point you raise. b/c for me, the perception is that anything left of extreme right often gets labeled as "too liberal", liberal, socialist, etc, etc). I think (in the current climate) many of these labels (conservative, liberal, etc) are counter-productive. b/c it seems to do little more than allow people to label someone as "x" and then shut out anything they have to say. It tends to discourage discourse and common ground in present day climate. People are more concerned about what to call themselves (or others), than they are really looking at the issues

                      On social issues, I would identify primarily as liberal, however, and I'll make no apologies for saying that if gay people want to get married, it has no impact on me, and that the only argument against it that I have ever heard put forth is a religious moral one... And, that the government should have no role in that beyond the fact that two people are entering into a legally binding contract. That to me, though... is actually kind of "conservative"... keeping the government out of things it doesn't really belong in, in the first place. B/c when they do involve themselves in it, they tend to do silly things (like having a standing law in the constitution until the year 2000 that forbid interracial marriage in my previous state of residence). While the notion that one would support gay marriage may come across as "quacky liberal viewpoint", the movement to apply government resources towards enacting and enforcing what ultimately amounts to a "moral law" seems highly un-conservative, but was a big part of the 2004 get out the vote conservative movement.

                      I agree with you that those presidents were not "conservative", but they are still primarily identified as such, and conservatives voted for them. I would be curious to hear your thoughts on what made Ronald Reagan a "conservative" in the true sense of the word, in your opinion. I cited government spending during his tenure, as well as the EIC, neither of which (to me) identify as conservative... the latter of which being more accurately identified as "socialist" under the current political "lexicon". I'd also dare to suggest that the whole "war on drugs" of the Reagan era was NOT conservative. It has been a massive government undertaking, both in terms of the use of government resources, and the use of tax payer dollars to fund it, etc. While on the flip side, our television pumps out billions of dollars in ads each year selling us the next new wonder drug approved by the FDA, which is funded by the very companies whose drugs they approve.

                      anyways. I know some of my views would make some people think I'm too "republican" depending on the topic. Others will have me perceived as a flaming liberal. And, others still (my views on the role and function of religion in present day society for example) would have even most "liberals" plugging their ears :) That's fine... whatever... I don't need to defend myself against name-callers. Only my ideas, and only to be open to other (thoughtfully expressed) ideas.

                      If you're in your 30s then I'm sure you were too young at the time Reagan was president to remember much.  If you would attribute high spending to Reagan, then you're definitely listening to the wrong people.  Reagan accomplished everything he did with Democrats in charge of the Congress the entire time.  It was an amazing demonstration of true leadership.  Can you imagine Obama pulling something like that off?  He couldn't even do it with his own party controlling Congress with a filibuster-proof majority. 

                      In order to make it work, Reagan had to make some compromises - particularly with spending, and particularly in his second term, when the economy was humming again.  After all, it is impossible for liberals to see new revenue coming in without inventing new ways to spend it.

                      Reagan also did everything he did (revive the dead economy, make people proud of this country again, defeat the Soviet Union in the Cold War, etc) without the benefit of the Internet to get his message out, without any non-liberal (biased) media outlets, without e-mail, etc.  When he was in a press conference he was grilled like George W Bush used to get grilled -- with every intent to embarrass him, and no intent to explore the truth of any subject.  Sam Donaldson was one of the biggest jerks doing that, and Helen Thomas was still considered a "journalist" back then.

                      Just to be clear, you're NOT too Republican, but I must say it sounds like in comparison to the folks you hang out with, you may come off that way.  In other words, if a liberal is standing next to a progressive, I guess the liberal could be considered "moderate" or "non-partisan", or whatever other code words you decide to use there.  But it doesn't make them so, it just means they have some fringe friends.

                      And OF COURSE a conservative would vote for George W Bush or his dad.  What, would we want John Kerry, Al Gore, or Michael Dukakis in there?  Heck, I even held my nose and voted for Dole when he ran against Clinton.  What do you think a conservative should do in that case?  Not vote?  How unpatriotic would that be?  Don't you consider it your duty to vote?  I sure do.

                       

                      Check the State Lottery Report Card
                      What grade did your lottery earn?

                       

                      Sign the Petition for True Lottery Drawings
                      Help eliminate computerized drawings!

                        rdgrnr's avatar - walt
                        Way back up in them dadgum hills, son!
                        United States
                        Member #73904
                        April 28, 2009
                        14903 Posts
                        Offline
                        Posted: October 31, 2010, 10:26 pm - IP Logged

                        The poor soul...

                        He was just too high strung is all...

                        The sad thing is I think I could have helped him.


                                                                     
                                             
                                                                 

                         

                         

                         

                         

                                                                                                                           

                        "The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing"

                                                                                                                    --Edmund Burke

                         

                         

                          Avatar
                          New Member

                          United States
                          Member #98857
                          October 15, 2010
                          16 Posts
                          Offline
                          Posted: October 31, 2010, 10:43 pm - IP Logged

                          Can you imagine Obama pulling something like that off?  He couldn't even do it with his own party controlling Congress with a filibuster-proof majority. 

                          Actually, I think it will be interesting to see what will happen. That is typically when the most (albeit still very little) actually gets done. When there is a better balance. What I've witnessed over the last two years was one political party practically requiring a 60 vote filabuster proof majority, b/c nearly every piece of legislation was blocked without it. There has been an awful lot of resistance, and not a lot of action or new ideas to attempt to address our biggest problems. Come November 2nd, that won't fly anymore. Republican's will be in charge, and they will have to make compromises too. not just be a party of resistance. If they continue doing what they've been doing once they re-gain control, then control will swap again.... and we'll rinse and repeat, again, and again... different teams in the lead... same old story.

                          Don't you consider it your duty to vote?  I sure do.

                          I do, though I have some pretty serious fundamental issues with the electoral process and framework in this country. Which, I also consider to be a fundamental flaw in our system that contributes to many of the other problems we have with the way our government functions. 

                          Having said that, you've got to be something really special this election season for me to not write-in "NONE OF THE ABOVE". Now, some may consider that me throwing away my vote. I consider it to be exercising my right to vote in the purest sense of the word, by expressing my distaste with the state of affairs in the political world, as well as with the electoral process in general. maybe if more people wrote in none of the above on election day, Republican's and Democrats might begin to realize that the same ole way of doing things isn't going to fly anymore with the public consciousness. As it stands, the majority of the voting public is firmly on one side of a party line or another, and the rest sway back and forth giving justification by saying they've "voted for the lesser of two evils"... well, I'll choose none of the above instead. I don't buy into the whole, I'm voting for the guy who is less bad argument. That (in my opinion) just helps to illustrate how terribly flawed our electoral process is, and how bad the people in charge really are.

                          The level of maturity these days on capitol hill is akin to reading "youtube comments'.

                          peace.

                            rdgrnr's avatar - walt
                            Way back up in them dadgum hills, son!
                            United States
                            Member #73904
                            April 28, 2009
                            14903 Posts
                            Offline
                            Posted: October 31, 2010, 11:26 pm - IP Logged

                            Can you imagine Obama pulling something like that off?  He couldn't even do it with his own party controlling Congress with a filibuster-proof majority. 

                            Actually, I think it will be interesting to see what will happen. That is typically when the most (albeit still very little) actually gets done. When there is a better balance. What I've witnessed over the last two years was one political party practically requiring a 60 vote filabuster proof majority, b/c nearly every piece of legislation was blocked without it. There has been an awful lot of resistance, and not a lot of action or new ideas to attempt to address our biggest problems. Come November 2nd, that won't fly anymore. Republican's will be in charge, and they will have to make compromises too. not just be a party of resistance. If they continue doing what they've been doing once they re-gain control, then control will swap again.... and we'll rinse and repeat, again, and again... different teams in the lead... same old story.

                            Don't you consider it your duty to vote?  I sure do.

                            I do, though I have some pretty serious fundamental issues with the electoral process and framework in this country. Which, I also consider to be a fundamental flaw in our system that contributes to many of the other problems we have with the way our government functions. 

                            Having said that, you've got to be something really special this election season for me to not write-in "NONE OF THE ABOVE". Now, some may consider that me throwing away my vote. I consider it to be exercising my right to vote in the purest sense of the word, by expressing my distaste with the state of affairs in the political world, as well as with the electoral process in general. maybe if more people wrote in none of the above on election day, Republican's and Democrats might begin to realize that the same ole way of doing things isn't going to fly anymore with the public consciousness. As it stands, the majority of the voting public is firmly on one side of a party line or another, and the rest sway back and forth giving justification by saying they've "voted for the lesser of two evils"... well, I'll choose none of the above instead. I don't buy into the whole, I'm voting for the guy who is less bad argument. That (in my opinion) just helps to illustrate how terribly flawed our electoral process is, and how bad the people in charge really are.

                            The level of maturity these days on capitol hill is akin to reading "youtube comments'.

                            peace.

                            I just threw up a little in my mouth.

                            Yeah jyn-jyn, all the Conservatives here are gonna run out and write in "None of the above" with you now.

                            Because you've made your case so well and we all honestly believe that you're really gonna do that rather than vote straight democrat.

                            jyn-jyn, for the love of GOD! Do you know how silly you look?

                             

                            "I have some pretty serious issues with the electoral process..." 

                            Uh, yeah, you and George Soros both. What a shocker!

                             

                            "Republican's will be in charge, and they will have to make compromises too."

                            Make compromises too?  What the hell does that mean - too?  The democrats never compromised. They owned all three branches and told the Republicans to take a hike. NOW  you want to start compromising? Ha ha ha. Why the hell should the Republicans start compromising now? Just the other day Obama said Republicans have to ride in the back of the bus. That's his "One America" he talked about in his campaign, I guess. He's a liar just like you.

                             

                            The truth is, jyn-jyn, you don't even have a wife and kids like you said. You're a liberal, gay activist (not that there's anything wrong with that) and not a very good one.  You really need to work on your cover story.  I can read you like a book, jyn-jyn. You're a short story and an easy read.

                            I'm actually embarrassed for you being caught in your lies but I truly wish you the best.

                            How about we just talk lottery from now on and become friends?


                                                                         
                                                 
                                                                     

                             

                             

                             

                             

                                                                                                                               

                            "The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing"

                                                                                                                        --Edmund Burke

                             

                             

                              Avatar
                              New Member

                              United States
                              Member #98857
                              October 15, 2010
                              16 Posts
                              Offline
                              Posted: October 31, 2010, 11:45 pm - IP Logged

                              You are an idiot, and just b/c you pretend to know me better than myself, doesn't make the crap you spew about me true.

                              keep on attacking. you are good at it. Keep on perfectly illustrating my point that you are little more than someone who has to attack people, and try to defame the person, b/c you are incapable of anything more. intellectually dishonest punk that you are.

                              This is getting ridiculous... i'm being told by some stranger that I am a liar, don't have kids, am gay, etc, etc? and this is acceptable behavior? there is nothing else to say to you than F* you... you are an of the greatest magnitude. 

                               

                              You can't read sh* , you ignorant hateful fool. I can't believe they let you get away with this bull here....

                                 
                                Page 10 of 11