Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
OT: The guy who picked up Obama
106 views
Skip to first unread message
popinjay999
Sep 11, 2012, 10:13:59 AM9/11/12
to
As much as I can't stand Obama, I actually felt very uncomfortable
watching that idiot who picked him up and gave him a bear hug at the
pizza parlor. What a retard, you don't put your hands on a president
like that. What was the Secret Service doing? Where were they? They
should have kicked that guy's ass. They should have turned the
cameras off and beat his fucking ass!
watching that idiot who picked him up and gave him a bear hug at the
pizza parlor. What a retard, you don't put your hands on a president
like that. What was the Secret Service doing? Where were they? They
should have kicked that guy's ass. They should have turned the
cameras off and beat his fucking ass!
RazzO
Sep 11, 2012, 11:08:08 AM9/11/12
to
It looked rigged. Perhaps that is why.
RazzO
fffurken
Sep 11, 2012, 12:55:23 PM9/11/12
to
RazzO
Sep 11, 2012, 3:48:09 PM9/11/12
to
Uh..it's been done to the queen. When she visited LA. Guy named Frank Drebin did it.
Yea, I saw it on TV,
fffrick'in fffurken, so don't say it ain't true.
RazzO
VegasJerry
Sep 11, 2012, 4:11:53 PM9/11/12
to
Try watching something other than Fox.
Jerry
RazzO
Sep 11, 2012, 4:42:11 PM9/11/12
to
I had NO knowledge of this. But as Paul stated, you don't just pick up and shake a US president.
That's to prevent assassination by neck snapping.
RazzO
Clave
Sep 11, 2012, 5:39:42 PM9/11/12
to
"RazzO" <ra...@razzo.com> wrote in message
news:e9fbfb31-a59f-4324...@googlegroups.com...
>
> I had NO knowledge of this. But as Paul stated, you don't just pick up and
> shake a US president.
I heard the guy interviewed on the radio this morning, and he sez that the
> I had NO knowledge of this. But as Paul stated, you don't just pick up and
> shake a US president.
Secret Service told him that his stop was one of the easiest they've had.
Jim
popinjay999
Sep 12, 2012, 12:37:01 AM9/12/12
to
On Sep 11, 2:37 pm, "Clave" <ChrisClav...@TheMonastery.com> wrote:
>
> I heard the guy interviewed on the radio this morning, and he sez that the
> Secret Service told him that his stop was one of the easiest they've had.
>
> Jim
Was anyone even talking to you?
>
> I heard the guy interviewed on the radio this morning, and he sez that the
> Secret Service told him that his stop was one of the easiest they've had.
>
> Jim
Clave
Sep 12, 2012, 1:03:56 AM9/12/12
to
"popinjay999" <paulpo...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:2dee08af-976f-49cf...@s9g2000pbh.googlegroups.com...
> On Sep 11, 2:37 pm, "Clave" <ChrisClav...@TheMonastery.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> I heard the guy interviewed on the radio this morning, and he sez that
>> the
>> Secret Service told him that his stop was one of the easiest they've had.
>
>
>>
>> I heard the guy interviewed on the radio this morning, and he sez that
>> the
>> Secret Service told him that his stop was one of the easiest they've had.
>
> Was anyone even talking to you?
I think you're the only drooling feeb here who's under the illusion that
Usenet conversations are somehow private.
In any case, it gratifies me to no end that I'm able to irritate you without
even addressing you directly.
Jim
popinjay999
Sep 12, 2012, 1:29:43 AM9/12/12
to
On Sep 11, 10:02 pm, "Clave"
including your name, in response to me. Like a big fat ponytailed
carp.
>
> I think you're the only drooling feeb here who's under the illusion that
> Usenet conversations are somehow private.
>
> In any case, it gratifies me to no end that I'm able to irritate you without
> even addressing you directly.
>
> Jim
It gratifies me to no end that I just got you to type out 39 words,
> I think you're the only drooling feeb here who's under the illusion that
> Usenet conversations are somehow private.
>
> In any case, it gratifies me to no end that I'm able to irritate you without
> even addressing you directly.
>
> Jim
including your name, in response to me. Like a big fat ponytailed
carp.
Clave
Sep 12, 2012, 1:34:12 AM9/12/12
to
news:66484e8f-8e00-49f8...@t9g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
> On Sep 11, 10:02 pm, "Clave"
>>
>> I think you're the only drooling feeb here who's under the illusion that
>> Usenet conversations are somehow private.
>>
>> In any case, it gratifies me to no end that I'm able to irritate you
>> without
>> even addressing you directly.
>
>>
>> I think you're the only drooling feeb here who's under the illusion that
>> Usenet conversations are somehow private.
>>
>> In any case, it gratifies me to no end that I'm able to irritate you
>> without
>> even addressing you directly.
>
> It gratifies me to no end that I just got you to type out 39 words,
> including your name, in response to me. Like a big fat ponytailed
> carp.
Shorter Pop-Tard: "Pay attention to MEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!"
> including your name, in response to me. Like a big fat ponytailed
> carp.
Beldin the Sorcerer
Sep 12, 2012, 1:34:22 AM9/12/12
to
Hey, pop the cork on some wine or something. Be back in a couple of hours
popinjay999
Sep 12, 2012, 1:43:51 AM9/12/12
to
On Sep 11, 10:02 pm, "Clave"
>
>
> I think you're the only drooling feeb here who's under the illusion that
> Usenet conversations are somehow private.
>
I have never been under any illusion that usenet conversations are
> Usenet conversations are somehow private.
>
private, but there is an implied protocol that should be followed when
you know you're not welcomed by the author of the thread.
Clave
Sep 12, 2012, 2:02:56 AM9/12/12
to
news:19618e0f-3ce0-406d...@ou2g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
LOL -- I'll bet there's just enough room up your ass to fit that "implied
protocol", right next to your head.
Jim
protocol", right next to your head.
Jim
popinjay999
Sep 12, 2012, 2:10:48 AM9/12/12
to
On Sep 11, 11:01 pm, "Clave" <ChrisClav...@TheMonastery.com> wrote:
> "popinjay999" <paulpopin...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
Insult me all you want, but you know that I am right. And you've been
on usenet much longer than I have, so I know that you know that I am
right.
> "popinjay999" <paulpopin...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
on usenet much longer than I have, so I know that you know that I am
right.
Clave
Sep 12, 2012, 2:15:27 AM9/12/12
to
news:38e80b9a-6135-485c...@oz6g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
You go right on believing that, Pumpkin.
Jim
> On Sep 11, 11:01 pm, "Clave" <ChrisClav...@TheMonastery.com> wrote:
>> "popinjay999" <paulpopin...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
>>
>> news:19618e0f-3ce0-406d...@ou2g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> > On Sep 11, 10:02 pm, "Clave"
>>
>> >> I think you're the only drooling feeb here who's under the illusion
>> >> that
>> >> Usenet conversations are somehow private.
>>
>> > I have never been under any illusion that usenet conversations are
>> > private, but there is an implied protocol that should be followed when
>> > you know you're not welcomed by the author of the thread.
>>
>> LOL -- I'll bet there's just enough room up your ass to fit that "implied
>> protocol", right next to your head.
>
> Insult me all you want, but you know that I am right...
>> "popinjay999" <paulpopin...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
>>
>> news:19618e0f-3ce0-406d...@ou2g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> > On Sep 11, 10:02 pm, "Clave"
>>
>> >> I think you're the only drooling feeb here who's under the illusion
>> >> that
>> >> Usenet conversations are somehow private.
>>
>> > I have never been under any illusion that usenet conversations are
>> > private, but there is an implied protocol that should be followed when
>> > you know you're not welcomed by the author of the thread.
>>
>> LOL -- I'll bet there's just enough room up your ass to fit that "implied
>> protocol", right next to your head.
>
You go right on believing that, Pumpkin.
Jim
Pepe Papon
Sep 14, 2012, 4:32:34 AM9/14/12
to
this post doesn't do it, nothing will.
--
Pepe "The Revelation" Papon
fffurken
Sep 14, 2012, 7:35:43 PM9/14/12
to
On Sep 14, 9:32 am, Pepe Papon <hitmeis...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> >I have never been under any illusion that usenet conversations are
> >private, but there is an implied protocol that should be followed when
> >you know you're not welcomed by the author of the thread.
>
> LOL. I've been trying to convince Jim that you're a funny guy. If
> this post doesn't do it, nothing will.
I don't get it?
> >I have never been under any illusion that usenet conversations are
> >private, but there is an implied protocol that should be followed when
> >you know you're not welcomed by the author of the thread.
>
> LOL. I've been trying to convince Jim that you're a funny guy. If
> this post doesn't do it, nothing will.
Pepe Papon
Sep 16, 2012, 4:31:17 PM9/16/12
to
hilarious.
fffurken
Sep 16, 2012, 6:13:03 PM9/16/12
to
On Sep 16, 9:31 pm, Pepe Papon <hitmeis...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> >> >I have never been under any illusion that usenet conversations are
> >> >private, but there is an implied protocol that should be followed when
> >> >you know you're not welcomed by the author of the thread.
>
> >> LOL. I've been trying to convince Jim that you're a funny guy. If
> >> this post doesn't do it, nothing will.
>
> >I don't get it?
>
> The idea that there's any such implied protocol on Usenet is
> hilarious.
Oh. I was looking for something more I guess. Nevermind.
> >> >I have never been under any illusion that usenet conversations are
> >> >private, but there is an implied protocol that should be followed when
> >> >you know you're not welcomed by the author of the thread.
>
> >> LOL. I've been trying to convince Jim that you're a funny guy. If
> >> this post doesn't do it, nothing will.
>
> >I don't get it?
>
> The idea that there's any such implied protocol on Usenet is
> hilarious.
Hey Pepe, did Paul ever tell you about the time he was driving, and it
was really misty, and then he pulled over, and he rolled a spliff, and
then he started smoking it and as the mist cleared he realised that he
was in a police parking lot!
ROTFLMAO! That was hilarious.
popinjay999
Sep 17, 2012, 1:11:19 AM9/17/12
to
On Sep 16, 3:13 pm, fffurken <fffur...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hey Pepe, did Paul ever tell you about the time he was driving, and it
> was really misty, and then he pulled over, and he rolled a spliff, and
> then he started smoking it and as the mist cleared he realised that he
> was in a police parking lot!
>
> ROTFLMAO! That was hilarious.
I don't know what your problem is, or Pepe's problem either, but I
>
> Hey Pepe, did Paul ever tell you about the time he was driving, and it
> was really misty, and then he pulled over, and he rolled a spliff, and
> then he started smoking it and as the mist cleared he realised that he
> was in a police parking lot!
>
> ROTFLMAO! That was hilarious.
suspect you are both mocking me. Both accounts were true and nothing
was meant to be "funny". It wasn't funny. I am not a clown.
Pepe Papon
Sep 17, 2012, 2:30:53 AM9/17/12
to
On Sun, 16 Sep 2012 22:11:19 -0700 (PDT), popinjay999
<paulpo...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>On Sep 16, 3:13�pm, fffurken <fffur...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Hey Pepe, did Paul ever tell you about the time he was driving, and it
>> was really misty, and then he pulled over, and he rolled a spliff, and
>> then he started smoking it and as the mist cleared he realised that he
>> was in a police parking lot!
>>
>> ROTFLMAO! That was hilarious.
>
>
>I don't know what your problem is, or Pepe's problem either, but I
>suspect you are both mocking me.
You're somewhat perceptive.
<paulpo...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>On Sep 16, 3:13�pm, fffurken <fffur...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Hey Pepe, did Paul ever tell you about the time he was driving, and it
>> was really misty, and then he pulled over, and he rolled a spliff, and
>> then he started smoking it and as the mist cleared he realised that he
>> was in a police parking lot!
>>
>> ROTFLMAO! That was hilarious.
>
>
>I don't know what your problem is, or Pepe's problem either, but I
>suspect you are both mocking me.
>Both accounts were true and nothing
>was meant to be "funny". It wasn't funny. I am not a clown.
fffurken
Sep 17, 2012, 11:28:26 AM9/17/12
to
On 17 Sep, 06:11, popinjay999 <paulpopin...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> > Hey Pepe, did Paul ever tell you about the time he was driving, and it
> > was really misty, and then he pulled over, and he rolled a spliff, and
> > then he started smoking it and as the mist cleared he realised that he
> > was in a police parking lot!
>
> > ROTFLMAO! That was hilarious.
>
> I don't know what your problem is, or Pepe's problem either, but I
> suspect you are both mocking me.
I wasn't mocking you Paul, I was contrasting funny and not so funny. I
> > Hey Pepe, did Paul ever tell you about the time he was driving, and it
> > was really misty, and then he pulled over, and he rolled a spliff, and
> > then he started smoking it and as the mist cleared he realised that he
> > was in a police parking lot!
>
> > ROTFLMAO! That was hilarious.
>
> I don't know what your problem is, or Pepe's problem either, but I
> suspect you are both mocking me.
guess me and Pepe just have a different idea of what's hilarious.
BillB
Sep 17, 2012, 11:43:28 AM9/17/12
to
On 9/16/2012 3:13 PM, fffurken wrote:
> Hey Pepe, did Paul ever tell you about the time he was driving, and it
> was really misty, and then he pulled over, and he rolled a spliff, and
> then he started smoking it and as the mist cleared he realised that he
> was in a police parking lot!
I think I saw that in a Cheech and Chong movie.
> Hey Pepe, did Paul ever tell you about the time he was driving, and it
> was really misty, and then he pulled over, and he rolled a spliff, and
> then he started smoking it and as the mist cleared he realised that he
> was in a police parking lot!
fffurken
Sep 17, 2012, 11:52:33 AM9/17/12
to
True story, just ask him.
0 new messages