CONCERNING THOSE WHO ARE CONCERNED ABOUT MR. LAMBERT
Colonel Edmund J. Burke
exaggerated interest in "famous" personalities are but sad and pitiful minds
living vicariously, often because their own lives are shallow and lifeless.
--
The memory should be specially taxed in youth, since it is then that it is
strongest and most tenacious. But in choosing the things that should be
committed to memory, the utmost care and forethought must be exercised, as
lessons well learnt in youth are never forgotten.
--Arthur Schopenhauer
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/16/Arthur_Schopenhauer_daguerreotype.jpg
Dr. Chuck
> Your Colonel would like to take a moment to remind those who take an
> exaggerated interest in "famous" personalities are but sad and pitiful
> minds living vicariously, often because their own lives are shallow and
> lifeless.
Okay, Colonel Lambert.
Hoots
> exaggerated interest in "famous" personalities are but sad and pitiful
> minds living vicariously, often because their own lives are shallow and
> lifeless.
>
>
Except the ones with big knockers.
They are worth interest.
Dr. Chuck
I agree Hoots.
Dolly Parton, Anna Nicole Smith, Pamela Anderson... need I go on?
%
"Colonel Edmund J. Burke" <edmun...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Tc-dnawtzodS4pPW...@giganews.com...
quuers , ahhahahahahahahahahahhah
The Other Side
"Colonel Edmund J. Burke" <edmun...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Your Colonel would like to take a moment to remind those who take an
> exaggerated interest in "famous" personalities are but sad and pitiful minds
> living vicariously, often because their own lives are shallow and lifeless.
Adam Lambert's disgusting public conduct is one of the reasons I
voted against queer marriage, and will continue to do so. Fags
don't know how to act, they're mentally ill, and they should
ALWAYS BE KEPT AWAY FROM CHILDREN.
Gay marriage would simply be a license to adopt, groom, and
molest children. That is the only way gays can legitimize their
nasty sexual perversions and recruit new members.
NOBODY is born gay.
The Chief Instigator
At least, nobody you know of.
--
Patrick L. "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (pat...@io.com) Houston, Texas
www.io.com/~patrick/aeros.php (TCI's 2009-10 Houston Aeros) AA#2273
LAST GAME: Houston 1, Hamilton 0 (November 25)
NEXT GAME: Friday, November 27 at Syracuse, 6:05
(�`�.�Craig Chilton�.���) <www.LayoffRemedy.com>
"The Other Side" <theoth...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> CONCERNING THOSE WHO ARE CONCERNED ABOUT
> ADAM LAMBERT
<flush bigoted garbage>
The ONLY such people would be brainless and bigoted LOSERS like you.
And sewer rat turds are more worthwhile to humanity than bigots.
With sewer rat turds, one at least has some useful fertilizer.
Bigots are WORTHLESS.
> NOBODY is born gay.
ROTFL!!! Practically EVERYONE was BORN with their sexual
orientations. And here is all the PROOF of that, that anyone having
a modicum of intelligence would ever need.
http://www.ChristianEgalitarian.com/Orientation-at-Birth.html
So unless you are a complete *dunce*, LYING is your long suit.
(And that's not smart either.)
Tell me -- what do *you* GET out of being a hateful bigot?
What's IN that for you?
anonymous
>
> In article <Tc-dnawtzodS4pPW...@giganews.com>
> "Colonel Edmund J. Burke" <edmun...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > Your Colonel would like to take a moment to remind those who take an
> > exaggerated interest in "famous" personalities are but sad and pitiful minds
> > living vicariously, often because their own lives are shallow and lifeless.
>
> Adam Lambert's disgusting public conduct is one of the reasons I
> voted against queer marriage, and will continue to do so. Fags
> don't know how to act, they're mentally ill, and they should
> ALWAYS BE KEPT AWAY FROM CHILDREN.
>
person, enlightened heterosexual person the awesomeness of heterosexual
marriage, the awesomeness of having heterosexual offspring and tell us
how each day or any day your life is so enriched because you are a
heterosexual leading an awesome life.
> Gay marriage would simply be a license to adopt, groom, and
> molest children. That is the only way gays can legitimize their
> nasty sexual perversions and recruit new members.
>
> NOBODY is born gay.
I think you are correct that nobody is born gay. Heterosexual men and
women jointly raise children in a variety of ways. Extreme examples
that produce homosexuals are fathers who spend most of their free time
in the bars, while the mother tries to hold the family together telling
their sons and daughters little lies about dad, the family hero and
breadwinner. Other fathers gamble, others work away from home in mines,
truck hauling, and sometimes long distance sales. There is a pattern,
thought that is funny. The fathers who would most hate having a
homosexual son, are those that actually produce them because they aren't
spending time with their sons. And most come home and see their son has
some unusual ways or habits and accuses the wife of making their son a
sissy.
Now as far as having the ability to groom and molest a lad to make him a
homosexual, it isn't possible. It really takes certain types of women
(which plays a minor roll) and fathers who are absent or preoccuped with
anything and everything except raising their son or sons.
Now, a heterosxual son can easily be produced by two lesbians and two
homosexuals because they know first hand what to do and what not to
do.
Mother Nature
> exaggerated interest in "famous" personalities are but sad and pitiful
> minds living vicariously, often because their own lives are shallow and
> lifeless.
>
>
%
"Mother Nature" <m_na...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:henls7$nb7$3...@news.eternal-september.org...
oh that's what your on about
slunky
Except he doesn't like to wrinkle his blankets.
--
-slunky
%
"slunky" <slu...@cryptobug.com> wrote in message
news:slrnhgun67...@asus.zero...
he might to see her gossiping rag
Mother Nature
What has that got to do with tabloids?
%
i don't know , you said it
Kia-Ed
Kia-Ed
(�`�.�Craig Chilton�.���) <www.LayoffRemedy.com>
slunky
What pills do you pop when you sit down at your pc that makes you type
like that?
--
-slunky
%
"(�`�.�Craig Chilton�.���) <www.LayoffRemedy.com> " <x...@m.com> wrote in
message news:tar0h5da5gesohgu5...@4ax.com...
THAT YOU VERY MUCH , LOL
>
slunky
> "(?`?.?Craig Chilton?.???) <www.LayoffRemedy.com> " <x...@m.com> wrote in
THAN -- *you*!
--
-slunky
Hoots
Do you have pics of Dolly Parton's boobs?
I'd like to see those puppies - they'd be an eyeful (and a
mouthful/handful), I am sure. :-P
Hoots
> NOT a Disney topic.
What isn't a Disney topic?
Hoots
I'm kind of curious about that, too.
That's a whole lot of key-clicking there!
Dr. Chuck
Me? No, I kind of figured they'd be everywhere.
%
"Hoots" <ratt...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:hera7f$lr2$2...@news.eternal-september.org...
dehydrated mangos , 60 year old mangos mmmmmm
Hoots
I think they've been filled to the brim with preservatives.
They should be fresh as when she was 21.
And, there's no saying we can't look at old pics.
Mangos - mmmmmm
Dr. Chuck
Oh, yes, Dr. So-and-so pumped them up real good!
slunky
CAPS, tabs, and *'s abound, and a hyperlink every now and then.
--
-slunky
%
> Kia-Ed wrote:
>> NOT a Disney topic.
>
>
> What isn't a Disney topic?
being goofy
Notsodumb
> What isn't a Disney topic?
Discussions related to Walt Disney World or one of several Disneylands.
Notsodumb
At least that would be REMOTELY related to the discussion group.
%
"Notsodumb" <Nots...@somehow.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9CD1EA02E...@216.196.97.142...
>> being goofy
>
> At least that would be REMOTELY related to the discussion group.
well from how i see it ,
this is going to more than one group ,
so i'm in the one where being off topic is acceptable
Hoots
It's a word/character/letter/punctuation salad.
I can't make any sense out of it, can you?
Hoots
So, discussions related to Walt Disney World are not a Disney topic?
Seems odd to me.
Just to help me clear this up in my mind would you say a discussion
about cakes wouldn't be allowed in alt,baking.cakes?
Puzzling, indeed!
Hoots
>> being goofy
>
> At least that would be REMOTELY related to the discussion group.
All right, all right, we're getting somewhere.
So, no discussions of Walt Disney World, but it's OK to discuss remotes.
Good!
So, I have a question for you guys, why do I need so many remotes for
the TV, sound system, etc? They (the remotes and components) all claim
to be able to talk to each other but they never do.
None of them ever works with my satellite dish at all.
Hoots
At this point it *is* the topic.
I think.
slunky
>>> That's a whole lot of key-clicking there!
>>
>> CAPS, tabs, and *'s abound, and a hyperlink every now and then.
>
> It's a word/character/letter/punctuation salad.
>
> I can't make any sense out of it, can you?
I'd need the rosetta stone.
--
-slunky