This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - MyNameIsCharlie
Pages: 1 ... 899091 9293 ... 260
2701
« on: September 09, 2016, 10:33:44 AM »
While one of the most retarded things, ever, the piint's moot. If they're in a burka, she's religious enough to not do anything without her husband or father's permission. So... Beat cop is out.
2702
« on: September 09, 2016, 12:46:33 AM »
Guis stahp.
Im gun cri
2703
« on: September 09, 2016, 12:21:41 AM »
Damn you 2016! DAMN YOU TO HELL!!
2016 officially became shit after Bowie left earth.
He was only a bloke that wanted to be anyone but himself.
Recording a final album and instructing his estate to release it after he died? Class act in death as much as he was in life
2704
« on: September 09, 2016, 12:16:40 AM »
Damn you 2016! DAMN YOU TO HELL!!
2705
« on: September 08, 2016, 10:02:55 PM »
CUMGZLR
2706
« on: September 07, 2016, 04:05:08 PM »
Between Desty and Iberian Husky, I'm seeing lots of words like "hard," "Salty," "Beef" and "Dick."
Will you two just shut up and admit you're gay for each other?
2707
« on: September 07, 2016, 03:44:22 PM »
Next he'll tell us he's into dudes.
2708
« on: September 07, 2016, 12:04:38 PM »
WW2 Russia.
You forgot, Jackie Chan don't want no trouble
2709
« on: September 07, 2016, 08:17:56 AM »
Why, start a drug smuggling / money laundering scheme involving south african gold coins
2710
« on: September 06, 2016, 07:05:07 PM »
No, saying he has a 0% chance. That line of thinking is exactly what both parties want you to think. Cause if everyone thinks this way this year, they'll think this way in 2020, and 2024, it'll never end.
What? My saying I don't really care about him? Then you missed the point. Johnson won't win. He doesn't have the machine backing Clinton or the irresistible charm (insanity?) that Trump has to the media. That's a simple fact. People need to take the long view on this. It's not about your horse winning the race, but your voice being heard.
2711
« on: September 06, 2016, 06:33:27 PM »
Or the fact that he lowered taxes 14 times in his state and still left office with the state in a surplus and with new everything. Even if what you say is true, is it wrong that his platform basically amounts to "Better than these two candidates"? Because it's fucking true. Johnson winning would be the best outcome for this election and Charlie having the attitude he has on Johnson winning this year will ensure third party candidates stay at a 0% chance because the two major parties will ride on you thinking that way next time.
All he's got to ride on is weed and most people not liking the dominant candidates. What? My saying I don't really care about him? I don't agree with his policies. And he doesn't have a chance. I want people to vote for their candidate. Not just one of the two presented to them. FTR, I'm still writing in Sanders. Is it a wasted vote? Probably. But my vote counts for little in CA. California will be a blue state as long as the sky is blue.
2712
« on: September 06, 2016, 04:56:35 PM »
Your momma's pussy juice
Jk
2713
« on: September 06, 2016, 03:49:41 PM »
I wonder how the extreme SJW's will spin this against France. The French did it for pretty much the same reasons. I can just see the France = ISIS signs already. Any chance to look stupid while making a point can never be passed up.
2714
« on: September 06, 2016, 03:46:05 PM »
I don't really care about Johnson. In reality he has a 0% chance of winning. What I do care about is people taking him seriously enough to break the mentality that the only choices are Republican or Democrat. Having to choose only these options got us in this mess, and the only way out is to end it.
2716
« on: September 06, 2016, 01:38:11 PM »
The only correct answer is Jackie Chan who doesn't want any trouble
2717
« on: September 06, 2016, 08:45:59 AM »
I don't get it
Shit. I gotta say it in Russian
2718
« on: September 06, 2016, 01:28:57 AM »
Ok. Did it.
2719
« on: September 06, 2016, 01:25:11 AM »
That's literally Camnator
2720
« on: September 05, 2016, 11:45:23 PM »
Longing.
Rusted.
Seventeen.
Daybreak.
Furnace.
Nine.
Benign.
Homecoming.
One.
Freight Car
Soldier?
2721
« on: September 05, 2016, 08:26:32 PM »
Usual Suspects
2722
« on: September 05, 2016, 03:14:46 PM »
You look at yourself, giving that little wink that means you're ready. You shake your head, not in the mood right now. You press a little, trying to get some action. But you keep telling yourself no. Finally you snap. It isn't about the sex anymore. It's about the principle. You get your way. You rip your shirt off, roughly rubbing your nipples. Then pants, and finally underwear. You're openly crying now, as you have your way with your unwilling self. You feel a wave of guilt as your body seemingly betrays you when you climax. You lay there silently weeping. It happened again and you promised yourself it wouldn't. Now you have to buy this 
2723
« on: September 05, 2016, 02:47:45 PM »
Surrounded by dead hookers and mounds of coke
2724
« on: September 04, 2016, 10:02:31 PM »
The OS wars continue?
2725
« on: September 04, 2016, 08:33:19 PM »
LOL. And it goes personal.
"Star Trek was an attempt to say that humanity will reach maturity and wisdom on the day that it begins not just to tolerate, but take a special delight in differences in ideas and differences in life forms. […] If we cannot learn to actually enjoy those small differences, to take a positive delight in those small differences between our own kind, here on this planet, then we do not deserve to go out into space and meet the diversity that is almost certainly out there."
-Gene Roddenberry
That's my point. That maturity he's talking about is losing tribalism. Us vs Them. Globalism isn't bad because it's the start of maturity.
Why the fuck is Gene Roddenberry you're intellectual backing here?
You're literally citing Star Trek. What the fuck.
So? His story touched millions. Like it or not, his vision gave people hope.
And I'm not quoting Star Trek, I'm quoting the author.
It's not so much that his work is popular, it's the fact that you referenced a fucking screenwriter as a legitimate intellectual source in a serious discussion.
It's like you deliberately go out of your way to miss the point of what people are trying to say sometimes.
And?
Having a concrete view of the future and the ability to communicate that vision to millions puts him ahead of most. And does his life as a writer invalidate him? Especially when most mainstream scientists quote him whenever the future is brought up?
I don't really care how influential you think he is. He was a television writer, with virtually no intellectual or credible bearing to what the thread is about. As interesting as his perspectives may be, citing a sci fi writer and producer, aka an entertainer, doesn't exactly belong in the realms of a serious discussion. It's like asking Tom Clancy for advice on a genuine military operation.
You're entitled to your opinions on globalism but at least substantiate these opinions with a somewhat reputable backing to them.
Oh... So post what everyone rlse is with the same level of source?
TEH MUDSLINES R EBIL N EEE SHUD NUK M ALL
Posts like these is why nobody takes you seriously any more.
Why would you take anyone seriously on this board?
I take the people that post here far more seriously than someone who's a carbon copy of a reddit board.
Are you gonna step out of the ad hominem? The thread is "Why is Globalism Bad" not "Cite with sources explaining the failures of Globalism and society." So far what I've said hasn't been called out, but my sources and attacks on me. I stand behind my original statement. Globalism isn't bad, as we can't achieve our potential until we move past tribalism. You want a "official source?" Fine.
2726
« on: September 04, 2016, 08:21:17 PM »
LOL. And it goes personal.
"Star Trek was an attempt to say that humanity will reach maturity and wisdom on the day that it begins not just to tolerate, but take a special delight in differences in ideas and differences in life forms. […] If we cannot learn to actually enjoy those small differences, to take a positive delight in those small differences between our own kind, here on this planet, then we do not deserve to go out into space and meet the diversity that is almost certainly out there."
-Gene Roddenberry
That's my point. That maturity he's talking about is losing tribalism. Us vs Them. Globalism isn't bad because it's the start of maturity.
Why the fuck is Gene Roddenberry you're intellectual backing here?
You're literally citing Star Trek. What the fuck.
So? His story touched millions. Like it or not, his vision gave people hope.
And I'm not quoting Star Trek, I'm quoting the author.
It's not so much that his work is popular, it's the fact that you referenced a fucking screenwriter as a legitimate intellectual source in a serious discussion.
It's like you deliberately go out of your way to miss the point of what people are trying to say sometimes.
And?
Having a concrete view of the future and the ability to communicate that vision to millions puts him ahead of most. And does his life as a writer invalidate him? Especially when most mainstream scientists quote him whenever the future is brought up?
I don't really care how influential you think he is. He was a television writer, with virtually no intellectual or credible bearing to what the thread is about. As interesting as his perspectives may be, citing a sci fi writer and producer, aka an entertainer, doesn't exactly belong in the realms of a serious discussion. It's like asking Tom Clancy for advice on a genuine military operation.
You're entitled to your opinions on globalism but at least substantiate these opinions with a somewhat reputable backing to them.
Oh... So post what everyone rlse is with the same level of source?
TEH MUDSLINES R EBIL N EEE SHUD NUK M ALL
Posts like these is why nobody takes you seriously any more.
Why would you take anyone seriously on this board?
2727
« on: September 04, 2016, 08:12:54 PM »
LOL. And it goes personal.
"Star Trek was an attempt to say that humanity will reach maturity and wisdom on the day that it begins not just to tolerate, but take a special delight in differences in ideas and differences in life forms. […] If we cannot learn to actually enjoy those small differences, to take a positive delight in those small differences between our own kind, here on this planet, then we do not deserve to go out into space and meet the diversity that is almost certainly out there."
-Gene Roddenberry
That's my point. That maturity he's talking about is losing tribalism. Us vs Them. Globalism isn't bad because it's the start of maturity.
Why the fuck is Gene Roddenberry you're intellectual backing here?
You're literally citing Star Trek. What the fuck.
So? His story touched millions. Like it or not, his vision gave people hope.
And I'm not quoting Star Trek, I'm quoting the author.
It's not so much that his work is popular, it's the fact that you referenced a fucking screenwriter as a legitimate intellectual source in a serious discussion.
It's like you deliberately go out of your way to miss the point of what people are trying to say sometimes.
And?
Having a concrete view of the future and the ability to communicate that vision to millions puts him ahead of most. And does his life as a writer invalidate him? Especially when most mainstream scientists quote him whenever the future is brought up?
I don't really care how influential you think he is. He was a television writer, with virtually no intellectual or credible bearing to what the thread is about. As interesting as his perspectives may be, citing a sci fi writer and producer, aka an entertainer, doesn't exactly belong in the realms of a serious discussion. It's like asking Tom Clancy for advice on a genuine military operation.
You're entitled to your opinions on globalism but at least substantiate these opinions with a somewhat reputable backing to them.
Oh... So post what everyone rlse is with the same level of source? TEH MUDSLINES R EBIL N EEE SHUD NUK M ALL
2728
« on: September 04, 2016, 07:30:37 PM »
LOL. And it goes personal.
"Star Trek was an attempt to say that humanity will reach maturity and wisdom on the day that it begins not just to tolerate, but take a special delight in differences in ideas and differences in life forms. […] If we cannot learn to actually enjoy those small differences, to take a positive delight in those small differences between our own kind, here on this planet, then we do not deserve to go out into space and meet the diversity that is almost certainly out there."
-Gene Roddenberry
That's my point. That maturity he's talking about is losing tribalism. Us vs Them. Globalism isn't bad because it's the start of maturity.
Why the fuck is Gene Roddenberry you're intellectual backing here?
You're literally citing Star Trek. What the fuck.
So? His story touched millions. Like it or not, his vision gave people hope.
And I'm not quoting Star Trek, I'm quoting the author.
It's not so much that his work is popular, it's the fact that you referenced a fucking screenwriter as a legitimate intellectual source in a serious discussion.
It's like you deliberately go out of your way to miss the point of what people are trying to say sometimes.
And? Having a concrete view of the future and the ability to communicate that vision to millions puts him ahead of most. And does his life as a writer invalidate him? Especially when most mainstream scientists quote him whenever the future is brought up?
2729
« on: September 04, 2016, 07:27:19 PM »
Believe it or not, Al Baghdadi and I spoke witg a gay sailor in Hawaii, abd this actually came up.
At least with the USN, tradition holds and ships are female.
Were you in Pearl City?
I grew up there.
Big Island. He was on leave. Been to Pearl a few times
2730
« on: September 04, 2016, 12:38:05 PM »
Believe it or not, Al Baghdadi and I spoke witg a gay sailor in Hawaii, abd this actually came up.
At least with the USN, tradition holds and ships are female.
Pages: 1 ... 899091 9293 ... 260
|
Show Posts