davjohns

I didn't notice US was in there until you mentioned it. I don't put much faith in these numbers. They seem on the low side to me. Maybe they are published to make guys feel better about themselves. Dropzone.com: where all of the men are above average. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

It's my first time in Europe, so I have lots of places to go. I've just always wanted to go to Venice. I have trips on the board for Paris, London, Amsterdam and such. I am going to Luxembourg this weekend. I am just trying to figure out something a little longer that I can fly to. Thanks for all of the input! I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

So...I can fly ryanair (low cost European airline) to Venice for the Thanksgiving weekend for $40 round trip. I'm trying to come up with a reason I shouldn't do this. Maybe I should go to Rome instead? I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

That chart can't be right. What the hell can you do with a penis that short? No stroke...just vibrate? And when they get down around 4 inches, how do they even perpetuate the species? Who measures these things, anyway? I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

Actually, I'm doing quite well. It was just a little rough messing with Facebook. That's where you report all the good stuff and post pictures of happy times, right? My only regret is any negative effect it has on her 4 year old boy. He's a sweetie. Mine are grown and will probably be glad to hear about the divorce. Tri: I did check the hump day video. I have never wanted to hump a rig before, but that was proof that most things can be an aphrodisiac if properly done. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

Well, being a toy for God's amusement had to have at least one perk. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

That made me smile. Thanks! I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

I need a girlfriend. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

So, I signed the divorce papers this morning in front of a notary public and put them in the mail to the ex. So, what does it say about our modern world that changing my status on facebook was more difficult? I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

Trying real hard to find a policy issue, moral deficit or other relevant issue here. The Obama detractors latched onto his statement about 57 states and tried to link it to his Muslim upbringing. That was stretching things at best. This makes even less sense. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

And that's HIS fault...why? He did not create the federal tax system. To my knowledge, he has never contributed to changing the federal tax system one way or the other. As far as I have seen or heard, he obeys the rules and pays what he is required to...and recently, more. If you disagree with the tax system, fine. Why attack a taxpayer who is paying more than everyone on this forum combined? How is it his fault that he doesn't pay as much as you want him to? I see no logic in this whole chain of discussion. I'm not necessarily a fan or detractor of Romney. I just notice that his detractors have to work very hard, squint through one eye, start out with a bias and create facts to find something to complain about. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

The guy pays more taxes in a year than I will pay in my life and some people continue to complain that he isn't doing enough. If I were him, I might consider leaving the country and letting the whiners have it. With all the things this country should be worrying about...Mitt Romney's taxes???? I can only conclude that large numbers of people are blinded by hate fuled by a masterful media campaign and truth twisting. He apparently even paid more in taxes just to appease some people and that was a dismal failure. I think I need to read 1984 again to make sense of the political landscape of the US today. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

How is quoting verbatim, in their entirety, several paragraph's of Romney's speech "distorting" anything? Quoting is fine. What you wrote, however, was: So Romney doesn't care about 47% of US voters. They are tax dodgers. Funny coming from a guy who pays tax at a lower rate than most middle class Obama supporters. He didn't say anything about whether he cared about anyone. He said his job (as a candidate) is to not worry about votes he can't win. Kind of stating the obvious, but you distorted it into something it wasn't. He didn't call anyone tax dodgers. He said they don't pay taxes. He said they have a sense of entitlement and think the government should take care of them. Tax dodging is a criminal offense. He just said they are playing the system and will not be swayed with talk of tax cuts and persuaded to vote for him. You distorted it. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

That's one of the more interesting analogies I've heard lately. I like it. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

If you watch the video, he dismissed 47 percent of the vote as those who will vote for Obama because they don't pay taxes, so his tax reform agenda means nothing to them. He said his job is to not worry about those votes and focus on the swing votes. He stated what every politician knows. After the primaries, you have secured your base and you go for the swing votes. Is there any chance the current regime will ever address real issues and quit worrying about attacking this guy? I understand that there is no positive track record to stand on, but at least pretend you have a plan that is viable to deal with issues. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

Clicked on this forum. Saw the title of this thread off to the side. Couldn't see who started it, but I knew from the title who it was. I was right. The comment was clear if you watch the video. It's what every politician does. It's his job as a candidate to not worry about the people whose vote he can not win. It is his job as a candidate to focus on swing voters. He described it just fine. His meaning was clear. Kallend is distorting things again. Other people on this thread are claiming Romney is unintelligent because he told the truth in public. I have no idea how intelligent he is, but his education is beyond reproach and he's done pretty well in life from any obective standpoint. Now, he's honest, too? I don't get the logic. But then, I often don't follow the purported logic of some of the denizens of this forum. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

I haven't gotten a phone over here yet. Wondering now if I should even try. Mind sharing who the messed up companies are? I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

I haven't figured out the train system, yet. I want to use it. I just don't know how. I haven't even found the local station. I might try this weekend. And you consider this bad weather? It has been lovely since I got here. It rained one day. Other than that, it has been sunny and 60's to 70's (F). I've loved it. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

Give it up, Jerry. Look at his last post. He clearly thinks that training in logical thought is not useful in a debate, even while using the term 'reasonable doubt'. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

"substance use disorder" Wow. I didn't know we had changed the name to take out all personal responsibility. What were the symptoms of this disorder before we had abusable substances? Granted, that's been a few years. People start out with the knowledge that the substance is likely to become addictive psychologically or physically. That hardly seems like a disorder to me. Sorry for the rant. Just tired of changes in the language to absolve people of responsibility for their actions. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

I agree with the original assertion to an extent and with a modification. There are people of all socio-political persuassions that insist on pushing their beliefs on others. It is hardly omni-present or restricted to one end of the spectrum. I can't stand the practice even if the person's views were identical to mine. I would likely argue with the person for fun. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

Don't get me started on 'reasonable doubt'. I'm an attorney. "Fifteen hundred years ago everybody knew the Earth was the center of the universe. Five hundred years ago, everybody knew the Earth was flat, and fifteen minutes ago, you knew that humans were alone on this planet. Imagine what you'll know tomorrow." - Agent K At the beginning of the 20th century, many scientists believed that just about all knowledge of the physical world had been obtained...oops. There were no eye witnesses to creationism or evolution. There are no videos, pictures, written accounts by persons in attendance, etc. There will always be reasonable doubt. Neither can be reproduced or demonstrated before me. I see no reason to say anything has been proven beyond any kind of doubt. I doubt we have any clue how we got here. Give it another few hundred years and see what happens. I've studied enough history to know that even things that should be objective fact are interpreted by historians, viewed through personal prisms and argued hotly. How much more so when the subject is an unprovable theory on events that came to pass before time began as we know it? People who question things do not worry me nearly as much as people who 'know' things beyond all reasonable doubt. Religious zealots 'know' things beyond all reasonable doubt. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

We like being able to take care of ourselves as individuals. It was written into our constitution and some of us still like it that way. It's kind of insulting to your country that you refer to a constitution written 225 years ago implying that nothing has changed in our society. Really shows a lack of evolution IMHO. Nothing has changed that suggests individuals should give up their right to protect themselves and others. Our Founding Fathers had just finished fighting to overthrow an unjust government. They wanted future generations to retain that ability. They understood that any government held the potential for tyranny. They studied government long and hard and gave us some enduring foundational principles that transcended simple changes in society. They did pretty good. You present no reasoning to suggest changes are needed other than your snide comments. Feel free to keep up the snide comments with no logical support. They confirm for me that my logical positions are sound. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

The word fair has become a hot button for me. My flags go up whenever I hear it. I hear Indigo Montoya saying, "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." 'Fair' when used by politicians seems to mean: To take from those who earned and give to those who keep me in power. 'Fair' when used by voters seems to mean: I want something you have. Just my observation. Personally, I have yet to hear an explanation of why a flat income tax is not 'fair'. Everyone is invested. Those who earn little, pay little. Those who earn much, pay much. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

That's a non-sequitur and just insulting. You are saying that if people don't think like you, they don't think. Most scientists throughout history firmly believed in God and creationism. Research Sir Isaac Newton. The guy was so devoted to his church that he missed Sunday services once in his life, by order of the Queen. He clearly considered his research merely exploring God's laws and creation. According to you, Sir Isaac Newton was incapable of understanding basic science. Gregor Mendel (Father of Modern Genetics) was a Friar. What do you think he believed? Do you think he was incapable of grasping basic science? Want to take a quick peek into Thomas Jefferson's story? Was he also scientifically illiterate? Like I said...non-sequitur. But it does show an interesting and illogical bias on your part. I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.