Worst Posts

User avatar
Posted by Cedarswamp
23 Sep 2016, 3:19 pm

Cedarswamp Cannonpointer's Internet Barrister
User avatar
Cannonpointer's Internet Barrister

Posts: 16449
onlyaladd » 23 Sep 2016 1:59 pm wrote:
Candy was right. Romney was lying.

Candy disagrees with you....


Ya fucking moron. :rofl:

User avatar
Posted by Obummerstinks
23 Sep 2016, 4:12 pm

User avatar

Posts: 9001
Cannonpointer » 23 Sep 2016 3:11 pm wrote:
She's trying to tar his unborn son - a son who would not be born for another 20+ YEARS - with the same klan brush she withholds from hitlery, who is ON RECORD blowing MULTIPLE grand wizards!

The cognitive dissonance is cognitively dissonant! :omg:

Dagnabit CP.....we're only on page 4 of TrumpsBitch latest tribute thread, and you come in and destroy with $)%^*_# facts. You coulda at least waited till she lost her mind and went postal with cartoons.

User avatar
Posted by Kobia2
23 Sep 2016, 4:40 pm

Post 23 Sep 2016, 4:40 pm
User avatar

Posts: 8699
Misty » 22 Sep 2016 7:26 pm wrote:
She's also a stripper.


300lbs of rancid mozzarella--- divided by a strand of dental floss....

User avatar
Posted by greatnpowerfuloz
24 Sep 2016, 4:15 am

Post 24 Sep 2016, 4:15 am
greatnpowerfuloz Moderator
User avatar

Posts: 14186
charles.thompson » 23 Sep 2016 8:23 pm wrote:
GeorgeWashington » 23 Sep 2016 8:13 pm wrote:
charles.thompson » 23 Sep 2016 7:55 pm wrote:

but a person who is familiar enough with neurology would consider it extremely likely that there is no experience after death. People who have debated with that tend to rely on such things as quantum entanglement and the brain interpreted as a receiver instead of a transmitter. I would say that the idea of life after death is more defensible than a belief in santa clause, but I'm still obviously not expecting to experience anything after death.

Why do you speak on behalf of neurologists?

Are you a neurologist?

How does neurology explain these experiences?

But that hypothesis still cannot account for people who report seeing, during their out-of-body experiences, what they could not have. Most commonly that’s an overhead view of their frantic medical teams. Parnia reports a 2001 case, in which a Dutch patient’s dentures were removed during cardiac arrest. When his nurses couldn’t find the dentures later, the patient was able to remind them where they were. Perhaps the most famous corroborated case, cited by Beauregard, is that of a migrant worker named Maria, whose story was documented by her critical care social worker, Kimberly Clark. The day after she had been resuscitated after cardiac arrest, Maria told Clark how she had been able to look down from the ceiling and left the OR. She found herself outside the hospital and spotted a tennis shoe on the ledge of the north side of the building’s third floor. She described it in detail. Maria, not surprisingly, wanted to know whether she had “really” seen the shoe, and asked Clark to go look.

Quite skeptical, Clark went where Maria sent her, and found the tennis shoe, just as she’d described it. “The only way she could have had such a perspective,” said Clark, “was if she had been floating right outside and at very close range to the tennis shoe.” It shouldn’t have been possible, as both Beauregard and Parnia point out. “The question becomes,” Parnia says, “how can people have conscious awareness when they’ve gone beyond the threshold of death?”


The scientific method requires such reports to be dismissed because...as has been shown on plenty of individual cases...the observations of the doctors were inaccurate because of their own bias (there is no objective measure to confirm their story)...and the phenomena is not reproducible.

Neurology suggests that the mind is almsot certainly a product of the brain because damage to the brain also damages the mind. In fact, it can be specific to the region of the brain that controls various processes that damage the same process in the mind. For example cannon pointers mind as expressed here suggests that he may have damage to his brochas area of the brain and regions that control abstract reasoning. Does t5hat mean his soul is also damaged? or is part of his soul also missing and will be reunited with him after death? Its difficult and awkward to consider such things.

And therein lies the bare reason for your faith, I suspect. Considering abstracts, pondering possibilities are only difficult and awkward for the close-minded religious. The rest of us do not find it that way at all.

And you are completely wrong in your first statement. The scientific method requires no such dismissal. Some SCIENTISTS, not the scientific method itself, have dismissed NDAs as a dying brain experience based only on what they know about the brain and the behavior of consciousness contained within. Of the former, much is known of its form and function. Of the latter, some is known, but not enough to dismiss NDAs as you suggest.

I'm sorry, but neither you nor the science you parade around here as if you own it get to dismiss the testimony of Maria and others by blathering on about brain function that doesn't explain how a thing that can't logically be seen IS seen while lying prone in a bed or by claiming the medical staff are biased on all occasions and that these events never happened.

That isn't how the scientific method works.

roadkill's Photo
Posted by roadkill
24 Sep 2016, 7:26 am


Posts: 16343
Quick Reply Button » 24 Sep 2016 7:20 am wrote:

why all these killings in liberal lands????

http://www.aol.com/article/news/2016/09 ... /21478417/

hispanic man???..legal or not?

Obama is flipping through his thesaurus as we post...just in case it turns out to be an Islamic terrorist.

User avatar
Posted by TheAmerican
24 Sep 2016, 8:27 am

User avatar

Posts: 22203
Quick Reply Button » 24 Sep 2016 7:20 am wrote:

why all these killings in liberal lands????

http://www.aol.com/article/news/2016/09 ... /21478417/

hispanic man???..legal or not?

Maybe you can call it yet another terrorist attack on osama hussein obama's watch?

User avatar
Posted by kfools
24 Sep 2016, 12:37 pm

Post 24 Sep 2016, 12:37 pm
User avatar

Posts: 656
Who thinks Hillary won't even show up?

Who thinks Trump will win even if he loses?

Who thinks Clinton will shape shift into the reptilian she is?

I predict Clinton will be on the defensive the entire debate and Donald will deflect most questions his way.

User avatar
Posted by Misty
24 Sep 2016, 3:13 pm

Misty Senior Moderator
User avatar
Senior Moderator

Posts: 19385
roadkill » 24 Sep 2016 3:05 pm wrote:
Misty » 24 Sep 2016 2:54 pm wrote:
This is the best I could do.
I dug this up from my old RichClem folder of images.
Damn, I almost wish he'd come back so I could use these pics again.

So what's inaccurate about that picture Misty?

You do bleat a lot and you are a sheep. :die:

What's inaccurate is that RichClem never fucked me.
He did however hump my leg a lot, much like you do.
As a matter of fact, you remind me a lot of him.
Are you his love child?


User avatar
Posted by Annoyed Liberall
23 Sep 2016, 1:10 pm

Annoyed Liberall Hot Little Twist
User avatar
Hot Little Twist

Posts: 31290
By Andy Borowitz
TOLEDO (The Borowitz Report)—At a campaign rally on Friday, Donald Trump warned that Hillary Clinton is scheming to “rig the debate by using facts” in their first televised face-off, on Monday.
“You just watch, folks,” Trump told supporters in Toledo, Ohio. “Crooked Hillary is going to slip in little facts all night long, and that’s how she’s going to try to rig the thing.”
“It’s a disgrace,” he added.
The billionaire drew a sharp contrast between himself and the former Secretary of State by claiming that his debate prep “involved no facts whatsoever.”
“I am taking a pledge not to use facts at the debate,” he said, raising his right hand. “I challenge Crooked Hillary to take that pledge.”
He also warned that unless CNN, which is hosting the debate, promises to forbid the use of facts, he might pull out of Monday’s contest. “I’m only going to debate if I’m treated fairly, and facts don’t treat me fairly,” he said.
At CNN, a spokesperson assured Trump that the network would do everything in its power to keep the debate “as free of facts as possible.”
“We have a well-established practice at CNN,” the spokesperson said. “If the candidates start straying into facts, data, or other verifiable information, we have instructed the moderators to cut them off.”

User avatar
Posted by nuckin futz
24 Sep 2016, 5:48 pm

nuckin futz       
User avatar

Posts: 15366
Thanks Misty!

You belong in the NHB Hall of FAME! :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

User avatar
Posted by Al Donal
24 Sep 2016, 8:49 pm

Al Donal      
User avatar

Posts: 1564
Cannonpointer » 24 Sep 2016 8:31 pm wrote:
Hitlery is too arrogant to bleach her asshole. We bleach our assholes to please others - and that cunt has no such interests.

Now you're inadvertently backing up Misty's claim that Hillary is a Brown Eyed Girl.


Independent's Photo
Posted by Independent
25 Sep 2016, 10:16 am

Post 25 Sep 2016, 10:16 am

Posts: 5596
roadkill » 25 Sep 2016 10:09 am wrote:

Apparently the MSM thinks they all look alike.

If the MSM had a Jeff Foxworthy he would say..."If you have brown skin, you might be a Hispanic".

Nah. I think the libral mantra goes "if you have brown skin, you must be a victim of white oppression"

CanuckleSandwich's Photo
Posted by CanuckleSandwich
25 Sep 2016, 8:12 am

Post 25 Sep 2016, 8:12 am

Posts: 7474
roadkill » 25 Sep 2016 8:10 am wrote:
CanuckleSandwich » 25 Sep 2016 8:05 am wrote:

America was built by criminal immigrants.

Without America, Canada would be wiped off the map.

By whom?

User avatar
Posted by golfboy
25 Sep 2016, 12:49 pm

User avatar

Posts: 51294
onlyaladd » 23 Sep 2016 1:33 pm wrote:

And you deplorables wonder why we think you are fucking idiots for supporting this lying pos. What a disgrace.

You want "fact checking" like that fat-assed Candy Crowley "fact checked" Romney.
Trouble is liberals don't know the facts.

Trump was right, Only is a lying sack of shit.
TRUMP: Well, I think he has to be a moderator. You’re debating somebody, and if she makes a mistake, or if I make a mistake, we’ll take each other on. But I certainly don’t think you want Candy Crowley again.

User avatar
Posted by Tiger
25 Sep 2016, 3:54 pm

Post 25 Sep 2016, 3:54 pm
User avatar

Posts: 3746
Catcher In The Rye » 25 Sep 2016 3:53 pm wrote:
pink does not compliment her ass at all

Oh ... that's what it is ... just couldn't put my finger on it.


User avatar
Posted by Tiger
25 Sep 2016, 4:08 pm

User avatar

Posts: 3746
I've always thought MLK JR was one of the greatest Americans to have ever lived. After the White racists said he was a communist I had to accept the fact that even communists can be good people.

User avatar
Posted by indago
08 Aug 2016, 5:48 am

Post 08 Aug 2016, 5:48 am
User avatar

Posts: 8081
indago » 03 Aug 2016 7:35 am wrote:
bigsky » 03 Aug 2016 6:20 am wrote:
indago » 03 Aug 2016 6:07 am wrote:
Journalist Alan Feuer wrote for The New York Times 2 August 2016:
Exonerations of wrongfully convicted people have become so routine in recent years that their stories are almost commonplace. We think we know the narrative: A defendant languishes in prison for a crime he did not commit; through tenacious legal work — or the magic of DNA tests — he is freed.

...Nearly 30 years ago, at 22, Mr. Harrell was arrested on suspicion of raping a teenage girl and later served four years in a New Jersey prison. But when he was released on parole, what amounted to his second sentence started: For the next two decades, he had to live with the restrictions of the state’s sex-offender statute, known as Megan’s Law.


He should be shot by cops


Well, here it is, several days gone by, and Ol' bigsky has not responded. And why am I not surprised...

User avatar
Posted by Henry_
25 Sep 2016, 5:18 pm

User avatar

Posts: 8502
Cannonpointer » 25 Sep 2016 2:57 pm wrote:

Hill and Bill, what a pair. With friends like these........
There are very good reasons BLM has not endorsed any politician, good on them.

User avatar
Posted by deezer shoove
25 Sep 2016, 8:43 pm

deezer shoove       
User avatar

Posts: 8607
Cannonpointer » 25 Sep 2016 3:51 pm wrote:
deezer shoove » 25 Sep 2016 2:22 pm wrote:

Sort of like a tattoo on the forehead: "diputs ma I".
A few discrete numbers on the inside of the arm is more than enough. :)

I knew a guy a few years back with those. He had two amazingly beautiful daughters.

No real connection, that just popped into my head.

But some material for you to work with:
He was tossing his cars keys to his daughters from a balcony in the old crappy house he called home.
His daughters watched him break through the railing and land face first onto the driveway.

He always had a pipe in his mouth. It was driven through and that was what killed him.
Right in front of his daughters.

After surviving all he had been through, cheap bastard let his house go to hell to save a buck.

User avatar
Posted by Al Donal
25 Sep 2016, 9:32 pm

Al Donal      
User avatar

Posts: 1564
Cannonpointer » 25 Sep 2016 9:28 pm wrote:
You joined the liars in characterizing those of us who are against the change you lobby for as being against fact checking per se.

People have an agenda when they lie - yours is obvious.

When you get all done characterizing us as being against fact checking, our answer remains no - we decline your agenda to change the format of our pResidential debates.

"Poopgate" "Pooperazzi"
You guys help me get through the Sunday Night Blues. Thanks.