scabby....so you can no longer claim "willful ignorance.....and will just be stupid if you continue........the root for reich is the latin "rex" meaning king.....after it was spoken through different barbarian dialects...it came out 'reich" yet there might be an older root before codified Latin , maybe Etruscan....eh scabby? but then the topic is Republican voter surpression something you are trying to divert attention from..........just a little dishonest...eh scabby?
http://en.wiktionary...wiki/Talk:Reich
0
52 replies to this topic
#41
-
- Members
-
- 7,864 posts
Hardcore Member
- Gender:Male
- Location:citizen of the world
- Interests:politics,fishing, shooting, campaign finance reform
Posted January 12 2012 - 11:56 AM
#42
-
- Members
-
- 5,844 posts
Hardcore Member
Posted January 12 2012 - 04:49 PM
-Farley-
I often wonder what's rattling around in that head of yours when you open your mouth.
In any case, perhaps you ought to read your own sources before you cite them in the future. Of course, it would be even better if you had a truly legitimate source to begin with, instead of a Wiki discussion...but we'll let that go for the time being.. In any case, just where did come up with the idea that "reich" derived from the Latin "rex"? Your "source" sure doesn't support such a position. What gives? Couldn't rustle-up a "school child" to support you? [smile]
H.m.m.m.m....could Farley have just made something UP???? And then, when he got called on it, tried to cover his butt by making something ELSE up???? FARLEY!?!?! Perish the thought!
You are what you are, "Farley". Deal with it.
-scb-
I often wonder what's rattling around in that head of yours when you open your mouth.
In any case, perhaps you ought to read your own sources before you cite them in the future. Of course, it would be even better if you had a truly legitimate source to begin with, instead of a Wiki discussion...but we'll let that go for the time being.. In any case, just where did come up with the idea that "reich" derived from the Latin "rex"? Your "source" sure doesn't support such a position. What gives? Couldn't rustle-up a "school child" to support you? [smile]
H.m.m.m.m....could Farley have just made something UP???? And then, when he got called on it, tried to cover his butt by making something ELSE up???? FARLEY!?!?! Perish the thought!
You are what you are, "Farley". Deal with it.
-scb-
#43
-
- Members
-
- 7,864 posts
Hardcore Member
- Gender:Male
- Location:citizen of the world
- Interests:politics,fishing, shooting, campaign finance reform
Posted January 13 2012 - 12:18 PM
remain stupid scabby. I really do not care ......remember your "stupid" will spill over onto all of your dishonest posts........as well as attempted deflections.......the subject is Republican Voter suppression.....eh scabby?
#44
-
- Members
-
- 5,844 posts
Hardcore Member
Posted January 13 2012 - 04:10 PM
-Farley-
My, what a pithy response! Run out of wiggle room, did ya'? Meanwhile, I'm left wondering; is "sorpression" a term with Latin roots as well? Think that's something I could find out from "any school child"? [smile]
Sorry, "Farley", but "the subject" at hand is your integrity....or rather your lack thereof. If you don't like it, then perhaps you shouldn't have brought it into play. You are what you are.
-scb-
My, what a pithy response! Run out of wiggle room, did ya'? Meanwhile, I'm left wondering; is "sorpression" a term with Latin roots as well? Think that's something I could find out from "any school child"? [smile]
Sorry, "Farley", but "the subject" at hand is your integrity....or rather your lack thereof. If you don't like it, then perhaps you shouldn't have brought it into play. You are what you are.
-scb-
#45
-
- Members
-
- 7,864 posts
Hardcore Member
- Gender:Male
- Location:citizen of the world
- Interests:politics,fishing, shooting, campaign finance reform
Posted January 16 2012 - 10:24 AM
no scabby. the subject is Republican Voter Suppression....and your dishonest attemptes to divert attention from it....so I made a typo....they can be corrected....but unless you own your dishonesty and apologize...you will be saddled with it forever....eh scabby?
and scabby, your dishonesty also has a romance root, namely Latin "honestus" with a heavy emphasis on the "dis" .........negating the "honestus" portion of the word that aptly describes scabby. by the way scabby....how about those goBPers and their attempt to keep people off the voter roles that might vote democratic? pretty crafty eh?
and scabby, your dishonesty also has a romance root, namely Latin "honestus" with a heavy emphasis on the "dis" .........negating the "honestus" portion of the word that aptly describes scabby. by the way scabby....how about those goBPers and their attempt to keep people off the voter roles that might vote democratic? pretty crafty eh?
#46
-
- Members
-
- 5,844 posts
Hardcore Member
Posted January 16 2012 - 12:50 PM
-Farley-
"Typo". Yeah, right. "Latin", "the top 30", "any" and "every" "schoolchild", etc, etc., were "typos". Understood. [smile]
As for "dishonest"....well, one can't help but note that any time something that is* "honest" and/or factual is brought into a discusion, the ethical cripple who calls himself "Farley" makes a self-absolving determination that it's a "diversion" or a "distraction", or some-such. Wonder why? [another "smile"] Is that the same type of logic that made manifest the determination that asking voters to positively identifiy themselves is an "attempt to keep people of [another "typo" we assume] the voter roles that might vote democratic?" Or that the INTOLERABLE burden of having citizens obtaining such identification in order to vote is a "crafty" act on the part of "goBPers" (a term that represents yet another "typo", one assumes) designed to keep DEMOCRATS away!. Golly Gee!!!
Beyond that, after your posts here on T-Net, you really don't want to get into a discussion that calls even more attention to your linguistic "abilities", do ya' guy?
Sorry, "Farley", but you are what you are. Deal with it.
-scb-
"Typo". Yeah, right. "Latin", "the top 30", "any" and "every" "schoolchild", etc, etc., were "typos". Understood. [smile]
As for "dishonest"....well, one can't help but note that any time something that is* "honest" and/or factual is brought into a discusion, the ethical cripple who calls himself "Farley" makes a self-absolving determination that it's a "diversion" or a "distraction", or some-such. Wonder why? [another "smile"] Is that the same type of logic that made manifest the determination that asking voters to positively identifiy themselves is an "attempt to keep people of [another "typo" we assume] the voter roles that might vote democratic?" Or that the INTOLERABLE burden of having citizens obtaining such identification in order to vote is a "crafty" act on the part of "goBPers" (a term that represents yet another "typo", one assumes) designed to keep DEMOCRATS away!. Golly Gee!!!
Beyond that, after your posts here on T-Net, you really don't want to get into a discussion that calls even more attention to your linguistic "abilities", do ya' guy?
Sorry, "Farley", but you are what you are. Deal with it.
-scb-
#47
-
- Members
-
- 7,864 posts
Hardcore Member
- Gender:Male
- Location:citizen of the world
- Interests:politics,fishing, shooting, campaign finance reform
Posted January 16 2012 - 03:32 PM
scabby.........son............ if you want to rant on a subject, start your own string....do not try to dishonestly hijack a string that has nothing to do with the dishonest diversions you are attempting..............I am what I am and that is the bright light that shines on cockroach scabby when he lies and sends scabby scurrying back into the shadows. Yes it is an intolerable burden requiring voters to get picture ID's an d then making it nearly impossible to comply with all the draconian requirements to obtain such an ID.....especially when voter fraud is virtually unknown....but election fraud is a main tenet of goBP election strategy....eh scabby?
#48
-
- Members
-
- 5,844 posts
Hardcore Member
Posted January 16 2012 - 07:21 PM
-Farley-
Yeah, you're the "bright light" alright [smile]. And no doubt people such as yourself are quite ready to proclaim that "voter fraud is virtually unknown". 'Course, such commentary is not of much comfort to responsible citizens, given that the individual offering it up (1) has proven to have very little true knowledge of much of anything, and (2) has shown himself time and time again to be one who thinks nothing of speaking "fraudulently" himself.
You are what you are, "Farley". As for your suggestion about "hijack[ing] your thread", sorry.... but when some bozo like you claims the things that you have ("every schoolchild", "socialism is not socialism", "the top 30 corporations pay no taxes", "Latin term", etc.), I think he ought to expect an interjection into his "thoughts" now and then. Translated into the sort of simple language that even a "Farley" ought to understand, it means that, if you're gonna' lie (or should one say "Farley"?) on a thread, you're probably going to get called on it as well.
Deal with it.
-scb-
Yeah, you're the "bright light" alright [smile]. And no doubt people such as yourself are quite ready to proclaim that "voter fraud is virtually unknown". 'Course, such commentary is not of much comfort to responsible citizens, given that the individual offering it up (1) has proven to have very little true knowledge of much of anything, and (2) has shown himself time and time again to be one who thinks nothing of speaking "fraudulently" himself.
You are what you are, "Farley". As for your suggestion about "hijack[ing] your thread", sorry.... but when some bozo like you claims the things that you have ("every schoolchild", "socialism is not socialism", "the top 30 corporations pay no taxes", "Latin term", etc.), I think he ought to expect an interjection into his "thoughts" now and then. Translated into the sort of simple language that even a "Farley" ought to understand, it means that, if you're gonna' lie (or should one say "Farley"?) on a thread, you're probably going to get called on it as well.
Deal with it.
-scb-
#49
-
- Members
-
- 217 posts
Member
Posted January 17 2012 - 01:43 AM
Governor Rick Perry (R-Texas) successfully names three departments he'd cut … just not the same three as before
You’ll very likely remember that, back in early November 2011, Perry was unable to remember one of the three departments he’d eliminate if elected president, ending his attempt with an “oops.”
Then, earlier this month, Perry garnered a round of applause when he was finally able to recall and name all three departments he’d do away with: Commerce, Education and Energy.
On a talkshow this week Perry was able to name three departments with ease… they just weren’t the same three he’d listed in January.
“Three right off the bat,” he began, “you know, Commerce, Interior and Energy are three that you think.”
A spokesperson for Perry, meanwhile, explained that it “shouldn’t be surprising the governor is talking about another federal agency that needs to be looked at and cut.” Or just cut ‘em all and let God sort them out.
http://www.mediaite....hree-as-before/
You’ll very likely remember that, back in early November 2011, Perry was unable to remember one of the three departments he’d eliminate if elected president, ending his attempt with an “oops.”
Then, earlier this month, Perry garnered a round of applause when he was finally able to recall and name all three departments he’d do away with: Commerce, Education and Energy.
On a talkshow this week Perry was able to name three departments with ease… they just weren’t the same three he’d listed in January.
“Three right off the bat,” he began, “you know, Commerce, Interior and Energy are three that you think.”
A spokesperson for Perry, meanwhile, explained that it “shouldn’t be surprising the governor is talking about another federal agency that needs to be looked at and cut.” Or just cut ‘em all and let God sort them out.
http://www.mediaite....hree-as-before/
xg21 is now xg22 due to brutal technical difficulties
#50
-
- Members
-
- 7,864 posts
Hardcore Member
- Gender:Male
- Location:citizen of the world
- Interests:politics,fishing, shooting, campaign finance reform
Posted January 17 2012 - 02:25 PM
scabby....yes every school child knows the "socialism" in "National Socialism aka The Nazi Party" has nothing to do with "socialism......and it is just another example of your dishonesty to promote such a fantasy......even you could not be that uninformed so it leaves just dishonesty. and you are further dishonest by inuendo regarding voter fraud....even a dunce mouthpiece like yourself knows that Rove had the US attornies fired because they could find no voter fraud and refused to fabricate cases....you know scabby....back to the topic....eh scabby?
#51
-
- Members
-
- 5,844 posts
Hardcore Member
Posted January 17 2012 - 03:30 PM
-Farley-
I've got this image of you pestering a bunch of third grade school girls.....and getting them ALL (as in "any" and "every") to tell you that.....
'"socialism" in "National Socialism aka The Nazi Party" has nothing to do with "socialism"'
That situation sound reasonable to you? Really? [smile]
N-o-o-o, YOU'RE not an unintelligent or dishonest person, are ya' "Farley"?!?!?! [place a BIG "grin" here]
-scb- (who's appalled at being so "uninformed" as to think that 1st Graders might not yet have obtained that peculiar "Farley knowledge" about world historical events like Nazism and Socialism and such)
I've got this image of you pestering a bunch of third grade school girls.....and getting them ALL (as in "any" and "every") to tell you that.....
'"socialism" in "National Socialism aka The Nazi Party" has nothing to do with "socialism"'
That situation sound reasonable to you? Really? [smile]
N-o-o-o, YOU'RE not an unintelligent or dishonest person, are ya' "Farley"?!?!?! [place a BIG "grin" here]
-scb- (who's appalled at being so "uninformed" as to think that 1st Graders might not yet have obtained that peculiar "Farley knowledge" about world historical events like Nazism and Socialism and such)
#52
-
- Members
-
- 5,844 posts
Hardcore Member
Posted January 17 2012 - 03:38 PM
-Guys-
Got a general question here. "Farley" above maintains that "every school child knows the "socialism" in "National Socialism aka The Nazi Party" has nothing to do with "socialism". It dawned on me that perhaps a few of you might know school children, or even have one or two (or more) yourself. If so, could you relate to me their level of knowledge about the relative nature of Nazism and Socialism? I'm particularly interested in the younger crowd; those under ten years of age. "Farley" tells me that ANY and EVERY ONE of them will "know" what he "knows" about the subject. For some nebulous reason, I rather doubt that.
Anybody out there prepared to confirm his supposed observation? [smile]
Thanks in advance......
-scb-
Got a general question here. "Farley" above maintains that "every school child knows the "socialism" in "National Socialism aka The Nazi Party" has nothing to do with "socialism". It dawned on me that perhaps a few of you might know school children, or even have one or two (or more) yourself. If so, could you relate to me their level of knowledge about the relative nature of Nazism and Socialism? I'm particularly interested in the younger crowd; those under ten years of age. "Farley" tells me that ANY and EVERY ONE of them will "know" what he "knows" about the subject. For some nebulous reason, I rather doubt that.
Anybody out there prepared to confirm his supposed observation? [smile]
Thanks in advance......
-scb-
#53
-
- Members
-
- 5,844 posts
Hardcore Member
Posted January 17 2012 - 04:45 PM
-Guys-
The links below might hint anecdotally as to just why requiring proper identification to vote might not be the "intolerable burden" those of the "Farley" persuasion insist it is. They are....
http://www.saratogia...06093051238.txt
....and....
http://www.timesunio...roy-2429705.php
That said, I think the links might also generate some thoughts as to just WHY folks like "Farley" don't cotton to the idea of voter I.D.....and why they might find the "burdensome" concept "intolerable" [smile]
-scb-
The links below might hint anecdotally as to just why requiring proper identification to vote might not be the "intolerable burden" those of the "Farley" persuasion insist it is. They are....
http://www.saratogia...06093051238.txt
....and....
http://www.timesunio...roy-2429705.php
That said, I think the links might also generate some thoughts as to just WHY folks like "Farley" don't cotton to the idea of voter I.D.....and why they might find the "burdensome" concept "intolerable" [smile]
-scb-
