Have you been fucked out of doing anything you wanted to do by this fake coronavirus hysteria

There's no use talking to a guy who is so high on himself that he can't see whats around him. He's just going to come back, and keep coming back, and keep screwing over waitresses, and he's going to be that customer that nobody wants to deal with for probably the rest of his life. People will scoff at him and say, "stuck in his ways". Bitter man who thinks he knows everything, but in reality everyone looks at each other when he walks out the door and raises an eyebrow to their partner as if to say, "... wow, what's up with him? Screw that guy".

He will die old and bitter. The waitress will move onto hopefully a better job.

What he did is done, there isn't any point in trying to tell him what he did was fucked up if he doesn't see HOW fucked up what he did already was.

You can bring a horse to water - you can teach a man to fish. But you can't teach an old dog new tricks. Originally Posted by valkyra

Oh no

You dont resemble any of Thise traits . Thank God

Oh no

You dont resemble any of Thise traits . Thank God Originally Posted by JONBALLS

Exhibit A

Exhibit A Originally Posted by valkyra

Oh no

Not passing your screening sweet heart?

And....none of the rest of you even reacted. Whew. I know it's a hook board, but still....ain't none of you ever worked that job? Or have any of your kids worked it?

Idiots like me and woody and stewie and nbt deserve what we get on here.

But a waitress in a restaurant who is doing her job doesn't deserve what he did.

She is no doubt used to cheapskates fucking her over all the time. But his rationale was absurd. And blatantly unfair to her. Fuck that.

. Originally Posted by rooster

You’re right. I thought you did a more than thorough job of reacting to his statement, and I ‘Liked’ your post, but I should have responded as well.

As long as I get decent service, I usually tip 30-50 percent at a restaurant. I’m also the guy that often pays for the car behind me when I go through the drive thru. It’s so easy to do something nice for another person that could make them feel a little special for the rest of the day.

A surcharge wouldn’t register with me. 4% on a hundred dollar bill is what? Less than a glass of wine?!? Much less than what my employer pays me when I take a leak on their time. Who gives a fuck?!?I can’t understand the justification for stiffing anyone over that. If I was upset, I would direct my issue to the manager. I don’t try to hold the innocent accountable for things they did not do or things they cannot change.

The one thing that sometimes bothers me is the thought that someday I will do something nice to someone who really doesn’t deserve it.

But your response was spot effin on.

We all have to choose our own battles. 10 posts go by that you might disagree with, but sometimes it's better to let some slide because you can't fight them all. It can be fun sparring with another user if each side can be objective and respect that other side is just as passionate in their views as you are, and that it isn't personal. We can have opposing views but still be civil with one another and respect each others humanity. Its better to attack the ideology and not the person imo. It doesn't always go that way though, and both sides lose when that happens.

It can be fun sparring with another user if each side can be objective Originally Posted by Willie Wanker

You provided three sources. One was from the Cato Institute, a libertarian think-tank created by one of the Koch brothers. Another was from an author who is regularly published in The Federalist, a conservative publication that published an article recommending that people hold Chicken-pox style parties for the “Wuhan virus” (which is how they refer to COVID-19) indicating this person was an MD, when the author had no such degree and had his article had been turned down many other news sources before finally being accepted at The Federalist.

And yes, one of your sources was a repository of documents collected by a public university that was probably less skewed and fairly objective, but there was no content there which supported your specific argument.

So, no, you aren’t really being objective. Perhaps you believe you are, but what you are actually bringing to the table is not objectivity. One part of being objective is being able to distance yourself from your personal opinions, views, and perspectives. You’ve made a comment about “getting back to the trenches”; this just kind of sounds like you’re more about the “fight” itself than what it was about, and you have no interest in approaching this with an active mind. (Yes, I used “active mind” where most would say “open mind”. And if you understand the difference, then you realize I am far from a liberal).

My bet is you’ve never been anywhere close to being involved with federally-funded research grants, which is the specific portion of this topic that I criticized your statements on. You are questioning the integrity of something you’ve shown to lack an understanding of. As others have pointed out, there are systems of checks and balances (ex university oversight, peer review) established, that you seem oblivious to.

When you make pot-shot comments about something that you’ve probably read from a right-leaning source of information (based on your supporting articles) questioning the integrity of a system where a significant amount of effort and resources is expended just to maintain that integrity, you should expect a strong response.

And if you do this for entertainment purposes, then that’s just regretful.

Valkyra was right, this is not fun. You think you’re right because something you’ve read in a right-wing conspiracy rag, and I know I’m right because I’ve actually been involved in the process and have a solid understanding of how it works and it’s internal check and balance systems. Let’s leave it at that.

This likely won't make a lot of sense as I cannot copy the quote peckerhead made of me but....the "outta here" comment was meant in regards to moving out of the area. I no longer live in Upset.



. Originally Posted by rooster

You certainly know how to copy and paste, "ole roo". It's easier to lie about what you meant by saying you can't copy it.



"One month, boyz. Then I'm outta this shithole.

And I promise I will stop hassling you all."


I can take a punch just fine and I don't pay for CBJ's. I'm just getting my fill of guys like you who hide behind the use of multiple handles and have conversations with yourselves.

You provided three sources. One was from the Cato Institute, a libertarian think-tank created by one of the Koch brothers. Another was from an author who is regularly published in The Federalist, a conservative publication that published an article recommending that people hold Chicken-pox style parties for the “Wuhan virus” (which is how they refer to COVID-19) indicating this person was an MD, when the author had no such degree and had his article had been turned down many other news sources before finally being accepted at The Federalist.

And yes, one of your sources was a repository of documents collected by a public university that was probably less skewed and fairly objective, but there was no content there which supported your specific argument.

So, no, you aren’t really being objective. Perhaps you believe you are, but what you are actually bringing to the table is not objectivity. One part of being objective is being able to distance yourself from your personal opinions, views, and perspectives. You’ve made a comment about “getting back to the trenches”; this just kind of sounds like you’re more about the “fight” itself than what it was about, and you have no interest in approaching this with an active mind. (Yes, I used “active mind” where most would say “open mind”. And if you understand the difference, then you realize I am far from a liberal).

My bet is you’ve never been anywhere close to being involved with federally-funded research grants, which is the specific portion of this topic that I criticized your statements on. You are questioning the integrity of something you’ve shown to lack an understanding of. As others have pointed out, there are systems of checks and balances (ex university oversight, peer review) established, that you seem oblivious to.

When you make pot-shot comments about something that you’ve probably read from a right-leaning source of information (based on your supporting articles) questioning the integrity of a system where a significant amount of effort and resources is expended just to maintain that integrity, you should expect a strong response.

And if you do this for entertainment purposes, then that’s just regretful.

Valkyra was right, this is not fun. You think you’re right because something you’ve read in a right-wing conspiracy rag, and I know I’m right because I’ve actually been involved in the process and have a solid understanding of how it works and it’s internal check and balance systems. Let’s leave it at that. Originally Posted by Gdubya110

My comment regarding back to the trenches was making light of the battle going on within the entire thread. Not just our little disagreement. Irregardless of who's right or wrong there's still a better way to hash it out than to throw in the personal insults, it's unnecessary and only causes more bitterness from the person that you're trying to convince.

My last reply wasn't directed at you in particular. It was meant for both sides. When I say I enjoy the sparring, I like the back and forth of a spirited debate, but not a war to see who can inflict the most damage. I don't believe the last article that I sent was conspiracy material. Perhaps I misspoke when I said "predetermined outcomes", I'll give that. "a history of fraud" would have been a more accurate statement. Knowing that you're in the field does makes a difference. I'm okay to leave it at that.

btw: I thought you were an alias account for another user, but I've since learned that isn't the case, sorry for any confusion that might have caused.

Great to see all the interest in what motivates and what does not motivate Next Best Thing from virtue signaling whores as well as male lesbians.

Thanks ladies.

You certainly know how to copy and paste, "ole roo". It's easier to lie about what you meant by saying you can't copy it.



"One month, boyz. Then I'm outta this shithole.

And I promise I will stop hassling you all."


I can take a punch just fine and I don't pay for CBJ's. I'm just getting my fill of guys like you who hide behind the use of multiple handles and have conversations with yourselves.
Originally Posted by woodywouldpekher

woody this is an extremely poor job of interpreting what your fellow democrat male lesbian blurted out.

i can't figure out how to embed this but this should be playing in the background of this thread



smash mouth - why can't we be friends?

i can't figure out how to embed this but this should be playing in the background of this thread

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z5OX...SmashMouthVEVO

smash mouth - why can't we be friends? Originally Posted by valkyra

www.youtube.com/watch?v=z5OXON8vIaA
all after the =. if 2= all after the 1st if I remember right
z5OXON8vIaA
then highlight and cclick or when in advanced reply




Im on a PC not sure if same on a Cell
your welcome Sir

I like the original by War better, but point well taken.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=z5OXON8vIaA
all after the =. if 2= all after the 1st if I remember right
z5OXON8vIaA
then highlight and cclick or when in advanced reply




Im on a PC not sure if same on a Cell
your welcome Sir Originally Posted by offshoredrilling

what she said...
thank you ma'am

I like the original by War better, but point well taken. Originally Posted by Willie Wanker

music and singing agree

video I like hers better

but I'm a pig and liked the lead singer smacking the waitress's ass's
LOL topic yes this BS has keep me from going out more and seeing which waitress's react well to a fanny whack to ask mmmm any takeout... And find her before the one that did not react well has ya kicked out