Forum Replies Created

Viewing 30 posts - 691 through 720 (of 806 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Would you kill 6.5 Billion people ? #32851
    TSRF
    Participant

    OK, here’s my play.

    I stick with the Angel of Death kill the first born male, but make it retroactive through time.

    That means Cain dies before he can kill Abel. That also stops this whole mess:

    Cain made love to his wife, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Enoch. Cain was then building a city, and he named it after his son Enoch. 18 To Enoch was born Irad, and Irad was the father of Mehujael, and Mehujael was the father of Methushael, and Methushael was the father of Lamech.

    19 Lamech married two women, one named Adah and the other Zillah. 20 Adah gave birth to Jabal; he was the father of those who live in tents and raise livestock. 21 His brother’s name was Jubal; he was the father of all who play stringed instruments and pipes. 22 Zillah also had a son, Tubal-Cain, who forged all kinds of tools out of[g] bronze and iron. Tubal-Cain’s sister was Naamah.

    Also, Abel was a “keeper of flocks” i.e., a sheep fucker. No children. No human race. No overpopulation. Problem solved.

    in reply to: Feel the Bern #32718
    TSRF
    Participant

    Did you happen to see Larry David doing Bernie on SNL? I saw it live (not there, but on my TV when it was being broadcast) and I almost peed my pants.

    I wish Bernie well, but I think he has too much common decency to survive a national run.

    in reply to: Would you kill 6.5 Billion people ? #32717
    TSRF
    Participant

    I’d start with all the first born males, unless their house was marked with the blood of a rams coach…

    Then I’d kill God. But then the game would end because I was dead.

    in reply to: Wow, how thunk that? (Seattle game reaction thread) #30342
    TSRF
    Participant

    When was the last time you saw the Rams lose the turnover battle but win the game?

    in reply to: Will the Rams beat Seattle? #30249
    TSRF
    Participant

    I have a bad feeling about this game. But then again, I had a good feeling about the Yankees vs. Blue Jays today, and my Yankees are losing 6-0…

    in reply to: Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation #28097
    TSRF
    Participant

    We saw MI today. Some movies are just meant to be seen on the big screen. This is one of them. LOTS of action. I agree with PA that this was Simon Pegg’s best MI movie (but “Paul” is still my favorite of his movies).

    I liked Baldwin in the movie too, but he should have stayed a hard ass through it all.

    I won’t be in favor to order it on PPV, because it will lose so much pop going small screen from big screen, but I’ll probably be out-voted…

    in reply to: Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation #28051
    TSRF
    Participant

    OK, so today is going to be our Freeport / movie / BBQ day (showers and storms today).

    We are going to see MI, but as I was looking, the movie I really want to see is Mr. Holmes. Has anybody seen it (it isn’t playing at the theater we’re going to, but I’d like to see it when I’m back in CT)?

    in reply to: Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation #28021
    TSRF
    Participant

    Very North tip of Popham by the fort? The island look familiar.

    We always pull in to the parking lot and go to the left side of the beach. Away from Fox Island, but that’s where the big waves live (and today was an excellent wave day).

    I think my kids are hooked and are even planning / plotting how they will take their families here (we’ve got some time; 19 and 15…).

    in reply to: Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation #28019
    TSRF
    Participant

    Thanks for the review, PA!

    We’re on our yearly Maine beach vacation (Reid yesterday, Popham today) and we usually have at least one rainy day where we go to the movies. This week, it looks like it is going to be beautiful all week, but we’ll need at least a day away from the sun. Probably Wednesday, maybe Thursday. After Freeport, before Beale St BBQ in Bath.

    in reply to: 11 American nations #27602
    TSRF
    Participant

    We, the residents of New Netherland call it “Tri-State”. And we claim all of Long Island too.

    -Tri-State Rams Fan

    in reply to: Disturbing yet compelling #27551
    TSRF
    Participant

    ”If you ask me today why I sculpt – I’ll answer its because sculpting a person or feeling helps me understand them – and I can get the most true portrait of them by losing myself in squishing the clay. But tomorrow I’ll tell you that the truth is that i feel most alive when i’m sculpting. And the day after I’ll tell you that I sculpt because I love the connection that happens when people talk to me about one of the figures. So any words I give you today are only good for today…. and when I read them tomorrow I’ll probably cringe and go “wow, what a dork!””

    Pat Lillich

    in reply to: So, How 'Bout that Bernie Sanders? #27401
    TSRF
    Participant

    I’ll bite. What’s the HOA, Mac?

    in reply to: 101 — ‘99 Rams would beat the ‘85 Bears #27329
    TSRF
    Participant

    Of course the 99 Rams. The PED’s were much more refined by then.

    TSRF
    Participant

    The 12th man…

    in reply to: possible a spring league is coming? #27276
    TSRF
    Participant

    Hope not. Hockey is my Spring sport/

    in reply to: The Climate Deception Dossiers #27274
    TSRF
    Participant

    I can’t speak for anybody else, but this just confirmed (in my reality tunnel) what I always suspected.

    The way I see it, it was very similar to the way Big Tobacco reacted to the cancer risk.

    Yes, I’m outraged, yes, it pisses me off, but instead of a “Grab the pitchforks” reaction, I just kind of went, “Yep, that’s what the fuckers do.”

    TSRF
    Participant

    Excerpts from here:

    http://www.people-press.org/2011/04/08/civil-war-at-150-still-relevant-still-divisive/

    About a quarter of all whites (24%) consider themselves Southerners; 75% do not.

    Nearly half of self-described Southern whites (49%) see states’ rights as the war’s main cause; among whites who do not consider themselves Southerners, a comparable percentage (48%) also says states’ rights was the war’s main cause. However, self-described Southern whites are more likely than other whites to view praise by politicians for Confederate leaders as appropriate and to have a positive reaction to displays of the Confederate flag.

    Hard to imagine an unbiased poll of “all Americans” would find 56% in favor of allowing the starts and bars on plates when only 25% of all white males consider themselves Southerners.

    I agree the media has their own agenda, but EVERYTHING you read ANYWHERE needs to be taken with a very large grain of salt…

    I here the family stirring, I have to think about more interesting issues, like “What’s for breakfast”?

    TSRF
    Participant

    I stand with the 70%

    MSNBC is 100% biased, as is Fox News. They are both blatantly biased, but it is there in the Network news and USA McPaper too.

    One question I have, where was the survey, which states it represents all Americans done?

    This “factoid” in particular:

    35 percent say the government “should be allowed to deny issuing license plates to a group who intends to display a Confederate flag on the plates,” while 56 percent oppose the idea.

    Somehow, I don’t see much support at all for the Confederate flag anywhere except in ex-confederate states.

    So, it appears the article itself is biased…

    in reply to: Gaining steam- States Rights #26967
    TSRF
    Participant

    “Only 20% now consider the federal government a protector of individual liberty. Sixty percent (60%) see the government as a threat to individual liberty instead.”

    Says who? Rasputin Reports??

    Come on, you need to do better than that if you want to argue this point here.

    Let’s just for a minute think what it would be like if the states had full rights to make their own laws. Are you living in a state where you would be OK with that? Personally, living in New England, I’d be OK with that, but I think it would be a horrible injustice for the majority of people living below the Mason / Dixon line, and for lots more living in all directions of said line.

    in reply to: Always a hard day #26927
    TSRF
    Participant

    Mac, Zooey, SD, I grieve with you, one father to another.

    in reply to: RIP my sister Carol #26772
    TSRF
    Participant

    Zack, my sincere condolences.

    Matt

    in reply to: Rams defense seeking fast start, consistency in 2015 #26729
    TSRF
    Participant

    But then, and maybe it’s me, there’s that other quality too.

    I am not quite putting my finger on it

    He’s a dick?

    in reply to: Speaking of gun control #26675
    TSRF
    Participant

    Thanks, Waterfield.

    We all watched it.

    I laughed until I cried.

    in reply to: Why didn't Sandy Hook change anything? #26590
    TSRF
    Participant

    Here, here, PA.

    I agree with everything in your post, as do the majority of people in this country.

    The old get old and the young gets stronger
    May take a week and it may take longer
    They got the guns but we got the numbers
    Gonna win, yeah, we’re takin’ over, come on!

    in reply to: Why didn't Sandy Hook change anything? #26321
    TSRF
    Participant

    Apparently I’m not the only one this subject hit a nerve with. ZN, thank you for running interference here for me, but I’m not offended by any of the debate; in fact, I welcome it. I think it is important to know how others feel, and why they feel that way. I (and you, and PA, and VW, and X) can’t get our heads wrapped around why a ban on assault rifles is so controversial, so it is good to here from others with differing opinions.

    As I kind of said already, I have ideals, and hopes and dreams, but I’d like to think I’m also a realist.

    I’m not very optimistic about where we are going as a country; guns, no jobs, next stock market crash, Israel, Russia, etc.

    Buckle your seat belts…

    in reply to: Why didn't Sandy Hook change anything? #26275
    TSRF
    Participant

    Sorry, I’m done with this thread. Shouldn’t have gone here; still too raw.

    My daughter, the light of my life, had several anxiety attacks at school in Boston. Walking down Commonwealth Ave, she looked up at church steeples and imagined what would happen if there was a shooter up there.

    I died a bit, when I heard this. She is in therapy and is making progress, but it is baby steps.

    I sincerely hope nobody else here has to deal with what me and mine are dealing with, but as long as a “rights” line is drawn in the sand, sorry bitches, get the front row seats on the hayride to Hell…

    • This reply was modified 9 years, 5 months ago by TSRF.
    in reply to: Why didn't Sandy Hook change anything? #26264
    TSRF
    Participant

    I don’t think anybody on my side of this discussion wants to repeal the 2nd Amendment. We’re idealists, but also realists.
    I just want to get assault rifles banned. I’m sure there would be a grandfather clause, where they aren’t going to come and take your AK out of your cold, dead hands, but how in the wide world of sports can you claim a ban on additional sales of assault rifles is taking away one of your “rights”? (Speaking of rights, have you heard of this little thing known as the Patriot Act??).

    I didn’t plan on starting an argument, just wanted to make my initial comment. After seeing what one sick fuck with an assault rifle can do, I fear that somebody with a similar weapon can take my children from me. This is the waking nightmare I and lots of my town folk have every fucking day.

    in reply to: Why didn't Sandy Hook change anything? #26233
    TSRF
    Participant

    Really? How about people are tired of having their brothers and mothers and daughters and friends taken away by bullets from guns.

    In the spirit in which “the right to bear arms” was written, any American should be able to have a single shot rifle. Not a fucking AR-15.

    TSRF
    Participant

    Foles will have a good year because he is now going to be allowed to be a game manager, not a gunslinger. I think his years as a gunslinger will make him a better game manager and he will have several opportunities per game to throw the surprise long bomb (he may not do it, but if the ground game is going good, he’ll have the opportunities).

    I think Bradford will also have a good year, getting back to a more wide open offence where he can let it rip.

    Horses for courses.

    TSRF
    Participant

    Am I the only one to see the obvious?

    Johnny Fucking Hekker!!!!!

    Already elite. Only going to get better (with his arm, not his leg).

Viewing 30 posts - 691 through 720 (of 806 total)