I go to meetings all the time and don't talk to everyone there. Does that mean we met? Verbs, nouns, tenses, whatnot.
While you may have me on a technicality Bob, my point remains that over the years most if not all Presidents have invited some less than savory folk to the Whitehouse in support of some cause.
I also cannot seem to find any images of Obama meeting with these people. Ludacris from 2012, Kendrick Lamar last year, but can't find those images...
Why is this particular "meeting" a big deal?
He invited Kendrick Lamar to the oval office last October and I seem to not recall any outrage. His most recent album was entitled "To Pimp a Butterfly."
Meanwhile this meeting involved "All of those invited have either been active in social-justice movements or have formed nonprofit organizations whose missions are in line with the goals of the organization."
I voted for Obama twice and agree with most of what he does. Shocker, I know, I'll give you a minute to catch your breath.
Got it?
Great, so sitting around agreeing with one another is boring. Surrounding yourself with people you agree with is dangerous. This place is just a big monotonous conservative circle-jerk. Someone has to stir the pot, I guess I'm it.
"I drink a great deal. I sleep a little, and I smoke cigar after cigar. That is why I am in two-hundred-percent form." -- Winston Churchill "LET'S GO FRANCIS" Peter
I haven't agreed with most of what any president has done since Reagan. Even then I scratch my head on some things. Sadly my entire voting experience has been pulling the lever for the less evil.
Elvis/Nixon, I thought Elvis showed up to volunteer to be a drug agent of some kind. He had a collection of badges, not the ones we get here, and wanted a federal agent badge too. Could be wrong.
Speaking of just showing up, did you know Springsteen jumped the wall at Graceland to see Elvis? Made it halfway up the lawn. Notice how I connected that from my last post?
pelirrojo said:Someone has to stir the pot, I guess I'm it.
No, that would be me. I don't see how you can have democracy without spirited debate. Thanks for sticking your oar in.
If you don't stand for something, you will fall for anything.
“It has been a source of great pain to me to have met with so many among [my] opponents who had not the liberality to distinguish between political and social opposition; who transferred at once to the person, the hatred they bore to his political opinions.” —Thomas Jefferson (1808)
I go to meetings all the time and don't talk to everyone there. Does that mean we met? Verbs, nouns, tenses, whatnot.
While you may have me on a technicality Bob, my point remains that over the years most if not all Presidents have invited some less than savory folk to the Whitehouse in support of some cause.
I also cannot seem to find any images of Obama meeting with these people. Ludacris from 2012, Kendrick Lamar last year, but can't find those images...
Why is this particular "meeting" a big deal?
He invited Kendrick Lamar to the oval office last October and I seem to not recall any outrage. His most recent album was entitled "To Pimp a Butterfly."
Meanwhile this meeting involved "All of those invited have either been active in social-justice movements or have formed nonprofit organizations whose missions are in line with the goals of the organization."
So I ask, what is the outrage about?
"I go to meetings all the time and don't talk to everyone there. Does that mean we met? Verbs, nouns, tenses, whatnot."
Well then, if that's how ya' figure, I actually met Mick Jagger and the rest of the Rolling Stones. Me and about 40 thousand other people "met" them that night.
"While you may have me on a technicality Bob, my point remains that over the years most if not all Presidents have invited some less than savory folk to the Whitehouse in support of some cause."
A technicality? BS. You said they met. Apparently, you're wrong.
"I also cannot seem to find any images of Obama meeting with these people. Ludacris from 2012, Kendrick Lamar last year, but can't find those images..."
Just a quick little search.Here they are in case you need them.
"Why is this particular "meeting" a big deal?"
To Me? It isn't. You pointed to this particular "meeting" in your comparison and since (apparently) no meeting took place, I just couldn't resist pointing that out. It was quite enjoyable.
"He invited Kendrick Lamar to the oval office last October and I seem to not recall any outrage. His most recent album was entitled "To Pimp a Butterfly."
Meanwhile this meeting involved "All of those invited have either been active in social-justice movements or have formed nonprofit organizations whose missions are in line with the goals of the organization."
So I ask, what is the outrage about?"
Me? Outraged? No. Please do not assign emotion or motives upon me. No thank you sir. If I'm so inclined, I'll be the one to declare if I'm outraged, not you.
Does everybody think I'm grumpy? Sorry. While reading my words, try imagining them being spoken in the voice of Grover from Sesame Street. Everyone should try that. Maybe that will help.
Elvis/Nixon, I thought Elvis showed up to volunteer to be a drug agent of some kind. He had a collection of badges, not the ones we get here, and wanted a federal agent badge too. Could be wrong.
Speaking of just showing up, did you know Springsteen jumped the wall at Graceland to see Elvis? Made it halfway up the lawn. Notice how I connected that from my last post?
I go to meetings all the time and don't talk to everyone there. Does that mean we met? Verbs, nouns, tenses, whatnot.
While you may have me on a technicality Bob, my point remains that over the years most if not all Presidents have invited some less than savory folk to the Whitehouse in support of some cause.
I also cannot seem to find any images of Obama meeting with these people. Ludacris from 2012, Kendrick Lamar last year, but can't find those images...
Why is this particular "meeting" a big deal?
He invited Kendrick Lamar to the oval office last October and I seem to not recall any outrage. His most recent album was entitled "To Pimp a Butterfly."
Meanwhile this meeting involved "All of those invited have either been active in social-justice movements or have formed nonprofit organizations whose missions are in line with the goals of the organization."
So I ask, what is the outrage about?
"I go to meetings all the time and don't talk to everyone there. Does that mean we met? Verbs, nouns, tenses, whatnot."
Well then, if that's how ya' figure, I actually met Mick Jagger and the rest of the Rolling Stones. Me and about 40 thousand other people "met" them that night.
"While you may have me on a technicality Bob, my point remains that over the years most if not all Presidents have invited some less than savory folk to the Whitehouse in support of some cause."
A technicality? BS. You said they met. Apparently, you're wrong.
"I also cannot seem to find any images of Obama meeting with these people. Ludacris from 2012, Kendrick Lamar last year, but can't find those images..."
Just a quick little search.Here they are in case you need them.
"Why is this particular "meeting" a big deal?"
To Me? It isn't. You pointed to this particular "meeting" in your comparison and since (apparently) no meeting took place, I just couldn't resist pointing that out. It was quite enjoyable.
"He invited Kendrick Lamar to the oval office last October and I seem to not recall any outrage. His most recent album was entitled "To Pimp a Butterfly."
Meanwhile this meeting involved "All of those invited have either been active in social-justice movements or have formed nonprofit organizations whose missions are in line with the goals of the organization."
So I ask, what is the outrage about?"
Me? Outraged? No. Please do not assign emotion or motives upon me. No thank you sir. If I'm so inclined, I'll be the one to declare if I'm outraged, not you.
Does everybody think I'm grumpy? Sorry. While reading my words, try imagining them being spoken in the voice of Grover from Sesame Street. Everyone should try that. Maybe that will help.
Met is the past tense of meet. Meeting shares the same root and is defined as "a coming to gether of two or more people by chance or arrangement." If people attend a meeting, they met. Easy-E did infact attend a meeting with President Bush. This is fact. I didn't create the language, I just speak it.
When I refer to Obama meeting "these people" I am referring to the people mentioned in the original post. I too have google and found that picture of Ludacris from 2012 and Kendrick Lamar from 2015. I said it right there in my post. I cannot find any pictures of the people in the the original post meeting with the President. Sorry that wasn't very clear the way I worded it.
The meeting I am referring to when I ask why is it a big deal is again the one mentioned in the original post of this thread not Easy-E.
Again, asking about outrage generally. Not referring to you specifically.
I'm glad you enjoyed correcting me. The highlight of your day I'm sure.
If there's anything else I can clear up for you, just let me know.
I go to meetings all the time and don't talk to everyone there. Does that mean we met? Verbs, nouns, tenses, whatnot.
While you may have me on a technicality Bob, my point remains that over the years most if not all Presidents have invited some less than savory folk to the Whitehouse in support of some cause.
I also cannot seem to find any images of Obama meeting with these people. Ludacris from 2012, Kendrick Lamar last year, but can't find those images...
Why is this particular "meeting" a big deal?
He invited Kendrick Lamar to the oval office last October and I seem to not recall any outrage. His most recent album was entitled "To Pimp a Butterfly."
Meanwhile this meeting involved "All of those invited have either been active in social-justice movements or have formed nonprofit organizations whose missions are in line with the goals of the organization."
So I ask, what is the outrage about?
"I go to meetings all the time and don't talk to everyone there. Does that mean we met? Verbs, nouns, tenses, whatnot."
Well then, if that's how ya' figure, I actually met Mick Jagger and the rest of the Rolling Stones. Me and about 40 thousand other people "met" them that night.
"While you may have me on a technicality Bob, my point remains that over the years most if not all Presidents have invited some less than savory folk to the Whitehouse in support of some cause."
A technicality? BS. You said they met. Apparently, you're wrong.
"I also cannot seem to find any images of Obama meeting with these people. Ludacris from 2012, Kendrick Lamar last year, but can't find those images..."
Just a quick little search.Here they are in case you need them.
"Why is this particular "meeting" a big deal?"
To Me? It isn't. You pointed to this particular "meeting" in your comparison and since (apparently) no meeting took place, I just couldn't resist pointing that out. It was quite enjoyable.
"He invited Kendrick Lamar to the oval office last October and I seem to not recall any outrage. His most recent album was entitled "To Pimp a Butterfly."
Meanwhile this meeting involved "All of those invited have either been active in social-justice movements or have formed nonprofit organizations whose missions are in line with the goals of the organization."
So I ask, what is the outrage about?"
Me? Outraged? No. Please do not assign emotion or motives upon me. No thank you sir. If I'm so inclined, I'll be the one to declare if I'm outraged, not you.
Does everybody think I'm grumpy? Sorry. While reading my words, try imagining them being spoken in the voice of Grover from Sesame Street. Everyone should try that. Maybe that will help.
Met is the past tense of meet. Meeting shares the same root and is defined as "a coming to gether of two or more people by chance or arrangement." If people attend a meeting, they met. Easy-E did infact attend a meeting with President Bush. This is fact. I didn't create the language, I just speak it.
When I refer to Obama meeting "these people" I am referring to the people mentioned in the original post. I too have google and found that picture of Ludacris from 2012 and Kendrick Lamar from 2015. I said it right there in my post. I cannot find any pictures of the people in the the original post meeting with the President. Sorry that wasn't very clear the way I worded it.
The meeting I am referring to when I ask why is it a big deal is again the one mentioned in the original post of this thread not Easy-E.
Again, asking about outrage generally. Not referring to you specifically.
I'm glad you enjoyed correcting me. The highlight of your day I'm sure.
If there's anything else I can clear up for you, just let me know.
Met is the past tense of meet. Meeting shares the same root and is defined as "a coming to gether of two or more people by chance or arrangement." If people attend a meeting, they met. Easy-E did infact attend a meeting with President Bush. This is fact. I didn't create the language, I just speak it.
BS. Again with the BS. You wrote that Bush 41 "met with" Easy-E. Plain and simple. Everybody knows what met means. Everybody knows it doesn't mean the same thing as being in the same room as 1400 other people. This really is the only thing I wanted to bug you with. I could assume you didn't even read the article you used to support your own comparison. I could assume if you had actually read it you wouldn't have used the term "met with". But, I shouldn't make assumptions. So I'll just ask you,.... did you read the article?
When I refer to Obama meeting "these people" I am referring to the people mentioned in the original post. I too have google and found that picture of Ludacris from 2012 and Kendrick Lamar from 2015. I said it right there in my post. I cannot find any pictures of the people in the the original post meeting with the President. Sorry that wasn't very clear the way I worded it.
OK, now I see what you meant to say.
The meeting I am referring to when I ask why is it a big deal is again the one mentioned in the original post of this thread not Easy-E.
OK, now I see what you meant to say.
Again, asking about outrage generally. Not referring to you specifically.
OK, now I see what you meant to say.
I'm glad you enjoyed correcting me. The highlight of your day I'm sure.
Ouch.
If there's anything else I can clear up for you, just let me know.
Oddly enough, even here in the Land of the Free there are plenty of people who crave tyranny. Here they come now: His fawning apologists. (If they have been able to stomach reading this far). They'll post that everyone does it, that the result is so grand, they'll minimize all his policy failures, blame the other guy, ignore his constant lies, say it happened a long time ago, erect straw men in front of our eyes, claim it doesn't matter, and (my favorite) call me racist. Let them tell us how much they love everything from Obamacare to a nuclear Iran to this sick obsession with pervert empowerment. Then let them explain why the land of the free ought to be ruled by decree.
Apparently, I omitted nit-picking from that list. Shoulda been more thorough. Sorry.
“It has been a source of great pain to me to have met with so many among [my] opponents who had not the liberality to distinguish between political and social opposition; who transferred at once to the person, the hatred they bore to his political opinions.” —Thomas Jefferson (1808)
Merriam-Webster defines luncheon as "a usually formal lunch that occurs as part of a meeting or for entertaining a guest." Therefore the luncheon was a meeting that both the President and Easy-E attended as it clearly states in the article that, yes, I did read.
Haha. I knew you'd post the definition. You think you got enough wiggle room there?
Maybe you got ME on a technicality? LOL
You wrote that Bush 41 "met with" Easy-E. By common usage of the term "met with" you implied they had a face to face meeting and at least greeted one another. In common usage with no supporting context, "Bush 41 "met with" Easy-E" doesn't mean the same thing as "Bush 41 gave a speech and Easy-E and 1400 other people attended." The "persecution" rests.
"I drink a great deal. I sleep a little, and I smoke cigar after cigar. That is why I am in two-hundred-percent form." -- Winston Churchill "LET'S GO FRANCIS" Peter
Silly libs giving convicted felons voting rights in virginia. Scared much
"I drink a great deal. I sleep a little, and I smoke cigar after cigar. That is why I am in two-hundred-percent form." -- Winston Churchill "LET'S GO FRANCIS" Peter
Dang Nick. Just because they make poor choices for themselves doesn't mean they can't make good choices that effect the masses and deserve to be punished for their actions. What you thinking bro?
They prolly served 1/10 of their sentence. Just because they may have been in out of jail 100 times doesn't mean they don't deserve another chance. The whole jail and prison thing is a waste of money anyway. Who are we to take someone out of society and lock them up. We just need to work harder at understanding them. They just doing what they can because society keeps kicking them. Dang bro get with the program.
"I drink a great deal. I sleep a little, and I smoke cigar after cigar. That is why I am in two-hundred-percent form." -- Winston Churchill "LET'S GO FRANCIS" Peter
Dang Nick. Just because they make poor choices for themselves doesn't mean they can't make good choices that effect the masses and deserve to be punished for their actions. What you thinking bro?
They prolly served 1/10 of their sentence. Just because they may have been in out of jail 100 times doesn't mean they don't deserve another chance. The whole jail and prison thing is a waste of money anyway. Who are we to take someone out of society and lock them up. We just need to work harder at understanding them. They just doing what they can because society keeps kicking them. Dang bro get with the program.
All they really need is a crap artist, who earned an ankle bracelet by pistol whipping his gardener, to serve them all as a role model, straighten their lives out, brother's keeper. Good thinking.
“It has been a source of great pain to me to have met with so many among [my] opponents who had not the liberality to distinguish between political and social opposition; who transferred at once to the person, the hatred they bore to his political opinions.” —Thomas Jefferson (1808)
Comments
While you may have me on a technicality Bob, my point remains that over the years most if not all Presidents have invited some less than savory folk to the Whitehouse in support of some cause.
I also cannot seem to find any images of Obama meeting with these people. Ludacris from 2012, Kendrick Lamar last year, but can't find those images...
Why is this particular "meeting" a big deal?
He invited Kendrick Lamar to the oval office last October and I seem to not recall any outrage. His most recent album was entitled "To Pimp a Butterfly."
Meanwhile this meeting involved "All of those invited have either been active in social-justice movements or have formed nonprofit organizations whose missions are in line with the goals of the organization."
So I ask, what is the outrage about?
Can you believe it?!?? The president of the U S of A, leader of the free world, spending time with these low-lifes!
Sitting down & talking with inmates! Bush never did that!!!
* I have a new address as of 3/24/18 *
Got it?
Great, so sitting around agreeing with one another is boring. Surrounding yourself with people you agree with is dangerous. This place is just a big monotonous conservative circle-jerk. Someone has to stir the pot, I guess I'm it.
Hi!
-- Winston Churchill
"LET'S GO FRANCIS" Peter
Speaking of just showing up, did you know Springsteen jumped the wall at Graceland to see Elvis? Made it halfway up the lawn. Notice how I connected that from my last post?
If you don't stand for something, you will fall for anything.
Well then, if that's how ya' figure, I actually met Mick Jagger and the rest of the Rolling Stones. Me and about 40 thousand other people "met" them that night.
"While you may have me on a technicality Bob, my point remains that over the years most if not all Presidents have invited some less than savory folk to the Whitehouse in support of some cause."
A technicality? BS. You said they met. Apparently, you're wrong.
"I also cannot seem to find any images of Obama meeting with these people. Ludacris from 2012, Kendrick Lamar last year, but can't find those images..."
Just a quick little search. Here they are in case you need them.
"Why is this particular "meeting" a big deal?"
To Me? It isn't. You pointed to this particular "meeting" in your comparison and since (apparently) no meeting took place, I just couldn't resist pointing that out. It was quite enjoyable.
"He invited Kendrick Lamar to the oval office last October and I seem to not recall any outrage. His most recent album was entitled "To Pimp a Butterfly."
Meanwhile this meeting involved "All of those invited have either been active in social-justice movements or have formed nonprofit organizations whose missions are in line with the goals of the organization."
So I ask, what is the outrage about?"
Me? Outraged? No. Please do not assign emotion or motives upon me. No thank you sir. If I'm so inclined, I'll be the one to declare if I'm outraged, not you.
Does everybody think I'm grumpy? Sorry. While reading my words, try imagining them being spoken in the voice of Grover from Sesame Street. Everyone should try that. Maybe that will help.
Met is the past tense of meet. Meeting shares the same root and is defined as "a coming to gether of two or more people by chance or arrangement." If people attend a meeting, they met. Easy-E did infact attend a meeting with President Bush. This is fact. I didn't create the language, I just speak it.
When I refer to Obama meeting "these people" I am referring to the people mentioned in the original post. I too have google and found that picture of Ludacris from 2012 and Kendrick Lamar from 2015. I said it right there in my post. I cannot find any pictures of the people in the the original post meeting with the President. Sorry that wasn't very clear the way I worded it.
The meeting I am referring to when I ask why is it a big deal is again the one mentioned in the original post of this thread not Easy-E.
Again, asking about outrage generally. Not referring to you specifically.
I'm glad you enjoyed correcting me. The highlight of your day I'm sure.
If there's anything else I can clear up for you, just let me know.
Met is the past tense of meet. Meeting shares the same root and is defined as "a coming to gether of two or more people by chance or arrangement." If people attend a meeting, they met. Easy-E did infact attend a meeting with President Bush. This is fact. I didn't create the language, I just speak it.
BS. Again with the BS. You wrote that Bush 41 "met with" Easy-E. Plain and simple. Everybody knows what met means. Everybody knows it doesn't mean the same thing as being in the same room as 1400 other people. This really is the only thing I wanted to bug you with. I could assume you didn't even read the article you used to support your own comparison. I could assume if you had actually read it you wouldn't have used the term "met with". But, I shouldn't make assumptions. So I'll just ask you,.... did you read the article?
When I refer to Obama meeting "these people" I am referring to the people mentioned in the original post. I too have google and found that picture of Ludacris from 2012 and Kendrick Lamar from 2015. I said it right there in my post. I cannot find any pictures of the people in the the original post meeting with the President. Sorry that wasn't very clear the way I worded it.
OK, now I see what you meant to say.
The meeting I am referring to when I ask why is it a big deal is again the one mentioned in the original post of this thread not Easy-E.
OK, now I see what you meant to say.
Again, asking about outrage generally. Not referring to you specifically.
OK, now I see what you meant to say.
I'm glad you enjoyed correcting me. The highlight of your day I'm sure.
Ouch.
If there's anything else I can clear up for you, just let me know.
Thank you.
The defense rests.
Maybe you got ME on a technicality? LOL
You wrote that Bush 41 "met with" Easy-E. By common usage of the term "met with" you implied they had a face to face meeting and at least greeted one another. In common usage with no supporting context, "Bush 41 "met with" Easy-E" doesn't mean the same thing as "Bush 41 gave a speech and Easy-E and 1400 other people attended."
The "persecution" rests.
-- Winston Churchill
"LET'S GO FRANCIS" Peter
I like sparring with Gordon. Hope he enjoys it. No harm intended
-- Winston Churchill
"LET'S GO FRANCIS" Peter
They prolly served 1/10 of their sentence. Just because they may have been in out of jail 100 times doesn't mean they don't deserve another chance. The whole jail and prison thing is a waste of money anyway. Who are we to take someone out of society and lock them up. We just need to work harder at understanding them. They just doing what they can because society keeps kicking them. Dang bro get with the program.
-- Winston Churchill
"LET'S GO FRANCIS" Peter