patrick.net

I didn't do the first two. I lost my job and lost my house, but never declared BR and was well within my means until the huge layoff of '92. I paid my tax debt for the loan forgiven, something todays forcloure people do not have to do. Some credit for 'ol Bap on that point please! lol

I did the 3rd one, but re-fied into a conventional note as soon as I could (6 month mark)

I live a pretty conservative life, and make an honest attempt to be kind, and of good character in my dealings, so I may not fully understand what you mean on #4

On the 5th point, I don't fully understand how you come to the conclusion that I do not understand/support/embrace personal responsibility and accountablity, based on some bantering on a blog. If that conclusion is based on my posts, then I am at fault for having given you the wrong impression.

Hate Free, the way to be, like Bap33 (that could be chanted on WallStreet! lol)

Bap33 says

Hate Free, the way to be, like Bap33

I'm not so sure that your definition of "hate free" is the same as that of the average person. Your posts certainly don't promote tolerance, peace & love.
Bap33 says

Pointing out the facts about those who suffer from progressive/liberal/leftist disorder is not hate. You sure do like to try to hang your own personal definition on each word, a common trait with those who suffer from the disorder.

"facts?" Really? Your opinion is not factual at all - it's merely your reality, and it's mean spirited in many instances.

Bap33 says

You have a very unique view, but it was provided for you.

It's difficult to take you seriously when you make such a stupid comment. I'm gonna stop trying to make sense of what you're spewing.

Vicente says

elliemae says

Then throw the live baby covered in test tubes out the window and it'll be caught by the fire department that is waiting outside.

I like the way you think outside the box.

Thanks. I try to be as accurate as possible in such a realistic scenario.

elliemae says

Bap33 says

You have a very unique view, but it was provided for you.
It's difficult to take you seriously when you make such a stupid comment. I'm gonna stop trying to make sense of what you're spewing.

Stupid comment? I am suggesting that your view (position in life, the world, the universe, time itself) was provided, fixed, situated, in-the-cards, for you (by God). I don't know why that offended you, but I was not "spewing" anything negative. Please read the entire entry, I was showing how unique each person's view would be (at least, I was trying to). Accuse me of poor writing skills, not poor manners.

How can you give an opinion about my opinion and suggest your opinion is valid while mine is not? Are not all opinions the same? I pointed out facts, in my opinion. You think I'm stupid, in your opinion. Pretty sure that's just how it goes. Aint it?

BAP:
One cannot have a unique view if it has been provided for them. It was a stupid comment and indicative of a person who lacks the ability to understand something as simple as the difference between opinion and fact. I'd also like to take this opportunity to point out that it's simply not possible for one to point out facts (in their opinion).

Bap33 says

I was showing how unique each person's view would be (at least, I was trying to). Accuse me of poor writing skills, not poor manners.

Thank you for your permission to accuse you of poor writing skills. However, your problem is your lack of ability to communicate combined with your lack of ability to accept that many people don't believe in your God, do not share your hatred of what you've decided is "liberal," and don't appreciate the mean spirited comments you attempt to pass off in an "aw, shucks" manner.

elliemae says

I'm gonna stop trying to make sense of what you're spewing.

I am pretty sure you can be given a unique view, without much trouble. For example, if you were to step up on a chair, your view becomes unique, but that chair came from someplace. If that chair is in a room, the room came from someplace. They were provided to you at just the right place and time to give you that unique perspective. And if I walk in while you are on that chair, in that room, at a particular time and lift the chair above my head I have given you a unique view .... a view that is all yours, given to you .... a view of life, planet, room, chair, ect ect.

It's as if your faking a lack of understanding just so you can be negative in your response. No need for that. Feeling that it is mean for someone to take issue with things you find comfort in, is not all that rare, so I do not hold that against you. I do the same thing.

my God is the God and your God and everyone's God. God's existance does not require anyone's belief. And, as it turns out, just beliving in God is nothing special. Satan knows God, has been in his presence, and failed. So "belief" in God is pretty much a given. But, just belief don't cut the mustard where the God issue is concerned.... in my opinion! lol

aw shucks? interesting.

Bap33 says

Depending of what the definition of is, is

Being the genius you are, you probably think this is some kind general indictment of the way "liberals" are.

Not that you will listen, or comprehend this, but just to remind others of the context. Republicans were on a long witch hunt against Clinton.

They finally found something real that he had done, and it was bad, although many normal people (you know, the ones Bap says have a mental disorder) would question whether it was really any of our our business. And of course, it wasn't part of the original reason for the special prosecutor.

This was a sin in Clinton's personal life. Bap can probably explain why this was also a sin against the people, that was worthy of a special prosecutor's focus.

(now you have something to respond to rather than understanding my point).

Here's the point: Clinton was somewhat cornered and probably should have fessed up right away, but instead he said "There is no improper relationship."

Later he claimed this was not a lie, unless by "is" he had meant there isn't and never was.

Shocking that the president would not want to fess up for such a transgression in his personal life.

Interesting that in this day and age, where so many AMericans constantly lie, nobody would have said anything if he had just said, "I said there is no relationship, and that was true when I said it," people would have understood why he said that and what he meant.

But when they got that awesome quote, "it depends on what the definition of is is." That was a stupid thing for Clinton to say. Now it's quoted by dimbulbs like Bap, with only half an idea what the context was, they just think it's a really sweet indictment of the behavior of liberals. And since Clinton was and is so intelligent, it makes this all the sweeter. "hey, he may be way up there in intelligence, but he said "it depends on what the meaning of is, is." So now I can feel superior.

MAybe this is how Bush learned to say literally hundreds of really stupid things, you know, so there would not be just one that was quoted and that he would be known for.

Nobody was or is going to overmisunderestimate Bush.

cool marcus, now apply that logic of yours to what has went on with Hermen Cain and give some of your zippy insight. Thanks.

Bap33 says

God's existance does not require anyone's belief.

marcus says

Nobody was or is going to overmisunderestimate Bush.

or BAP, who also simply doesn't get it.

Bap33 says

cool marcus, now apply that logic of yours to what has went on with Hermen Cain

IT's a travesty. The liberal media is trying to distract everyone from talking about his bold policy ideas; preventing China from obtaining nuclear weapons.

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/11/03/cain-china-nukes-arrogance/

His contribution are up in the wake of claims of sexual harassment.

By the way, just FYI, the betting money has never given Cain better than a 3% chance of winning the nomination. On the IEM, he isn't even listed, he's just part of the category "other" that has what

http://tippie.uiowa.edu/iem/index.cfm

http://iemweb.biz.uiowa.edu/quotes/356.html

You should send in your $500 and play. Perry has a 10% chance (according to the money), Romney has a 73 % chance, and people other than ROmney, Perry, Paul and Bachman have less than a 2% chance.

YOu can bet $500 and if Cain or Christie, or anyone else who isn't Romney, Bachman or Perry wins (the nomination), you'll get back $25000.

That's RROF_NOM.

Here's the gragh showing history.
http://iemweb.biz.uiowa.edu/graphs/graph_RCONV12.cfm

The money never had Cain having more than what, a 3% chance. Note
the RROF category includes that chance that CHristie enters at the last minute. Actually I think it might be a decent bet for that reason.

The media paying so much attention to someone everyone knows has less chance than Ron Paul of being elected, just because of BS polls, is all just part of the axis of bullshit (i got that from BB).

I'm not saying the polls are false, but rather that we all know they don't mean anything at this point.

Cain? He's the current DISTRACTION from the rest of the GOP field. Fox News will dump him like yesterdays' news shortly before the election, when they swing back to pumping their favorites full-time. Right now Cain keeps the spolight off Romney and Perry. The person that should be ticked is Michelle, Herman is taking her job of drawing off fire.

Meanwhile in poll fantasy land, Ron Paul wins another straw poll:

http://www.cnbc.com/id/45178834

I saw Paul on Fox today (don't ask).

Motherfucker was sitting there justifying defunding CDC and NIH so as to let drug co's more profitably solve the world's problems on their own dime.

Most dangerous ideologue on the planet given his presence in our system. I guess we can thank our Founders for their wisdom in setting up a system of checks and balances and not some totalitarian BS, but if the American people actually elected this clown we'd truly deserve the misery and woe that would follow.

Well, nobody corrected be on it, but I was off by a factor of 10. The Iowa exchange market RROF (which is the chance of anyone other than Romney, Paul, Bachman, or Paul) is at around 15% not 1.5%.

I thought that was too cheap. And yes, I know, I'm the math guy.

You people need something else to do.

KILLERJANE says

You people need something else to do.

Maybe the world actually did end, and we're now in some alternate universe. My proof:
Bellingham Bill says

I saw Paul on Fox today.

Question: why can't it be one where there is no math?

marcus says

I'm the math guy.

Damn!

Nomograph says

I would call it self-loathing:

Wow, I did not know all this history about Bap. What a self-contradiction. That makes me take everything he/she says much less seriously - major hypocrite who keeps getting bailed out by the rest of us.

Of course, that's in addition to the lack of facts/evidence + making a logical argument generally in almost every post.

lol ... weak!! Punt 2.0

corntrollio says

Of course, that's in addition to the lack of facts/evidence + making a logical argument generally in almost every post.

I'd like to second that motion. Or third it, as the case may be.

Bap33 says

lol ... weak!! Punt 2.0

Fail.

negative, corn punted up yonder. NEXT!! No soup for you!!

What am I punting from? Your poor arguing style, your lack of general evidence of any of the nonsense you spout, and your fundie religious beliefs? Why would that be a punt? Please explain. Again, if you were ever able to make a coherent argument, this would be more interesting. As it is, I don't see the point.