by FatFreek 2005 20 Replies latest social entertainment
Harriet was a life-long smoker, so I seriously doubt she was a Witness.
Her obituary (http://articles.latimes.com/1994-10-04/news/mn-46403_1_harriet-nelson) mentions that she smoked "for years," but other sources say she smoked from the age of 13 until her death, although she hid it from the public to preserve her wholesome image.
Your so right blondie, I was just a kid when I heard all of this, I was too young for Ozzie and Harriet, I never saw one of their shows but the rummer's were going around.
Thanks for you example blonide it is so true. The last CO we had said he went to the same school Prince did, just that Prince was about three or fours older then he was so he never had classes with him, when I tried to pin down the CO he clearly dogged my questions.
Crazy religion.
LITS
Bizzy bee once again shows how clueless she is about having even simple thinking abilities. When I say "simple", I mean between a rock and a fern from the Jurassic Age So I wasn't setting a very high standard about "simple" thinking abilities to make my conclusion.
:Hmmm....I don't think so, but I'm not surprised that such an urban legend might spring up among Witnesses.
Hmmm.... Notice the segue from Bizzy saying she doesn't "think so" to drawing the conclusion that therefore it is "an urban legend" without a single bit of transition or evidence.
It's nice to know that if Bizzy Bee doesn't "think" something is true then it MUST be an urban legend.
Now, this is not about whether David Nelson was or wasn't influenced by JWs. NO! This is all about how Bizzy Bee thinks and makes conclusions.
And it reveals a lot about her thinking abilities. Of course, I use the term "thinking abilities" pejoratively here. Think "rocks" and "ferns." And then think "dumber than that."
Farkel
Farkel, I am committed to the tall, handsome, well-to-do Mr Bee.
So you really must stop obsessing about me. It can never bee. Lust for me from afar if you must, but otherwise, try to control yourself.
This is the bizzy bee response to my argument:
:Farkel, I am committed to the tall, handsome, well-to-do Mr Bee.
Mr. Bee is tall, handsome and rich. GREAT argument.
HAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA!
:So you really must stop obsessing about me. It can never bee.
I made an argument, and you turned that into obsessing about you. Curious at best. Crazy at worst.
: Lust for me from afar if you must, but otherwise, try to control yourself.
How silly is that? Let's revisit your comments which made me make my argument and then we can reveal how crazy you really are, shall we?
----------
YOU said:
:Hmmm....I don't think so, but I'm not surprised that such an urban legend might spring up among Witnesses.
I said:
Hmmm.... Notice the segue from Bizzy saying she doesn't "think so" to drawing the conclusion that therefore it is "an urban legend" without a single bit of transition or evidence.
It's nice to know that if Bizzy Bee doesn't "think" something is true then it MUST be an urban legend.
Now, this is not about whether David Nelson was or wasn't influenced by JWs. NO! This is all about how Bizzy Bee thinks and makes conclusions.
And it reveals a lot about her thinking abilities. Of course, I use the term "thinking abilities" pejoratively here. Think "rocks" and "ferns." And then think "dumber than that."
--------
So, bizzy bee, where you get from that the I "lust" after your fat ass and saggy boobs and pimply face and stupid brain?
Farkel
"So, bizzy bee, where you get from that the I "lust" after your fat ass and saggy boobs and pimply face and stupid brain?"
Farkel
a sampling of the "best of Farkel"
That kind of sweet talk will get you nowhere!
bizzy,
I have to give you credit. You dish it out, but you can take it like a pro.
My hat is off to you, dear lady. I hit you with my best shot and you deflected it brilliantly. I'm breathless!
My argument is still valid with or without my insults and you took the insults with grace and charm. That is why I salute you. That showed genuine class!
You didn't address my argument, though. I'll keep my hat on for that part. But otherwise, kudus to you!
Farkel
TMS,
:a sampling of the "best of Farkel"
You inspired me into looking up the "best of TMS". Since you've been on this board a tad longer than I have, I figured I should give you the due respect for that. With respects to the "best of TMS", I found four pages of topics you started, with responses ranging from 10-20. One of your blockbusters garnered about 62 responses. But the BIGGEST thread you started with regards to responses was this one:
How much positive reinforcement do you need to function on JWD?
It got a whopping 64 responses! Wow! I'm impressed. But the topic was a social topic, not a doctrinal topic, or any kind of topic that rises above the level of a bar conversation topic. Put simply, it's a bullshit topic, but THAT was your BIGGEST and more important topic in terms of feed back that you've posted in here in ten years.
Of course, the "best of TMS" doesn't exist. You never qualified for that honor, and your posts speak more toward that than I could ever do.
I have about 24 PAGES full of topics and several DOZEN of them are in the "Best of" section (you know that one? It's the one YOU didn't make it into.)
I have a few threads which have 50,000 page views and lots of threads that have 5,000 or more pages views and a number of threads which have dozens and dozens of pages of responses.
But YOU had a thread with 64 responses, which is what? 3 pages? But only ONE that large and at most with only 10-20 responses.
When you are pointing fingers, be sure to look in your own mirror first. Because when you point one finger at someone else, there are still four fingers pointing back at you.
Asshole.
Farkel
That's a good old fashioned beat down.
