Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )
   Mobile App






Reply to this topicStart new topicStart Poll

> Is Obama Really Satan?, Or just the Anitchrist?
Bookmark and Share
stoirmeil 
Posted: 24-Aug-2009, 03:44 PM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
********

Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 3,581
Joined: 07-Nov-2004
ZodiacBirch

Realm: New York







QUOTE (SCShamrock @ 24-Aug-2009, 05:35 AM)
I've never met Obama either. Don't want to. I think he is a self-serving, lying, and loathsome character; a wretched sonofabitch with zero appreciation for the things which made our country great and will do anything to make a name for himself. Snake? Nahhh, snakes just want to eat, crap, and lay in the sun.

That would be "lie in the sun," not "lay." smile.gif

You, at least, have the backbone not to disguise the source of your opinions. For a man who lives or dies by the First Amendment, though, you sure do use it like bathroom tissue sometimes.

PMEmail Poster               
Top
SCShamrock 
Posted: 24-Aug-2009, 11:15 PM
Quote Post

Member is Offline





Confirmed Daydreamer
Group Icon

Group: Ireland
Posts: 1,169
Joined: 22-May-2004
ZodiacVine

Realm: Gamecock Country

male





QUOTE (stoirmeil @ 24-Aug-2009, 03:44 PM)
That would be "lie in the sun," not "lay."  smile.gif

You, at least, have the backbone not to disguise the source of your opinions.  For a man who lives or dies by the First Amendment, though, you sure do use it like bathroom tissue sometimes.

Oh, I've once again offended your delicate senses. Obama must be defended even in the face of personal opinion. I get it. We all do.

How do you know I meant "lie", do tell?

While we're still catching each and every perceivable grammatical and/or spelling error, here are a few of yours.

QUOTE
Probably not a single righteous motivation among any of the parties, true. But it's not the kind of thing these very big corps will go back on once they've repudiated the guy, I don't think, and they can afford to refuse sponsorship for a single objectionable show with a jackass host. I doubt they will lose the account for the whole station and programming. The corps need the stations for exposure, but the stations also need the corps for funding.


That would be The corps needs, not need. Additionally, I would prefer the word amongst to among here, but that one doesn’t’ matter much.

QUOTE
It's pretty dreadful what it's worth. Once again you have on tap some nameless anecdotal expert as your authority, and God forbid you should dirty your own hands with a direct opinion -- and of course you are bumping up the validity scale by claiming he's a D -- to spread a message you can't or won't substantiate, but only insinuate. Do you get paid for this or something? Name some damned names when you do this -- you aren't some kind of professional that has to protect his sources to keep exclusive access. At least, I don't think you are. It isn't even whether it's true that Obama has a calculating personality; frankly I think he'd better, if he's going to survive in a pit full of vipers. It's the snakish way you zing these things in and so innocently let them fall where they may, "for whatever it's worth," that brings your whole position down.


It's pretty dreadful what it's worth. This looks like a sentence fragment to me. Who knows what you were attempting to convey? Perhaps it was just another pearl of brilliance like your "agree as gentlemen" comment which I was just far too unintelligent to understand.

QUOTE
True enough - and Lieberman is one that D's have (perhaps inadvisedly) courted and begun to depend on in this issue. It isn't so watertight on Lieberman's account in any case, since the moderate D's themselves are hardly in agreement. But this is an odd statement in context -- are you merely prognosticating again in your optimistic way, or are you enjoying the fact? Sounds like gloating.


Inadvisedly is not a word. Were you trying to say unadvisedly, or inadvisably?

QUOTE
The Deutoronomic extension of the commandments is full of possible ways to alienate oneself from one's rights, if there are any rights to begin with. In fact the complex necessities of the federalist plan needed a great deal more than "something so simple" as the 10 commandments.


Deutoronomic is not a word. You obviously were attempting to make up a word here. For future reference, you might want to stick with the original word. Try using a reference. The one in this case would be the Christian Bible. The correct spelling for that book is Deuteronomy, so your made-up word would be Deuteronomic. Not only does that look more intelligent (erudite, if you prefer), but it also shows you at least looked up a word you aren't familiar with.

This is just a touch of the problems with your grammar and spelling, taken from less than one week of posting. Is this what you have wanted to do with me, a little tit-for-tat? It must be since you have made exposing your perception of my errors your personal project. There is not one person who never makes mistakes posting to a forum. I'm sure my history is riddled with errors, as I rarely use a spell checker. So just let me know. If not, perhaps you could get a job as an editor for some publication. God knows I find errors in print all the time.

Here, I have a smiley face for you too. smile.gif


--------------------
The peculiar evil of silencing the expression of an opinion is, that it is robbing the human race; posterity as well as the existing generation; those who dissent from the opinion, still more than those who hold it. If the opinion is right, they are deprived of the opportunity of exchanging error for truth: if wrong, they lose, what is almost as great a benefit, the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth, produced by its collision with error. ~John Stuart Mill, On Liberty, 1859

Education: that which reveals to the wise, and conceals from the stupid, the vast limits of their knowledge.
~Mark Twain
PMEmail Poster               
Top
Patch 
Posted: 25-Aug-2009, 05:50 AM
Quote Post

Member is Offline





Celtic Guardian
Group Icon

Group: Scotland
Posts: 7,710
Joined: 22-Dec-2002
ZodiacIvy

Realm: America, Mid West

male





Nice piece of research. You have exposed again one of the big problems in education today. thumbs_up.gif

Slàinte,    

Patch    
PMEmail Poster               
Top
Camac
Posted: 25-Aug-2009, 08:29 AM
Quote Post




Guest


Main: Registration
Questions: Help
Important: Rules
Messages: Search






Zodiac








SCShamrock;

Let me throw in my two cents on this. With all the mistakes in spelling and grammar that you both have made English Teachers up here would have a fielday marking your papers. ONLY IN CANADA laugh.gif angel_not.gif
               
Top
Patch 
Posted: 25-Aug-2009, 04:08 PM
Quote Post

Member is Offline





Celtic Guardian
Group Icon

Group: Scotland
Posts: 7,710
Joined: 22-Dec-2002
ZodiacIvy

Realm: America, Mid West

male





I was not going to bring that up, but well said! I do not profess to be a writer, but I think I do an acceptable job. For the most part "nearly" all understand what I am saying.

Slàinte,    

Patch    

PMEmail Poster               
Top
stoirmeil 
Posted: 25-Aug-2009, 11:05 PM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
********

Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 3,581
Joined: 07-Nov-2004
ZodiacBirch

Realm: New York







QUOTE (SCShamrock @ 24-Aug-2009, 11:15 PM)
QUOTE (stoirmeil @ 24-Aug-2009, 03:44 PM)
That would be "lie in the sun," not "lay."  smile.gif

You, at least, have the backbone not to disguise the source of your opinions.  For a man who lives or dies by the First Amendment, though, you sure do use it like bathroom tissue sometimes.

Oh, I've once again offended your delicate senses. Obama must be defended even in the face of personal opinion. I get it. We all do.

How do you know I meant "lie", do tell?

While we're still catching each and every perceivable grammatical and/or spelling error, here are a few of yours.



That would be The corps needs, not need. Additionally, I would prefer the word amongst to among here, but that one doesn’t’ matter much.



It's pretty dreadful what it's worth. This looks like a sentence fragment to me. Who knows what you were attempting to convey? Perhaps it was just another pearl of brilliance like your "agree as gentlemen" comment which I was just far too unintelligent to understand.



Inadvisedly is not a word. Were you trying to say unadvisedly, or inadvisably?



Deutoronomic is not a word. You obviously were attempting to make up a word here. For future reference, you might want to stick with the original word. Try using a reference. The one in this case would be the Christian Bible. The correct spelling for that book is Deuteronomy, so your made-up word would be Deuteronomic. Not only does that look more intelligent (erudite, if you prefer), but it also shows you at least looked up a word you aren't familiar with.

This is just a touch of the problems with your grammar and spelling, taken from less than one week of posting. Is this what you have wanted to do with me, a little tit-for-tat? It must be since you have made exposing your perception of my errors your personal project. There is not one person who never makes mistakes posting to a forum. I'm sure my history is riddled with errors, as I rarely use a spell checker. So just let me know. If not, perhaps you could get a job as an editor for some publication. God knows I find errors in print all the time.

Here, I have a smiley face for you too. smile.gif

Deuteronomic certainly IS a word:
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/...uteronomic-Code
so there was no need for me to coin it. I have moreover been familiar with the word in adjective form, and the book of Deuteronomy itself, since before you made your appearance on the planet. I did spell it wrong, you are correct in that. (The spell check function on this board says "deuteronomic," which is correct, is spelled wrong, but it also informs me of this by using the word "incorrected," which is not a word, so trust this or any other spell check at your peril.)

"Inadvisedly" is a word. It is an acceptable substitute for "unadvisedly," much as "unalienable" is a legitimate substitute for "inalienable;" Jefferson and Franklin argued about that one, if I remember, so I guess it's OK for you to question it.
http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/inad...sedly?qsrc=2446

"It's pretty dreadful what it's worth" is a complete sentence. If you turn it around, you will see "What it's worth is pretty dreadful;" "What it's worth" is a noun phrase acting as subject; "is" can't take an object, so it simply joins the subject to a descriptive predicate phrase. It is perfectly permissible to invert the sentence order for emphasis.

I was using the word "corps" as an shorthand for "corporations," and that is too informal for the post and evidently unclear enough to lead you, the reader, astray. I fully admit it, although the context supports "corporations" if you read it with any care. The word "corps" with the singular meaning of a group acting as a body, like a military unit, which WOULD be singular, makes no sense at all in the context. You're just wrong, and grasping at straws.

"Amongst" is considered a somewhat affected usage in the States, albeit correct. I don't use it. You go ahead.

To "lay" something (other than an egg, maybe) means to place it on a reasonably flat surface in a horizontal position, as when one lays a sheet of paper on a table. Snakes have no hands, so it would be hard for them to perform that manoeuver; in any case, your context indicates that after eating and crapping, your snake wishes only to recline in the sunlight and be still. That means "lie," period. This might be helpful:
http://web.ku.edu/~edit/lie.html

I do edit professionally and I have been editing three projects all summer long, and making a bit of money at it. But thanks for the suggestion -- I can always use more.

If my senses were delicate, I would not read your commentary at all. But since you seem to go out of your way to be crude and inflammatory in posts like that one to shock or annoy and then enjoy imagining the reaction, I have my own ways of returning small shot, and you are sticking your head above the parapet beautifully.
bye1.gif
PMEmail Poster               
Top
stevenpd 
Posted: 25-Aug-2009, 11:43 PM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



An American Guardian of the Realm
Group Icon

Group: Founder
Posts: 2,894
Joined: 15-Feb-2002
ZodiacReed

Realm: Fountain Valley, Calif.

male





I think that this discussion has strayed from the original subject. It has appeared to have degenerated into a series of English grammar lessons and nothing more.

Shall we get back to the subject?


--------------------
2013


user posted image


Vote in the 2013 Music Awards


Dear Lord, lest I continue in my complacent ways, help me to remember that someone died for me today. And if there be war, help me to remember to ask and to answer "am I worth dying for?" - Eleanor Roosevelt

The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly is to fill the world with fools.
-- Herbert Spencer, English Philosopher (1820-1903)
PMEmail Poster My Photo Album               
Top
stoirmeil 
Posted: 25-Aug-2009, 11:57 PM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
********

Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 3,581
Joined: 07-Nov-2004
ZodiacBirch

Realm: New York







I'm willing to do so, sure. The discussion has been graced with gratuitously coarse and not realistically supportable commentary about the President's possible demonic nature and definite base and vile character as its foundation; in my opinion the thread was a pointless practical joke that misfired from its inception, even in its simple inflammatory intent. So -- by all means, let us go back to the rewarding political discussion about whether the President is really Satan, or whether it's a grand hoot that there are people dumb enough to think so.

For the record, it is not Obama I am defending; I had doubts about his election in the first place, although I doubt he has the reptilian character deficits being claimed here. I am defending, if we call it a defense, the opportunity for discussion on these boards that actually covers the complex issues we're up against without sinking into this kind of abusive rhetoric. That can be found all over the web, for those with a taste for it. As vigourous and heated as good discussion gets, it is nevertheless destroyed when it is brought down to that level, and simply becomes a vicious mutual disgruntlement venue where nothing can be weighed or considered, and no validating sources need ever be brought. I resist that, Steven, and forgive me, but I feel I have to.
PMEmail Poster               
Top
SCShamrock 
Posted: 26-Aug-2009, 07:40 AM
Quote Post

Member is Offline





Confirmed Daydreamer
Group Icon

Group: Ireland
Posts: 1,169
Joined: 22-May-2004
ZodiacVine

Realm: Gamecock Country

male





Lynn, The point is that you have been doing this with me for weeks, which, just as Patch point out, distracts from whatever topic is being discussed. I find it rather amusing since it not necessary as I am quite capable of conveying a thought without your brilliant translation and editing skills. But if you insist on singling out my grammar and spelling, I'll be glad to join you, and I may be wrong sometimes just like you will be. Deuteronomic would be the correct spelling, you had Deutoronomic. Indadvisedly is still not a word. Phat is not a word either, but will one day be in the dictionary, oddly enough, it will eventually not be listed as slang which will give comfort to those young street kids who use it. Oh wait, it is there. HA! As for corps, try using a period at the end of your abbreviations. With your style, one could easily infer you meant corps, and making sense is never a necessary component of posts here as you have so often pointed out. Amongst...you are in the United States. Get over it. So let me ask one more thing. Do you insist on continuing to single me out over grammar and spelling? I don't particularly enjoy it. There are many times, as you well know, that posts here could be picked apart. I see no reason to do that when the poster's intentions are clear. You obviously don't either, unless your only intention is to get a rise out of the person, in which case I'm the proverbial moth to the flame. Proverbial, from the book Proverbs. Some might insist on capitalization (capitalisation for the Britophile (another made up word)), but I'm happy with the lower-case spelling. Hey, if you do insist on grading posts, start a thread just for that. You can peruse the entire forum and be a cut-and-paste maniac. Call it "Your Papers Have Been Graded." HMMM?
PMEmail Poster               
Top
Camac
Posted: 26-Aug-2009, 08:00 AM
Quote Post




Guest


Main: Registration
Questions: Help
Important: Rules
Messages: Search






Zodiac








Methinks enough Broadsides have been fired and both should withdraw to neutral territory and cool off. Not all of us are masters of English and I for one have noticed that my use of the language has deteriorated over the years. Anyway to you Yanks I spell funny and my grammar is a little different. Vive l'Difference'.
It would be a real bore if we were all the same. Argue if we must but with decorum and manners. One does not have to get nasty to get ones point across nor pick ones use of the language to peices. In the case of the word Deuteronomic, never heard of it but I got the point in that it refers to the Book of Deuteronomy. Thats what counts.


Camac
               
Top
stoirmeil 
Posted: 26-Aug-2009, 08:09 AM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
********

Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 3,581
Joined: 07-Nov-2004
ZodiacBirch

Realm: New York







QUOTE (SCShamrock @ 26-Aug-2009, 07:40 AM)
Deuteronomic would be the correct spelling, you had Deutoronomic. Indadvisedly is still not a word.

You're backpeddling -- this is what you said in your last post but one:

"The correct spelling for that book is Deuteronomy, so your made-up word would be Deuteronomic." It is not a made-up word when it is spelled correctly, and I have showed you one reference among many to demonstrate that fact; I had the correct word in mind, which I have used and read many times, and I spelled it wrong, but that's not what you decided to call me on. Check it out -- it might be even more interesting or useful to you than it is to me.
http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=deuter...=en&btnG=Search
Unless you are indirectly admitting that you are wrong about it? I don't need you to.

As far as "indadvisedly", which you have just typed now -- you're right, it is not a word in English. "Inadvisedly", however, is.

Do you ever look over anything before you hit "Reply"? And I mean really for tone: I actually don't give a damn about what you do to English. It has survived much worse, on the web and off it. It's not your opinion on the issues, either, but the ragefully ugly and abusive delivery of your opinion that honestly makes me want to irritate you, for its own sake and even more for what your delivery does to the forum and the site.

But picking at form in an annoying way when it is tone that appalls me is wrongheaded on my part, and I regret it. I won't indulge in it any more. You don't like it? Fine. I won't do it. That's all you had to say.

Camac -- Your diplomatic overtures are noted and appreciated, but it may be best to stay well offshore and out of range. This really has nothing to do with English, you know, and I'm annoyed at myself for losing control and indulging in petty twitting of an angry man. You are very right -- it's not worth a single volley.
PMEmail Poster               
Top
Camac
Posted: 26-Aug-2009, 08:47 AM
Quote Post




Guest


Main: Registration
Questions: Help
Important: Rules
Messages: Search






Zodiac








stoirmeil; I am well offshore to windward and course set for the Horn.


Camac.

               
Top
Antwn 
Posted: 26-Aug-2009, 02:08 PM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
********

Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 1,409
Joined: 18-Apr-2005
ZodiacBirch

Realm: UDA ond o linach Cymry

male





QUOTE (stoirmeil @ 25-Aug-2009, 11:57 PM)
As vigourous and heated as good discussion gets, it is nevertheless destroyed when it is brought down to that level, and simply becomes a vicious mutual disgruntlement venue where nothing can be weighed or considered, and no validating sources need ever be brought. I resist that, Steven, and forgive me, but I feel I have to.

I agree. The forum is only as good as we make it. I don't see a reason to apologize for wanting to raise the qualitative bar Stoirmeil.


--------------------
Yr hen Gymraeg i mi,
Hon ydyw iaith teimladau,
Ac adlais i guriadau
Fy nghalon ydyw hi
--- Mynyddog
PMEmail Poster               
Top
stevenpd 
Posted: 26-Aug-2009, 02:17 PM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



An American Guardian of the Realm
Group Icon

Group: Founder
Posts: 2,894
Joined: 15-Feb-2002
ZodiacReed

Realm: Fountain Valley, Calif.

male





And people wonder why I don't get more involved with topics.
PMEmail Poster My Photo Album               
Top
Antwn 
Posted: 26-Aug-2009, 02:45 PM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
********

Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 1,409
Joined: 18-Apr-2005
ZodiacBirch

Realm: UDA ond o linach Cymry

male





QUOTE (stevenpd @ 26-Aug-2009, 02:17 PM)
And people wonder why I don't get more involved with topics.

Your posts are wonderful contributions Steven. Thank you for them.
PMEmail Poster               
Top
0 User(s) are reading this topic (0 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

Reply to this topicStart new topicStart Poll

 








Celtic RadioTM broadcasts through Live365.com and StreamLicensing.com which are officially licensed under SoundExchange, ASCAP, BMI, SESAC and SOCAN.
©2014 Celtic Radio Network, Highlander Radio, Celtic Moon, Celtic Dance, Ye O' Celtic Pub and Celt-Rock-Radio.
All rights and trademarks reserved. Read our Privacy Policy.
Celtic Graphics ©2014, Cari Buziak


Link to CelticRadio.net!
Link to CelticRadio.net
View Broadcast Status and Statistics!

Best Viewed With IE 8.0 (1680 x 1050 Resolution), Javascript & Cookies Enabled.


[Home] [Top]

Celtic Hearts Gallery | Celtic Mates Dating | My Celtic Friends | Celtic Music Radio | Family Heraldry | Medival Kingdom | Top Celtic Sites | Web Celt Blog | Video Celt