Votes Today - Did yours cancel out with your family members?

[Spelt]

Where was the Easter Bunny on my ballot?

 

[Jaedrik]

Man you are just handing people reasons to hate you on a gold-plated platter, by the truckload.

Thank Obama you are not able to vote yet.

To hate someone let alone for their opinions or formulated logic when they do not act in the manner of a jerk is very hotheaded, and not conducive to thinking, peace of mind, or being calm.

Don't hate, be sorrowful of their failure if you feel that strong about it. If you have hope in addition to this you will be trying to help them or have civil discussion rather than just hating, which is decidedly not good for one's health, mental and physical.

 

[#HBC | Acrostic]

Just putting this out there. But my vote was a wasted vote because I specifically did a mail in vote and left in a sticky note that said in bold letters,

Spoiler

"CANCEL KRYS VOTE."

Knowing that the vote would already be cancelled, I would have gone through considerable length to get my vote retracted and to vote for

Spoiler

Sanchaz

despite his shady name searching history I think that he would make a good president.

 

[Firus]

Voting for Johnson is about as effective as voting for the Easter Bunny.

Maybe so, but for some people it's a situation of either voting for somebody they hate, "the lesser of two evils," or voting for somebody who will never get elected who at least shares their morals, and somebody they don't have to compromise their morals to vote for.

 

[Spelt]

To hate someone let alone for their opinions or formulated logic when they do not act in the manner of a jerk is very hotheaded, and not conducive to thinking, peace of mind, or being calm.

Don't hate, be sorrowful of their failure if you feel that strong about it. If you have hope in addition to this you will be trying to help them or have civil discussion rather than just hating, which is decidedly not good for one's health, mental and physical.

You are too cute.

 

[#HBC | Acrostic]

You are too cute.

Spelt is extraordinarily brazen. We've all known that for a long time. However, his willingness to woo over naive astrologers by using tactics such as scapegoating, reductionist and simplistic solutions, demagoguery, and a conspiracy theory of history sets a new world record for brazenness.

If one accepts the framework I've laid out here, it follows that Spelt maintains that he never engages in beggarly, foul, or sanguinary politics. This is a complete fabrication without a scintilla of truth in it. What's more, idle hands are the devil's tools. That's why Spelt spends his leisure time devising ever more self-deluded ways to further political and social goals wholly or in part through activities that involve force or violence and a violation of criminal law.

But it gets much worse than that. During the first half of the 20th century, etatism could have been practically identified with totalism. Today, it is not so clear who can properly be called a blockish, wild nabob of onanism. Spelt really shouldn't formulate social policies and action programs based on the most crime-stained classes of nativism in existence. That's just common sense. Of course, the people who appreciate his missives are those who eagerly root up common sense, prominently hold it out, and decry it as poison with astonishing alacrity.

While I am not attempting to argue openly in favor of any particular position, Spelt is trying to get us to acquiesce to a Faustian bargain. In the short term this bargain may help us speak truth to power. Unfortunately, in the long term it will enable Spelt to make our lives miserable. He is lacking in the social graces. Now that's a rather crude and simplistic statement, and in many cases it may not even be literally true. But there is a sense in which it is generally true, a sense in which it unequivocally expresses how I condemn his gross and systematic violations of human rights. I'm not just talking about the arbitrary detentions, enforced disappearances, torture, and summary executions but also about my previous observation that Spelt possesses no significant intellectual skills whatsoever and has no interest in erudition. Heck, he can't even spell or define "erudition", much less achieve it.

When all is said and done, what I find frightening is that some academics actually believe Spelt's line that he could do a gentler and fairer job of running the world than anyone else. In this case, "academics" refers to a stratum of the residual intelligentsia surviving the recession of its demotic base, not to those seekers of truth who understand that Spelt says that his adversaries are aligned with very dark and malevolent fourth-dimensional aliens known as Draconians. Hey, Spelt, how about telling us the truth for once? He practically breaks his arm patting himself on the back when he says, "It takes courage to go down into the muddy trenches and shred the basic compact between the people and their government." As if that were something to be proud of. If I weren't so forgiving, I'd have to say that courage is what we need to avoid the extremes of a pessimistic naturalism and an optimistic humanism by combining the truths of both—not politeness, not intellectual flair, not cleverness with words, just courage. And it sometimes takes a lot of courage to look a callous bludger in the eye and tell him that by comparing today to even ten years ago and projecting the course we're on, I'd say we're in for an even more adversarial, cuckoo, and power-hungry society, all thanks to Spelt's perorations.

Spelt is currently limited to shrieking and spitting when he's confronted with inconvenient facts. Before you know it, however, Spelt is likely to switch to some sort of "leave behind a legacy of perpetual indebtedness in developing countries" approach to draw our attention away from such facts. He says that he is forward-looking, open-minded, and creative. The inference is that the best way to serve one's country is to treat traditional values as if they were twisted crimes. I'm happy to report that I can't follow that logic.

Litigious good-for-nothings are sharply focused on an immediate goal: to pose a threat to personal autonomy and social development. I repeat: Spelt wants to control every aspect of our lives. He wants us to rise, fall asleep, work, and live at the beat of a drum. Then, once we're molded into a uniform mass, we'll be incapable of seeing that Spelt has been insulting my intelligence. It's time to even the score. I suggest that we begin by notifying people of the fact that Spelt's comments are often appallingly craven, sometimes slimy, frequently off-point, and occasionally irritable. Nevertheless, they do tell us something important about Spelt. They tell us that Spelt intends to infringe upon our most important constitutional rights.

I obviously have no appetite for vending an inimical mixture of antiheroism and superstition to a new generation of uncivilized, appalling rapscallions. Many insolent pikers, however, do. That's why I want them all to read this letter and others like it and discover for themselves that Spelt has garnered enough support to ruin my entire day but not enough support to provide illiberal conspiracies with the necessary asylum to take root and spread. So don't feed me any phony baloney about how his theatrics won't be used for political retribution. That's just not true. His view that preaching hatred is essential for the safety and welfare of the public is sheer make-believe. But there's the rub; he doesn't want me to appeal for comity between us and him. Well, I've never been a very obedient dog so I intend not only to do exactly that but also to cross-examine Spelt's batty scare tactics.

So, what's my take on Spelt's rapacious tactics? Simply this: He claims to have read somewhere that matters of racial justice should enter a period of "benign neglect". I don't doubt that he has indeed read such a thing; one can find all sorts of crazy stuff on the Internet. More reliable sources, however, tend to agree that Spelt has been telling people that he is the most recent incarnation of the Buddha. This story has been uncritically swallowed and regurgitated by many half-informed, counterproductive slubberdegullions who find pleasure in believing it. No, I can't explain it either. However, I can say that we must do everything we can to shape a world of dignity and harmony, a world of justice, solidarity, liberty, and prosperity. Fortunately, detailing the specific steps and objectives needed to thwart his self-righteous schemes is an activity that's right in my wheelhouse. I even know where to begin: by informing people that I must, on principle, guide the world into an age of peace, justice, and solidarity. Do I blame society for this? No, I blame Spelt.

It must be pointed out over and over again to Spelt's bedfellows and, in a broader sense, to amateurish energumens that Spelt presents himself as a disinterested classicist lamenting the infusion of politically motivated methods of pedagogy and analysis into higher education. He is eloquent in his denunciation of modern scholarship, claiming it favors the most indecent nihilarians you'll ever see. And here we have the ultimate irony because he has become a patsy to his own malevolence. But there is a further-reaching implication: Spelt often misuses the word "interparenthetically" to mean something vaguely related to alcoholism or paternalism or somesuch. Spelt's peons, realizing that an exact definition is anathema to what they know in their hearts, are usually content to assume that Spelt is merely trying to say that his objectives are Right with a capital R. This letter has gone on far too long in my opinion and probably yours as well. So let me end it by saying merely that Spelt makes free and liberal use of chicanery, deceit, intolerance, lust, persecution, and oppression.

 

[#HBC | Acrostic]

Oops, forgot to log in as MonK4. Wait pretend you didn't see that.

 

[Smooth Criminal]

LMAO

I think I love you, Acrostic.

Smooth Criminal

 

[Luigitoilet]

Spelt is extraordinarily brazen. We've all known that for a long time. However, his willingness to woo over naive astrologers by using tactics such as scapegoating, reductionist and simplistic solutions, demagoguery, and a conspiracy theory of history sets a new world record for brazenness.

If one accepts the framework I've laid out here, it follows that Spelt maintains that he never engages in beggarly, foul, or sanguinary politics. This is a complete fabrication without a scintilla of truth in it. What's more, idle hands are the devil's tools. That's why Spelt spends his leisure time devising ever more self-deluded ways to further political and social goals wholly or in part through activities that involve force or violence and a violation of criminal law.

But it gets much worse than that. During the first half of the 20th century, etatism could have been practically identified with totalism. Today, it is not so clear who can properly be called a blockish, wild nabob of onanism. Spelt really shouldn't formulate social policies and action programs based on the most crime-stained classes of nativism in existence. That's just common sense. Of course, the people who appreciate his missives are those who eagerly root up common sense, prominently hold it out, and decry it as poison with astonishing alacrity.

While I am not attempting to argue openly in favor of any particular position, Spelt is trying to get us to acquiesce to a Faustian bargain. In the short term this bargain may help us speak truth to power. Unfortunately, in the long term it will enable Spelt to make our lives miserable. He is lacking in the social graces. Now that's a rather crude and simplistic statement, and in many cases it may not even be literally true. But there is a sense in which it is generally true, a sense in which it unequivocally expresses how I condemn his gross and systematic violations of human rights. I'm not just talking about the arbitrary detentions, enforced disappearances, torture, and summary executions but also about my previous observation that Spelt possesses no significant intellectual skills whatsoever and has no interest in erudition. Heck, he can't even spell or define "erudition", much less achieve it.

When all is said and done, what I find frightening is that some academics actually believe Spelt's line that he could do a gentler and fairer job of running the world than anyone else. In this case, "academics" refers to a stratum of the residual intelligentsia surviving the recession of its demotic base, not to those seekers of truth who understand that Spelt says that his adversaries are aligned with very dark and malevolent fourth-dimensional aliens known as Draconians. Hey, Spelt, how about telling us the truth for once? He practically breaks his arm patting himself on the back when he says, "It takes courage to go down into the muddy trenches and shred the basic compact between the people and their government." As if that were something to be proud of. If I weren't so forgiving, I'd have to say that courage is what we need to avoid the extremes of a pessimistic naturalism and an optimistic humanism by combining the truths of both—not politeness, not intellectual flair, not cleverness with words, just courage. And it sometimes takes a lot of courage to look a callous bludger in the eye and tell him that by comparing today to even ten years ago and projecting the course we're on, I'd say we're in for an even more adversarial, cuckoo, and power-hungry society, all thanks to Spelt's perorations.

Spelt is currently limited to shrieking and spitting when he's confronted with inconvenient facts. Before you know it, however, Spelt is likely to switch to some sort of "leave behind a legacy of perpetual indebtedness in developing countries" approach to draw our attention away from such facts. He says that he is forward-looking, open-minded, and creative. The inference is that the best way to serve one's country is to treat traditional values as if they were twisted crimes. I'm happy to report that I can't follow that logic.

Litigious good-for-nothings are sharply focused on an immediate goal: to pose a threat to personal autonomy and social development. I repeat: Spelt wants to control every aspect of our lives. He wants us to rise, fall asleep, work, and live at the beat of a drum. Then, once we're molded into a uniform mass, we'll be incapable of seeing that Spelt has been insulting my intelligence. It's time to even the score. I suggest that we begin by notifying people of the fact that Spelt's comments are often appallingly craven, sometimes slimy, frequently off-point, and occasionally irritable. Nevertheless, they do tell us something important about Spelt. They tell us that Spelt intends to infringe upon our most important constitutional rights.

I obviously have no appetite for vending an inimical mixture of antiheroism and superstition to a new generation of uncivilized, appalling rapscallions. Many insolent pikers, however, do. That's why I want them all to read this letter and others like it and discover for themselves that Spelt has garnered enough support to ruin my entire day but not enough support to provide illiberal conspiracies with the necessary asylum to take root and spread. So don't feed me any phony baloney about how his theatrics won't be used for political retribution. That's just not true. His view that preaching hatred is essential for the safety and welfare of the public is sheer make-believe. But there's the rub; he doesn't want me to appeal for comity between us and him. Well, I've never been a very obedient dog so I intend not only to do exactly that but also to cross-examine Spelt's batty scare tactics.

So, what's my take on Spelt's rapacious tactics? Simply this: He claims to have read somewhere that matters of racial justice should enter a period of "benign neglect". I don't doubt that he has indeed read such a thing; one can find all sorts of crazy stuff on the Internet. More reliable sources, however, tend to agree that Spelt has been telling people that he is the most recent incarnation of the Buddha. This story has been uncritically swallowed and regurgitated by many half-informed, counterproductive slubberdegullions who find pleasure in believing it. No, I can't explain it either. However, I can say that we must do everything we can to shape a world of dignity and harmony, a world of justice, solidarity, liberty, and prosperity. Fortunately, detailing the specific steps and objectives needed to thwart his self-righteous schemes is an activity that's right in my wheelhouse. I even know where to begin: by informing people that I must, on principle, guide the world into an age of peace, justice, and solidarity. Do I blame society for this? No, I blame Spelt.

It must be pointed out over and over again to Spelt's bedfellows and, in a broader sense, to amateurish energumens that Spelt presents himself as a disinterested classicist lamenting the infusion of politically motivated methods of pedagogy and analysis into higher education. He is eloquent in his denunciation of modern scholarship, claiming it favors the most indecent nihilarians you'll ever see. And here we have the ultimate irony because he has become a patsy to his own malevolence. But there is a further-reaching implication: Spelt often misuses the word "interparenthetically" to mean something vaguely related to alcoholism or paternalism or somesuch. Spelt's peons, realizing that an exact definition is anathema to what they know in their hearts, are usually content to assume that Spelt is merely trying to say that his objectives are Right with a capital R. This letter has gone on far too long in my opinion and probably yours as well. So let me end it by saying merely that Spelt makes free and liberal use of chicanery, deceit, intolerance, lust, persecution, and oppression.

That is interesting.

 

[cannedbread]

good thread guys thanks to everyone involved

 

[Spelt]

My aren't you the sassiest can of bread I have ever seen.

 

[deepseadiva]

Spelt is extraordinarily brazen.

This is from that one thing.

 

[Spelt]

 

[Luigitoilet]

i hope obama destroys everyone in here with a predator drone

 

[C.SDK]

Was that copypasta? I can't tell.

 

[Luigitoilet]

idk i didn't read it

 

[Falconv1.0]

Was that copypasta? I can't tell.

That's what I was wondering when you left me a visitor message that I couldn't really respond to because you don't have an open vm wall.

Also who the **** buys canned bread? Is this ****ing Canada?

 

[C.SDK]

That's what I was wondering when you left me a visitor message that I couldn't really respond to because you don't have an open vm wall.

Also who the **** buys canned bread? Is this ****ing Canada?

I don't? I didn't notice. Also, how is asking if someone plays TF2 copypasta?

 

[Jaedrik]

Oops, forgot to log in as MonK4. Wait pretend you didn't see that.

Legend.

Spoiler

10legends