Jump to content

Wanna-B-Fanboy

Members
  • Posts

    9,499
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    39

Everything posted by Wanna-B-Fanboy

  1. They are trying to keep up with the missed penalties for the bombers
  2. No holding call on the return... oh ****. This is going to be a long Game and I might need a new tv after this game
  3. They better call the offside fairly
  4. Purifoy with douchy hit on the ground
  5. Sounds more like Jay Sekulow and Pat Cipollone.
  6. Great song... but an... interesting pick for Game day... We need more of this: It's worth a gander. huge Lulz at 1:15
  7. SHUT YOUR MOUTH ABOUT RAMBO!!!!
  8. You are showing your ignorance when you equate what Cherry said and what Allen said, when you completely neglect the context. Virtue signaling? lazy argument and also not really applicable here, please brush up on your definitions if you are going to sling 'em around to stifle debate. It often feels like such a waste of time, because I am 99% sure you are not even going to click on the links provided- but there is still that 1% possibility that you will. I even quoted a few lines from each link, so even if you didn't want to click on the link, there are still some nuggets for you to read. https://www.adamsmith.org/blog/stop-saying-virtue-signalling "At best, virtue signalling is a pretentious way of saying 'showing off'. At worst, it is mental armour against self-doubt. People should stop saying it." https://www.ft.com/content/cf4d3d5c-7129-11e9-bf5c-6eeb837566c5 "the term is used increasingly to silence those who support causes the critic dislikes.... It is instead the insult of choice for people who don’t want to have to engage with the issue itself. In truth, what the critic dislikes is rarely the signalling; it is the virtue." https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jan/20/virtue-signalling-putdown-passed-sell-by-date "What started off as a clever way to win arguments has become a lazy put down. It’s too often used to cast aspersions on opponents as an alternative to rebutting their arguments. In fact, it’s becoming indistinguishable from the thing it was designed to call out: smug posturing from a position of self-appointed authority." What group was she bigoted about? Serious question.
  9. Like in this thread, for example.
  10. Agreed, I would pay money to listen to Dunigan make fun of suits on air.
  11. I would like a combination of Dunigan and Suitor
  12. https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/470286-plurality-in-battleground-states-support-trumps-impeachment-poll
  13. Because... of course they would
  14. Sadly, they keep omitting the fact that it was a person from Saskatchewan that was doing the dumping.
  15. And this is why you see nothing wrong with what Cherry said.
  16. I thought the same thing too when that "BREAKING NEWS" chyron scrolled across my screen
  17. Damn- That is something I never expected to see in my life pre-2016. Now- I raise and eyebrow and then "oh yeah... trump." Is this what the "trump effect" is?
  18. Decent, honest people at fox... here is one of the last of that total endangered species:
  19. All Federal crimes? Aaaaaand cue the incoming pardon:
  20. this is is Ingram's point she is making? The Sideshow Bob defense. What in the actual ****...
  21. See, you don't get it. That's cool- many people don't, nothing to be ashamed of.
  22. WSF showed that's not true. We scored 2 points not having the ball. Bovine spiked the ball in the endzone, we got a safety out of that. Also- rouges, you don't have the ball.
  23. You just don't get it, do you. Even if you did, I think you would still try to be obtuse about it.
×
×
  • Create New...