HenryBHough
Diamond Member
Thanks for sharing nothing, for nothing of substance seems to be your forte.
Nearly as weak as your spelling?
Or is it just ESL?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁
Thanks for sharing nothing, for nothing of substance seems to be your forte.
Thanks for sharing nothing, for nothing of substance seems to be your forte.
Nearly as weak as your spelling?
Or is it just ESL?
I'm crushed. I misspelled a word? Oh shame (on you); your fatuous effort to militate my posting has failed, as are nearly all responses limited to a personal attack are failures. Sadly, ad hominems seem to be your only strong suit, talent, or skill; in other words your forte.
I'm crushed. I misspelled a word? Oh shame (on you); your fatuous effort to militate my posting has failed, as are nearly all responses limited to a personal attack are failures. Sadly, ad hominems seem to be your only strong suit, talent, or skill; in other words your forte.
What can I say? I'm overwhelmed by the attention you pay to my succinct summaries of the silliness of the spew. Thank you for taking time out of your busy day to acknowledge my humble existence.
I don't know the answer to that question. Try to post something of substance, offer solutions to defined problems and be panoptic - otherwise I'll continue to skip by your comments as the 'musings' of a partisan fool.
I don't know the answer to that question. Try to post something of substance, offer solutions to defined problems and be panoptic - otherwise I'll continue to skip by your comments as the 'musings' of a partisan fool.
Something at which the ability so to do is proven absent.
But question arises as to whether any Democrats might have learned anything from this discussion of what rotates around what? Particularly that The Earth does not rotate around the brilliance of the poseur-in-chief?
The syntax in you first sentence is awkward; the second sentence as a 'musing' of a partisan fool.
The syntax in you first sentence is awkward; the second sentence as a 'musing' of a partisan fool.
Oh dear....not up to the challenge, eh.
In any case, thank you for your fealty. It's good to know somebody is hanging on each of my pearls of wisdom (musings, to you).
I know it must seem so, but - and trust me on this - the Earth does not revolve around me. I really would like that to be made clear as I wouldn't want The Obamastapo (IRS) to come down on me for outshining..........
That's 'musings' to me. See the little marks enclosing the word? They have significance.
That's 'musings' to me. See the little marks enclosing the word? They have significance.
Review the rules of grammar then get back to me.
But thank you for your kind attention.
Sorry, but this is a ridiculously partisan thread. A person can have strong political convictions, yet not dredge up pointless articles whose sole function is to insult and anger other people. What this does is invite even more pointless threads as revenge, which gets this vicious cycle spinning even hotter. The best thing we can do is not take bait threads like these seriously, regardless of partisan trappings.
"The Independent Review (TIR), subtitled A Journal of Political Economy, is a peer-reviewed quarterly interdisciplinary journal devoted to the study of political economy and the critical analysis of government policy. It is published by The Independent Institute, a libertarian think tank in the United States, and the articles it publishes are generally written from a libertarian perspective.[2] The journal was created in 1996.[2]"
Quote from: The Independent Review - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Why was the study not linked in either the OP or in the IR link?
You will have to ask the author of the article.
As to why I didn't link it, I thought it easy game and didn't bother.
But here you go since you asked.
http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind14/content/chapter-7/c07.pdf
Thanks for the link. In a quick perusal I noted no comments about Democrats or Republicans and many comments on "most Americans". Please copy and past the statement which offers proof that the OP conclusion / statement is accurate and the demographics (not noted in your link), i.e. who was interviewed, how and where.
More Than Half Of Democrats Do Not Know The Earth Revolves Around The Sun Once a Year | Independent Journal Review
The National Science Foundation published a study that reveals an astonishing number of Democrats do not know that the earth revolves around the sun and that it takes a year to do so.
For most Americans who have had any kind of science education, even if their formal schooling ended after the first or second grade, the concept of a solar system in which the sun is the center has long been considered settled science. Yet more than half of Democrats are apparently unaware that the earth goes around the giant glowing ball in the sky once a year.
Conservative Republicans were most likely to know this gradeschool fact about the solar system, while Republicans and conservatives as groups best moderates and Democrats. Various kinds of Liberals, earning those higher education sheepskins, are aware of the basic fact.
Furthermore, 49% percent of Democrats believe that astrology is scientific.
![]()
And notice the RINO position at dead last, bottom of the fucking barrel.
Sure essplains a lot.
Balderdash, senseless, stupid, or exaggerated talk or writing; nonsense. Exactly an apt description of the OP.
Now does anyone have something of substance to offer to the author of the OP? Or are we all in agreement that he is nothing more than a parrot, for he is incapable of posting any evidence to support the opinions he posts. In other words proof that lies are truth.
That's 'musings' to me. See the little marks enclosing the word? They have significance.
Review the rules of grammar then get back to me.
But thank you for your kind attention.
LOL, your arrogance is only exceeded by your ignorance.