Re: Pity the Sheeple

Discussion in 'Computer Support' started by Jenn, Dec 29, 2010.

  1. Jenn

    Jenn Guest

    §nühw¤£f wrote:
    > Nicely analysed:
    >
    > The fascinating thing about conservatism is that many poor people
    > subscribe to its principles thanks in large part to Fox News and talk
    > radio, even though it calls for doing away with the safety net. This
    > is crucial for forming a conservative utopia because the wealthy
    > business interests who push for deregulation need the impoverished to
    > provide (usually cheap and hard) labor and perform other menial tasks.
    > While the poor would likely suffer the most at first, since freedom
    > from government intrusion in the workplace guarantees the absence of
    > minimum wage laws, sanitation requirements and unemployment benefits,
    > ultimately the entire society would implode, since, as the sub-prime
    > mortgage crisis proves, unfettered free markets concentrate most of
    > the wealth in the hands of a few mega financial firms, which would
    > destroy themselves by creating a massive boom-bust cycle, leaving
    > everyone destitute.
    > http://scholarlywritingreviewed.com/?p=486



    Where is chicken little?? I expect to read next that the sky is falling.
    Liberals want their own utopia that rests on the backs of the poor only
    they offer it up via wild spending with no future consequences. I'm not
    sure if any one party has the right answers when we look at the big picture.
    --
    Jenn (from Oklahoma)
     
    Jenn, Dec 29, 2010
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Jenn <> pinched out a steaming pile
    of<ifecik$5hs$-september.org>:

    >§nühw¤£f wrote:
    >> Nicely analysed:
    >>
    >> The fascinating thing about conservatism is that many poor people
    >> subscribe to its principles thanks in large part to Fox News and

    talk
    >> radio, even though it calls for doing away with the safety net. This
    >> is crucial for forming a conservative utopia because the wealthy
    >> business interests who push for deregulation need the impoverished

    to
    >> provide (usually cheap and hard) labor and perform other menial

    tasks.
    >> While the poor would likely suffer the most at first, since freedom
    >> from government intrusion in the workplace guarantees the absence

    of
    >> minimum wage laws, sanitation requirements and unemployment

    benefits,
    >> ultimately the entire society would implode, since, as the sub-prime
    >> mortgage crisis proves, unfettered free markets concentrate most of
    >> the wealth in the hands of a few mega financial firms, which would
    >> destroy themselves by creating a massive boom-bust cycle, leaving
    >> everyone destitute.
    >> http://scholarlywritingreviewed.com/?p=486

    >
    >
    >Where is chicken little?? I expect to read next that the sky is

    falling.
    >Liberals want their own utopia that rests on the backs of the poor

    only
    >they offer it up via wild spending with no future consequences. I'm

    not
    >sure if any one party has the right answers when we look at the big

    picture.

    ah yes; the most cowardly position of all - the Perpetual Sceptic.

    <chuckle>


    --
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=COaoYqkpkUA
    cageprisoners.com|www.snuhwolf.9f.com|www.eyeonpalin.org
    _____ ____ ____ __ /\_/\ __ _ ______ _____
    / __/ |/ / / / / // // . . \\ \ |\ | / __ \ \ \ __\
    _\ \/ / /_/ / _ / \ / \ \| \| \ \_\ \ \__\ _\
    /___/_/|_/\____/_//_/ \_@_/ \__|\__|\____/\____\_\
     
    §ñühw¤£f, Dec 29, 2010
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Jenn

    Eagle Guest

    Jenn pretended :
    > §nühw¤£f wrote:
    >> Nicely analysed:
    >>
    >> The fascinating thing about conservatism is that many poor people
    >> subscribe to its principles thanks in large part to Fox News and talk
    >> radio, even though it calls for doing away with the safety net. This
    >> is crucial for forming a conservative utopia because the wealthy
    >> business interests who push for deregulation need the impoverished to
    >> provide (usually cheap and hard) labor and perform other menial tasks.
    >> While the poor would likely suffer the most at first, since freedom
    >> from government intrusion in the workplace guarantees the absence of
    >> minimum wage laws, sanitation requirements and unemployment benefits,
    >> ultimately the entire society would implode, since, as the sub-prime
    >> mortgage crisis proves, unfettered free markets concentrate most of
    >> the wealth in the hands of a few mega financial firms, which would
    >> destroy themselves by creating a massive boom-bust cycle, leaving
    >> everyone destitute.
    >> http://scholarlywritingreviewed.com/?p=486

    >
    >
    > Where is chicken little?? I expect to read next that the sky is falling.
    > Liberals want their own utopia that rests on the backs of the poor only they
    > offer it up via wild spending with no future consequences. I'm not sure if
    > any one party has the right answers when we look at the big picture.


    Careful, Jenn, the chicken littles can't handle the truth, or providing
    for their own future.

    --
    Eagle
    "Be who you are and say what you feel...
    Because those that matter... don't mind...
    And those that mind... don't matter..
    In God We Trust
     
    Eagle, Dec 29, 2010
    #3
  4. Jenn

    Guest

    "Jenn" <> wrote:

    >Liberals want their own utopia


    No Liberals are FOR THE PEOPLE!!

    Not some damn political party where Rush Limbaugh gives
    them a chubby and orgasm
     
    , Dec 29, 2010
    #4
  5. Jenn

    Jenn Guest

    §ñühw¤£f wrote:
    > Jenn <> pinched out a steaming pile
    > of<ifecik$5hs$-september.org>:
    >
    >> §nühw¤£f wrote:
    >>> society would implode, since, as the sub-prime mortgage crisis
    >>> proves, unfettered free markets concentrate most of the wealth in
    >>> the hands of a few mega financial firms, which would destroy
    >>> themselves by creating a massive boom-bust cycle, leaving everyone
    >>> destitute.
    >>> http://scholarlywritingreviewed.com/?p=486

    >>
    >>
    >> Where is chicken little?? I expect to read next that the sky is
    >> falling. Liberals want their own utopia that rests on the backs of
    >> the poor only they offer it up via wild spending with no future
    >> consequences. I'm not sure if any one party has the right answers
    >> when we look at the big picture.



    > ah yes; the most cowardly position of all - the Perpetual Sceptic.
    >
    > <chuckle>



    Not exactly ... Both sides seem to believe the other is totally off their
    rocker .. I think we spend too much time arguing about *sides* vs finding
    solid solutions that actually work.

    --
    Jenn (from Oklahoma)
     
    Jenn, Dec 29, 2010
    #5
  6. Jenn

    Jenn Guest

    wrote:
    > "Jenn" <> wrote:
    >
    >> Liberals want their own utopia

    >
    > No Liberals are FOR THE PEOPLE!!
    >


    I've yet to see any benefit from anything the liberals have done.

    --
    Jenn (from Oklahoma)
     
    Jenn, Dec 29, 2010
    #6
  7. Jenn

    Aardvark Guest

    On Wed, 29 Dec 2010 13:28:05 -0600, Jenn wrote:

    > §ñühw€£f wrote:
    >> Jenn <> pinched out a steaming pile
    >> of<ifecik$5hs$-september.org>:
    >>
    >>> §nühw€£f wrote:
    >>>> society would implode, since, as the sub-prime mortgage crisis
    >>>> proves, unfettered free markets concentrate most of the wealth in the
    >>>> hands of a few mega financial firms, which would destroy themselves
    >>>> by creating a massive boom-bust cycle, leaving everyone destitute.
    >>>> http://scholarlywritingreviewed.com/?p=486
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Where is chicken little?? I expect to read next that the sky is
    >>> falling. Liberals want their own utopia that rests on the backs of
    >>> the poor only they offer it up via wild spending with no future
    >>> consequences. I'm not sure if any one party has the right answers
    >>> when we look at the big picture.

    >
    >
    >> ah yes; the most cowardly position of all - the Perpetual Sceptic.
    >>
    >> <chuckle>

    >
    >
    > Not exactly ... Both sides seem to believe the other is totally off
    > their rocker .. I think we spend too much time arguing about *sides* vs
    > finding solid solutions that actually work.


    <http://whatthefuckhasobamadonesofar.com/>

    --

    Couldn't think of a sig. This'll have to do.
     
    Aardvark, Dec 29, 2010
    #7
  8. Jenn

    Aardvark Guest

    On Wed, 29 Dec 2010 21:51:36 +0000, ~BD~ wrote:

    > Aardvark wrote:
    >>
    >> <http://whatthefuckhasobamadonesofar.com/>
    >>
    >>

    > Where did he get the money from to do all those things?
    >


    Far too vague a question to warrant a reply.

    > Jus' wonderin'!


    Don't wonder. research.



    --
    Couldn't think of a sig. This'll have to do.
     
    Aardvark, Dec 29, 2010
    #8
  9. Jenn

    Jenn Guest

    ~BD~ wrote:
    > Aardvark wrote:
    >> On Wed, 29 Dec 2010 21:51:36 +0000, ~BD~ wrote:
    >>
    >>> Aardvark wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>> <http://whatthefuckhasobamadonesofar.com/>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>> Where did he get the money from to do all those things?
    >>>

    >>
    >> Far too vague a question to warrant a reply.
    >>
    >>> Jus' wonderin'!

    >>
    >> Don't wonder. research.
    >>

    >
    > Margaret Thatcher once observed that "the trouble with socialism is
    > that eventually you run out of other people's money."
    >
    > That moment has arrived, both in Europe and the United States!



    good point!
    --
    Jenn (from Oklahoma)
     
    Jenn, Dec 29, 2010
    #9
  10. Jenn

    Jenn Guest

    §nühw¤£f wrote:
    > Jenn wrote:
    >> wrote:
    >>> "Jenn" <> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Liberals want their own utopia
    >>>
    >>> No Liberals are FOR THE PEOPLE!!
    >>>

    >>
    >> I've yet to see any benefit from anything the liberals have done.



    > Do you use Medicare by any chance? Do you vote?



    nope ... don't use Medicare .... Yes, I do vote.
    --
    Jenn (from Oklahoma)
     
    Jenn, Dec 29, 2010
    #10
  11. Jenn

    Jenn Guest

    §nühw¤£f wrote:
    > Jenn wrote:
    >> §ñühw¤£f wrote:
    >>> Jenn <> pinched out a steaming pile
    >>> of<ifecik$5hs$-september.org>:


    >>>> §nühw¤£f wrote:
    >>>>> society would implode, since, as the sub-prime mortgage crisis
    >>>>> proves, unfettered free markets concentrate most of the wealth in
    >>>>> the hands of a few mega financial firms, which would destroy
    >>>>> themselves by creating a massive boom-bust cycle, leaving everyone
    >>>>> destitute.
    >>>>> http://scholarlywritingreviewed.com/?p=486


    >>>> Where is chicken little?? I expect to read next that the sky is
    >>>> falling. Liberals want their own utopia that rests on the backs of
    >>>> the poor only they offer it up via wild spending with no future
    >>>> consequences. I'm not sure if any one party has the right answers
    >>>> when we look at the big picture.



    >>> ah yes; the most cowardly position of all - the Perpetual Sceptic.
    >>> <chuckle>



    >> Not exactly ... Both sides seem to believe the other is totally off
    >> their
    >> rocker .. I think we spend too much time arguing about *sides* vs
    >> finding
    >> solid solutions that actually work.



    > Utilitarianism is ok as long as its not coupled with moral relativism.
    > And Obama is too willing to conceed to the other side, Jus Sayin.


    You mean like one president who said, "I did not have sex with that woman"?

    --
    Jenn (from Oklahoma)
     
    Jenn, Dec 29, 2010
    #11
  12. Jenn

    Aardvark Guest

    On Wed, 29 Dec 2010 22:01:24 +0000, ~BD~ wrote:

    > Aardvark wrote:
    >> On Wed, 29 Dec 2010 21:51:36 +0000, ~BD~ wrote:
    >>
    >>> Aardvark wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>> <http://whatthefuckhasobamadonesofar.com/>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>> Where did he get the money from to do all those things?
    >>>
    >>>

    >> Far too vague a question to warrant a reply.
    >>
    >>> Jus' wonderin'!

    >>
    >> Don't wonder. research.
    >>
    >>

    > Margaret Thatcher once observed that “the trouble with socialism is that
    > eventually you run out of other people’s money.â€
    >


    There's nothing more satisfying than to know that she has Alzheimer's.
    Apparently in her lucid moments she realises that Denis is dead and
    grieves all over again, every time.

    Karma's a real bitch.

    > That moment has arrived, both in Europe and the United States!


    It's our fucking money.



    --
    Couldn't think of a sig. This'll have to do.
     
    Aardvark, Dec 29, 2010
    #12
  13. Jenn

    Nomen Nescio Guest

    In article <>
    ~BD~ <~BD~@nomail.afraid.com> wrote:
    >
    > Aardvark wrote:
    > >
    > > <http://whatthefuckhasobamadonesofar.com/>
    > >

    >
    > Where did he get the money from to do all those things?
    >
    > Jus' wonderin'!


    From your credit card. }{3'2 _|00.- 3V1L }{4><0.-3.-
     
    Nomen Nescio, Dec 29, 2010
    #13
  14. Jenn

    Dustin Guest

    ~BD~ <~BD~@nomail.afraid.com> wrote in
    news::

    > Aardvark wrote:
    >>
    >> <http://whatthefuckhasobamadonesofar.com/>
    >>

    >
    > Where did he get the money from to do all those things?


    Why don't you send him an email and list your bad guy hunting skills. He
    could use some help.



    --
    Hackers are generally only very weakly motivated by conventional rewards
    such as social approval or money. They tend to be attracted by
    challenges and excited by interesting toys, and to judge the interest of
    work or other activities in terms of the challenges offered and the toys
    they get to play with.
     
    Dustin, Dec 30, 2010
    #14
  15. Jenn

    Dustin Guest

    ~BD~ <~BD~@nomail.afraid.com> wrote in
    news::

    > Aardvark wrote:
    >> On Wed, 29 Dec 2010 22:01:24 +0000, ~BD~ wrote:

    >
    > [....]
    >
    >>> Margaret Thatcher once observed that “the trouble with socialism
    >>> is that eventually you run out of other people’s money.â€
    >>>

    >>
    >> There's nothing more satisfying than to know that she has
    >> Alzheimer's. Apparently in her lucid moments she realises that
    >> Denis is dead and grieves all over again, every time.
    >>
    >> Karma's a real bitch.

    >
    > You (or your children) will get *your* just deserts. Mark my words!


    Is that a threat, David?

    > Britain *has* no money!


    If it wasn't for us across the pond; you wouldn't even have the britain
    you have now. Good thing you couldn't kick our asses when we decided we
    weren't going to pay your taxes anymore. You needed us to help you out
    of a jam in ww2. :)



    --
    Hackers are generally only very weakly motivated by conventional
    rewards such as social approval or money. They tend to be attracted by
    challenges and excited by interesting toys, and to judge the interest
    of work or other activities in terms of the challenges offered and the
    toys they get to play with.
     
    Dustin, Dec 30, 2010
    #15
  16. Jenn

    Aardvark Guest

    On Thu, 30 Dec 2010 00:28:51 +0000, Dustin wrote:

    > If it wasn't for us across the pond; you wouldn't even have the britain
    > you have now. Good thing you couldn't kick our asses when we decided we
    > weren't going to pay your taxes anymore. You needed us to help you out
    > of a jam in ww2.


    Why do you Yanks always come out with that historically inaccurate
    bollocks?

    Reminds me of the joke which did the rounds when England beat (or, should
    I say hammered) Germany 5-1 in Munich in the qualifying stages of the
    2002 World Cup. Word was that the US team turned up in Munich a week
    later claiming the victory for themselves.

    The match in question was actually played on September 1, 2001.

    --
    Couldn't think of a sig. This'll have to do.
     
    Aardvark, Dec 30, 2010
    #16
  17. Jenn

    Dustin Guest

    Aardvark <> wrote in
    news:VKQSo.1146$2:

    > On Thu, 30 Dec 2010 00:28:51 +0000, Dustin wrote:
    >
    >> If it wasn't for us across the pond; you wouldn't even have the
    >> britain you have now. Good thing you couldn't kick our asses when
    >> we decided we weren't going to pay your taxes anymore. You needed
    >> us to help you out of a jam in ww2.

    >
    > Why do you Yanks always come out with that historically inaccurate
    > bollocks?


    I recently watched an episode on the history channel abount the routine
    bombings britain was suffering at the hands of Germany. I observed our
    planes and our pilots being shipped to britian to save their RAF
    (German aircraft were for the most part, better than what britian had).

    Germany could have wiped the RAF off the map; they intended to do just
    that, until American technology arrived. We Yanks are always hassled
    for the meddling we do, but when some weaker country gets invaded; it's
    the Americans who come to clean up the mess. Personally, I wish my
    country would stay out of others issues and just fix our problems. But,
    if we actually did that, well; we'd be labeled bad guys for letting
    countries fall. We can't win either way.

    > Reminds me of the joke which did the rounds when England beat (or,
    > should I say hammered) Germany 5-1 in Munich in the qualifying
    > stages of the 2002 World Cup. Word was that the US team turned up in
    > Munich a week later claiming the victory for themselves.


    I wasn't talking about sports. I was talking about ww2 history; if it
    wasn't for us entering the war (even tho we entered late) the majority
    of persons today would be speaking German.

    --
    Hackers are generally only very weakly motivated by conventional
    rewards such as social approval or money. They tend to be attracted by
    challenges and excited by interesting toys, and to judge the interest
    of work or other activities in terms of the challenges offered and the
    toys they get to play with.
     
    Dustin, Dec 30, 2010
    #17
  18. Jenn

    Aardvark Guest

    On Thu, 30 Dec 2010 01:08:13 +0000, Dustin wrote:

    > Aardvark <> wrote in
    > news:VKQSo.1146$2:
    >
    >> On Thu, 30 Dec 2010 00:28:51 +0000, Dustin wrote:
    >>
    >>> If it wasn't for us across the pond; you wouldn't even have the
    >>> britain you have now. Good thing you couldn't kick our asses when we
    >>> decided we weren't going to pay your taxes anymore. You needed us to
    >>> help you out of a jam in ww2.

    >>
    >> Why do you Yanks always come out with that historically inaccurate
    >> bollocks?

    >
    > I recently watched an episode on the history channel abount the routine
    > bombings britain was suffering at the hands of Germany.


    It was called 'The Blitz'. Even Belfast suffered three bombing raids. Me
    dear ol' mum, whose dad worked in the docks and lived very near there,
    was evacuated with her siblings to the country for the duration.

    > I observed our
    > planes and our pilots being shipped to britian to save their RAF (German
    > aircraft were for the most part, better than what britian had).


    While there's no argument that the US possessed better technology of war,
    the Americans didn't come to Britain to save them- the Battle of Britain
    had already been won by the Autumn of 1940, quite some time before the
    first American set foot on British soil, by RAF pilots, and fat Hermann
    and Adolf had decided to indefinitely delay any plans they had to invade.

    The fact that the Japanese had attacked the US and the US had declared
    war on them (and on their Axis allies- Germany and Italy), it made sense
    for them to have forward operating bases closer to any potential bombing
    targets in Europe than the Eastern seaboard of the US. Britain, being
    allied with the US, allowed the US forces to use bases in the UK and
    Northern Ireland. US bases in Britain were mutually beneficial to both
    countries. No one was saving the other's ass.

    >
    > Germany could have wiped the RAF off the map;


    See above re: Battle of Britain.

    <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Britain>

    > they intended to do just
    > that,


    See above re Goerring and Hitler's postponement of any invasion.

    > until American technology arrived. We Yanks are always hassled for
    > the meddling we do,


    LOL. Bringing the world 'democracy'. ****, that's funny. Successive US
    administrations for sixty years have worked hard at *denying* democracy
    to many countries. See John Pilger's film 'War on Democracy':

    <http://johnpilger.com/videos/the-war-on-democracy>

    > but when some weaker country gets invaded; it's the
    > Americans who come to clean up the mess.


    No, it's usually the US doing the invading, one way or another.

    > Personally, I wish my country
    > would stay out of others issues and just fix our problems.


    I could live with the US keeping their 'democracy' at home.

    > But, if we
    > actually did that, well; we'd be labeled bad guys for letting countries
    > fall. We can't win either way.
    >


    Face it. US foreign policy has always sucked.

    >> Reminds me of the joke which did the rounds when England beat (or,
    >> should I say hammered) Germany 5-1 in Munich in the qualifying stages
    >> of the 2002 World Cup. Word was that the US team turned up in Munich a
    >> week later claiming the victory for themselves.

    >
    > I wasn't talking about sports.


    Nor was I, really. I was talking about the way Brits laugh when Americans
    come out with that 'we saved your asses' bullshit.

    > I was talking about ww2 history;


    You watched the programme, but I suspect you missed some salient details.
    Or the programme did.

    > if it
    > wasn't for us entering the war (even tho we entered late) the majority
    > of persons today would be speaking German.


    I'm not so sure about that, meself.



    --
    Couldn't think of a sig. This'll have to do.
     
    Aardvark, Dec 30, 2010
    #18
  19. Jenn <> pinched out a steaming pile
    of<ifgd6h$juu$-september.org>:

    >§nühw¤£f wrote:
    >> Jenn wrote:
    >>> §ñühw¤£f wrote:
    >>>> Jenn <> pinched out a steaming pile
    >>>> of<ifecik$5hs$-september.org>:

    >
    >>>>> §nühw¤£f wrote:
    >>>>>> society would implode, since, as the sub-prime mortgage crisis
    >>>>>> proves, unfettered free markets concentrate most of the wealth

    in
    >>>>>> the hands of a few mega financial firms, which would destroy
    >>>>>> themselves by creating a massive boom-bust cycle, leaving

    everyone
    >>>>>> destitute.
    >>>>>> http://scholarlywritingreviewed.com/?p=486

    >
    >>>>> Where is chicken little?? I expect to read next that the sky is
    >>>>> falling. Liberals want their own utopia that rests on the backs

    of
    >>>>> the poor only they offer it up via wild spending with no future
    >>>>> consequences. I'm not sure if any one party has the right

    answers
    >>>>> when we look at the big picture.

    >
    >
    >>>> ah yes; the most cowardly position of all - the Perpetual Sceptic.
    >>>> <chuckle>

    >
    >
    >>> Not exactly ... Both sides seem to believe the other is totally off
    >>> their
    >>> rocker .. I think we spend too much time arguing about *sides* vs
    >>> finding
    >>> solid solutions that actually work.

    >
    >
    >> Utilitarianism is ok as long as its not coupled with moral

    relativism.
    >> And Obama is too willing to conceed to the other side, Jus Sayin.

    >
    >You mean like one president who said, "I did not have sex with that

    woman"?
    >

    no, that would be called "lieing".

    --
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=COaoYqkpkUA
    cageprisoners.com|www.snuhwolf.9f.com|www.eyeonpalin.org
    _____ ____ ____ __ /\_/\ __ _ ______ _____
    / __/ |/ / / / / // // . . \\ \ |\ | / __ \ \ \ __\
    _\ \/ / /_/ / _ / \ / \ \| \| \ \_\ \ \__\ _\
    /___/_/|_/\____/_//_/ \_@_/ \__|\__|\____/\____\_\
     
    §ñühw¤£f, Dec 30, 2010
    #19
  20. Jenn

    Aardvark Guest

    On Thu, 30 Dec 2010 14:05:02 +0000, ~BD~ wrote:

    > Aardvark's answered this for me!
    >


    Of course I did.

    > I don't think Aardie mentioned, though, that Britain has only recently
    > repaid the final debt payment to the USA for money borrowed to pay for
    > the UK's expenditure during WWII !!!


    I was going to do so, but decided not to, and also add that the Yanks are
    still here on some bases.

    <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
    United_States_Air_Force_in_the_United_Kingdom>

    Menwith Hill (formerly Fylingdales) is still here, and the cause of
    controversy:

    <http://www.caab.org.uk/>



    --
    Couldn't think of a sig. This'll have to do.
     
    Aardvark, Dec 30, 2010
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. John Holmes

    Re: Wake up, sheeple.

    John Holmes, Nov 27, 2010, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    442
    Ferd Berfle
    Nov 28, 2010
  2. Meat Plow

    Re: Wake up, sheeple.

    Meat Plow, Nov 27, 2010, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    445
    Buffalo
    Nov 28, 2010
  3. Aardvark

    Re: Pity the Sheeple

    Aardvark, Dec 28, 2010, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    36
    Views:
    1,545
    Aardvark
    Jan 4, 2011
  4. NormanM

    Re: Pity the Sheeple

    NormanM, Dec 29, 2010, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    974
    NormanM
    Dec 29, 2010
  5. Aardvark

    Re: Pity the Sheeple

    Aardvark, Dec 29, 2010, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    860
    Aardvark
    Dec 29, 2010
Loading...

Share This Page