Posted on 04/12/2009 10:19:35 PM PDT by DrGop0821
WOW! The Closer, huh?
These two guys are headed for e-fisticuffs. I figured I’d lighten up the situation.
Andy Rooney would say? “Is it just me? Or is this a stupid thread and sorry I started it. I mean, it’s just a thread, right?”
I guess I don’t understand the nature of pissant’s complaint. I just did a search of your posts and they all contain a link which takes you to whatever blog contains the story.
Yes. It is titled "Closer". And, you're right. She doesn't go au natural, but she gets really, really close.
From what I understand she did when they filmed it - and more - but, Mike-married to Diane Sawyer-Nichols left it on the counting room floor. Which immediately leads me to believe he's a homo. Which, would be par for the course in Hollywood.
That’s exactly my point. Not trying to make anyone’s life difficult; in fact, I think it makes it easier. I don’t post any BS. I really just don’t get pissant’s beef with me. FR is a comfortable place for me and I feel like I’m helping the movement.
Some people may not like to click on a URL that looks like a random alphanumeric string because they fear opening a link which may contain a virus or malware, or maybe is just a pop-up pest site. Whatever. Here’s a solution: Fill in the friggin’ source. That’s what the space is there for.
“Andy Rooney would say? “Is it just me? Or is this a stupid thread and sorry I started it. I mean, it’s just a thread, right?”
My old man used to say “why don’t you try shutting up about how unimportant this is? Or just shut up about shutting up?”
I think one of the complaints you will find on this forum regards people who come into this country and want all of us who were already here to acculturate ourselves to their newcomer ways instead of the other way around.
You came into FreeRepublic less than two months ago.
I just added you to my “idiot blogpimp” list.
There isn’t much of a difference. It is more of a courtesy. For example, if you saw http://www.mmlott.org, that wouldn’t give you much of an idea what you would find there, some charity from the .org extension. But having it repeated as “Lotts’ Labors” may give you a clue that somebody is talking about their work. [Granted that particular title doesn’t let you know what that work is. I used that particular website because I know the owners very very well (as well as I know my own self) and that it is discussing the Lott’s work on a Bible Translation team in Southeast Asia. You are invited to peruse the website.]
Giving a url takes a reader to the specific article. Putting in “NYT” tells the reader not to waste their time. Putting in “Washington Times” says that this may be a reasonably balanced article.
Just not close enough. Of course, she’s not well endowed, so that might be a reason why, but she’s very pointy, and that can make up for things. ;-D
Think about the difference between Washington Post and WND. We really do need to see the source, just to be able to judge what the content of the article may contain bias, BS, or just plain fabrication. :D
au natural, is that like FreeRepubic?
It kinda reminds me of people who make it their duty to inform others when they've posted a duplicate thread when that's what mods are their for.
Sometimes you gotta let these things play out, ya know?
Separate the men from the boys.
The wheat from the chaff.
The winner from the loser.
Besides, ain’t nuthin on the tube now... I’m makin popcorn!
What are the Vegas odds now?
More like FreeRethongic.
LOL.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.