24c76996
XPost: alt.support.attn-deficit, alt.support.tourette
From: dawgface@ten.hut
"marcia" wrote in message
news:3b13a6e1-ac79-4ff1-aee5-821f40bdacf0@v39g2000pro.googlegroups.com...
> On Nov 2, 4:10 pm, "Frank" wrote:
>> "marcia" wrote in message
>>
>> news:1159722c-48b9-4ecd-9f41-15622c0dfb7b@o40g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Nov 1, 11:56 pm, "Frank" wrote:
>> >> "stanw" wrote in message
>>
>> >>news:caab1e5c-5533-4508-ad5f-6f999e64a65f@g17g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> >> >> > WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME YOU SAW A HOUSE BUILT FROM THE ROOF
>> >> >> > DOWN?
>>
>> >> >> A few weeks ago actually, really.
>>
>> >> > You saw a house being built from the top down? What, are you
>> >> > the
>> >> > kindergartener with cookie crumbs on his chin and a chocolate
>> >> > stain
>> >> > on
>> >> > his hands and collar who "swears" he "didn't take a
>> >> > cookie!!!!!".
>>
>> >> > Talk about spite. Marcia's analogy is quite apt. Neither
>> >> > you -
>> >> > nor ANY one - has *ever* or COULD ever build a house from the
>> >> > top
>> >> > down. Nope. Can't ever be done. Nope, even if, by some lunacy
>> >> > you
>> >> > build it in layers and stack it on some scaffolding "top
>> >> > first" -
>> >> > the
>> >> > contact to the ground, either via the scaffolding or a crane or,
>> >> > as
>> >> > I
>> >> > suspect, the lower floors, the fact remains that the ground
>> >> > supports
>> >> > everything else and, thus, it is built FROM THE GROUND UP.
>>
>> >> > -stan
>>
>> >> LOL, really frosts your cake, eh?
>>
>> >> Tell you what, I can build a house from the top down. I choose the
>> >> location, materials, etc. you pay for the costs if I can do it,
>> >> plus
>> >> a
>> >> percentage of profit at my discretion. I also hold all rights of
>> >> design,
>> >> and benefit from any publicity arising out of it. I can build it
>> >> so
>> >> that
>> >> it never touches the ground or so that when it is complete it will
>> >> be
>> >> set on the ground. You must first prove you have the wherewithal
>> >> to
>> >> pay
>> >> for the costs whether it be a one room abode of multiple.
>>
>> > What? They've repealed the laws of gravity where you live?
>>
>> > Just because you declare you can circumvent standard building
>> > construction (without providing any details for us to laugh at)
>> > doesn't mean your point is correct. It's not. You're just being a
>> > contrarian.
>>
>> You are both being ridiculous, as well as ignorant about how such
>> things
>> are done. I brought up the bird house/nest to provide an easy clue
>> for
>> both of you, and damn, it is staring you both in the face and you
>> still
>> cannot see it, about as bad as neither seeing the truth about Obama.
>>
>> You let me worry about "breaking the laws of gravity" lol, and cough
>> up
>> the money, I'll cut the costs down by just building on small room
>> fully
>> roofed, build it from a balloon if I must, but that will raise the
>> costs
>> considerably, but I can do it without any slight of hand or tricks.
>>
>> So lay out the parameters ahead of time so there will be no argument
>> about it or the finances upon my completion.
>>
>> Oh and please do explain Obama's trickle up BS. That just has to be
>> one
>> of the dumbest things he has ever said. The poor fella is a bit daft,
>> but he can read fairly will, hence the teleprompters.
>
> Frank, I hate to break it to you, but when a bird constructs a nest,
> it starts by putting twigs and other bits on a branch or in the crook
> of a tree. That would be the ***foundation,*** not the ***roof***. Bad
> example on your part.
Oh really? Try explaining that to the swallows and other birds. LOL
>
> The point is, even if you can figure out a way to work around standard
> construction techniques just to prove a point, you FAIL to prove your
> point, because everyone else's house was built from the foundation up.
> Dangling the roof from a balloon is exactly the kind of strategy I
> would expect from someone who believes in "trickle-down" economics,
> the failure of which is staring you directly in the face, whether you
> acknowledge it or not.
>
No, you used a poor analogy, trickle down economics does not equate to
house building.
I believe I've already given you yokels various expamples of trickle
down economics, sad to see you cannot understand what you benefit from.
so do try and explain trickle up economics as Obama would have it.
Dangling a whole house from a balloon was in response to the other poor
thinker, and you know that well. According to his logic anything
attached to the ground at any point was the bottom, hated to try and
explain to him that according to his logic that a house susended by a
branch must therefore be dangling upside down, but then that IS the best
logic that an Obama supporter can come up with.
> Provide a CREDIBLE link showing that Obama ever said "trickle up,"
> then I'll discuss it with you. Until then, the term sounds like
> something you made up or read on one of those crazy wing-nut websites
> you like.
ROTFL, You just said you could discuss illogical things as if to say you
know the mind of Obama. I could find it easy enough, but why? You could
never explain it.
Oh, and I did provide you the quote of where you said I was racist.
Apology?
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
