Ron, kill yourself and your wife for being stupid enough to marry
your retarded hick cracker ass. You're a fuckface, a moron, go play >>>> with Mint for 18 *more* years, illiterate monkey ass.
wtf? You on another bender, Joel?
Why are you so triggered by biology and reality?
I'm triggered by it? Not you and Ron for being in such utter *denial*
of this? At least Ron has the excuse he's been brainwashed by the
childrape cult of Catholicism, you're an avowed atheist, you should
see why this would exist.
I'm confused. Maybe 'cause I didn't read the whole thread, and I'm responding to just your last rant.
Ron and I are in denial of what?
Why are you frothing? Is it that you think men can get pregnant?
Do you actually think your online boyfriend is a female just because he plays dress-up?
On Sun, 15 Mar 2026 18:43:42 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-15, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 11:33 p.m., DFS wrote:
On 3/14/2026 5:09 PM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
what good is a Mac that can’t run Adobe stuff?
What good is a GuhNoo/Linux crapbox that can't run Adobe OR Microsoft
OR Apple stuff?
96 in 100 say "Not much".
Honestly, people who choose Linux don't really need the Microsoft,
Adobe or Apple stuff. You can easily live without Microsoft Office by
installing WPS Office or compromising with LibreOffice. If that's not
good enough, relying on the web versions like vallor does will do the
trick (albeit without all the functionality). As for not having the
Adobe stuff, not everyone manipulates images. In fact, practically no
one does. If they _absolutely_ need to use Photoshop, they can do so on
Windows or Mac, but what percentage of people do?
I didn't even use Adobe or Microsoft crap when I used Windows. So
definitely not a big loss for me these past twenty years.
The library project has given me insights into the average computer user.
I certainly use a browser, email, and so forth like a 'normal' person but I've primarily used computers for software development since the Z80 days. Most of the tools I use are cross platform. I've done very little image stuff and it was painful. I don't use office software other than read only if someone sends me a xlsx or docx file.
I used Windows at work since the sites used Windows although much of the development was done on Linux. Since that is no longer a necessity my one remaining Windows 11 laptop is folded up, a convenient shelf for the RPi
and phone.
On 2026-03-15 2:28 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-15, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 10:35 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-14, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 1:04 a.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-14, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-13 17:01, RonB wrote:They were asking this question because these idiots claim that men can have
On 2026-03-13, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-13 16:35, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-13, chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote:No one I have ever seen has actually claimed that.
CrudeSausage wrote:Homosexuality is a real thing. Why? I have no idea. But pretending a >>>>>>>>>> man can "become" a woman and carry a baby (for example) is >>>>>>>>>> delusional BS. And what we're supposed to "accept" this stupidity. >>>>>>>>>
chrisv wrote:
It's a continuous spectrum, and a natural condition of >>>>>>>>>>>>> animals. What percentage that can be called "homo" depends on >>>>>>>>>>>>> where you draw the line.
Disagreed. This is playing right into the narrative of the >>>>>>>>>>>> faggot community.
The assertion that all people are attracted to one sex or another, >>>>>>>>>>> and never both, is absurd. Obviously and demonstratively false. >>>>>>>>>>
Actually they have. And in some idiot countries you can be jailed for >>>>>>>> denying this stupidity.
https://www.feministcurrent.com/2022/07/22/christina-ellingsen-is-facing-prison-time-for-saying-that-men-cant-be-women/
Sorry, but that doesn't prove the converse.
So no, you're claiming your being asked to "accept" that which is not >>>>>>>>> being claimed.
Right. You really don't keep with the news, do you?
https://www.gbnews.com/news/us/liberal-doctor-can-men-get-pregnant-senator-watch-video
Refusing to answer an absurd question doesn't mean she thinks they can. >>>>>>
babies. I see you ignored the other link. Interesting.
I figured out that Anal was a leftist. Why am I not even remotely
shocked that an obnoxious, know-it all zealot is a leftist?
Being a Woke leftist is one thing. Being ignorant of obvious facts is
another. If he's ging to argue, he should at least know what he's talking >>>> about.
No sexual abuse problems in Hollywood... Yeah, right.
You would think that by now, the Operation Mockingbird sources Anal
relies on would have admitted that Harvey Weinstein was a problem or
that Hollywood actresses do allow themselves to be groomed at a young
age in exchange for roles. Oh wait, they did: Anal just purposefully
ignored them in order to needlessly argue here in Snit-like fashion.
Apparently not just Weinstein, Disney seems to a have serious grooming issue >> with child actors.
Or at least did. Hopefully the Weinstein jailing has made child actor
parents more vigilant by now.
I'm still pissed that Magic Kingdom cost my wife and I $600 a ticket
when we went there last week. There is absolutely nothing special about
the place that it would cost that much. Orlando was nice, but the Disney stuff is a serious rip-off.
On 2026-03-15 2:35 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-15, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 10:45 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-14, Jason Basso <jasonbasso1959@hotmail.org> wrote:
On Sat, 14 Mar 2026 11:04:55 -0700
Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 07:26, Lissajous wrote:
RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote inWhy must you lie?
news:slrn10r9r2d.1e5h.ronb02NOSPAM@3020m.home:
On 2026-03-14, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-13 17:01, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-13, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-13 16:35, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-13, chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote:
CrudeSausage wrote:
chrisv wrote:
It's a continuous spectrum, and a natural condition of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> animals. What percentage that can be called "homo" depends >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on where you draw the line.
Disagreed. This is playing right into the narrative of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> faggot community.
The assertion that all people are attracted to one sex or >>>>>>>>>>>>> another, and never both, is absurd. Obviously and
demonstratively false.
Homosexuality is a real thing. Why? I have no idea. But >>>>>>>>>>>> pretending a man can "become" a woman and carry a baby (for >>>>>>>>>>>> example) is delusional BS. And what we're supposed to "accept" >>>>>>>>>>>> this stupidity.
No one I have ever seen has actually claimed that.
Actually they have. And in some idiot countries you can be jailed >>>>>>>>>> for denying this stupidity.
https://www.feministcurrent.com/2022/07/22/christina-ellingsen-is-fac
ing-prison-time-for-saying-that-men-cant-be-women/
Sorry, but that doesn't prove the converse.
So no, you're claiming your being asked to "accept" that which >>>>>>>>>>> is not being claimed.
Right. You really don't keep with the news, do you?
https://www.gbnews.com/news/us/liberal-doctor-can-men-get-pregnant-se
nator-watch-video
Refusing to answer an absurd question doesn't mean she thinks they >>>>>>>>> can.
They were asking this question because these idiots claim that men >>>>>>>> can have babies. I see you ignored the other link. Interesting. >>>>>>>
"Planned Parenthood doctor tells committee that ‘men can have
pregnancies, especially trans men’"
<https://clyde.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=491> >>>>>>>
Why this is even in question demonstrates the idiocy of those who >>>>>>> support Trans agenda.
'Dr. Kumar pushed back, telling him such questions are “really
missing the point” at a hearing about abortion, before affirming his >>>>>> response.
“Somebody with a uterus may have the capability of becoming pregnant, >>>>>> whether they’re a woman or a man,” Dr. Kumar said.'
He never said that a biological male could get pregnant.
And how many biological males do you know who are born with a uterus >>>>> and ovaries?
And how many men have carried a baby to term and given birth? My guess is >>>> zero.
Go ahead, Alan, you can say it. Zero.
Cue Anal finding some discredited faggot source to say the opposite.
No, the Woke choose to use weasel words when this comes up. They don't want >> to give up on their delusional bullshit agenda, even though they *know* they >> can't defend the delusional bullshit it's based on. The reality wall gets in >> their way, so they ignore the question or weasel word around it — never
giving a straight answer. It's a chickenshit maneuver, but it's all they've >> got.
At this point in my life, the moment I find out that someone is a
leftist, I just walk away. I don't even bother trying to talk to them
about anything, no matter how inane.
On 2026-03-15 2:42 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-15, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 11:33 p.m., DFS wrote:
On 3/14/2026 5:09 PM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
what good is a Mac that can’t run Adobe stuff?
What good is a GuhNoo/Linux crapbox that can't run Adobe OR Microsoft OR >>>> Apple stuff?
It's great for those of us who don't want to run Microsoft or Adobe crap, and
don't like Mac OS. Choose what you want DuFuS. I'll choose what I want. Not >> everyone needs or wants Adobe and/or Microsoft crap.
96 in 100 say "Not much".
Only if their gullible enough to pay high rental prices for Adobe and
Microsoft crap. I'm not into that software rental bullshit.
Honestly, people who choose Linux don't really need the Microsoft, Adobe >>> or Apple stuff. You can easily live without Microsoft Office by
installing WPS Office or compromising with LibreOffice. If that's not
good enough, relying on the web versions like vallor does will do the
trick (albeit without all the functionality). As for not having the
Adobe stuff, not everyone manipulates images. In fact, practically no
one does. If they _absolutely_ need to use Photoshop, they can do so on
Windows or Mac, but what percentage of people do?
It's always Microsoft Office or niche products like overpriced Adobe crap
that Windows FUDsters point to. As if Linux users give a crap.
My apologies for commandeering your post to respond to the DuFuS.
I don't mind at all. You're entirely correct, either way. I mean, I use Windows to run open-source applications. The only reason I use Windows
is because I know that my hardware works right in it and don't have to
worry that one of the open-source titles is broken because some
dependency is missing or whatever.
On 2026-03-14 19:45, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-14, Jason Basso <jasonbasso1959@hotmail.org> wrote:
On Sat, 14 Mar 2026 11:04:55 -0700
Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 07:26, Lissajous wrote:
RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote inWhy must you lie?
news:slrn10r9r2d.1e5h.ronb02NOSPAM@3020m.home:
On 2026-03-14, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-13 17:01, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-13, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-13 16:35, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-13, chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote:
CrudeSausage wrote:
chrisv wrote:
It's a continuous spectrum, and a natural condition of >>>>>>>>>>>>> animals. What percentage that can be called "homo" depends >>>>>>>>>>>>> on where you draw the line.
Disagreed. This is playing right into the narrative of the >>>>>>>>>>>> faggot community.
The assertion that all people are attracted to one sex or >>>>>>>>>>> another, and never both, is absurd. Obviously and
demonstratively false.
Homosexuality is a real thing. Why? I have no idea. But
pretending a man can "become" a woman and carry a baby (for >>>>>>>>>> example) is delusional BS. And what we're supposed to "accept" >>>>>>>>>> this stupidity.
No one I have ever seen has actually claimed that.
Actually they have. And in some idiot countries you can be jailed >>>>>>>> for denying this stupidity.
https://www.feministcurrent.com/2022/07/22/christina-ellingsen-is-fac >>>>>>>> ing-prison-time-for-saying-that-men-cant-be-women/
Sorry, but that doesn't prove the converse.
So no, you're claiming your being asked to "accept" that which >>>>>>>>> is not being claimed.
Right. You really don't keep with the news, do you?
https://www.gbnews.com/news/us/liberal-doctor-can-men-get-pregnant-se >>>>>>>> nator-watch-video
Refusing to answer an absurd question doesn't mean she thinks they >>>>>>> can.
They were asking this question because these idiots claim that men >>>>>> can have babies. I see you ignored the other link. Interesting.
"Planned Parenthood doctor tells committee that ‘men can have
pregnancies, especially trans men’"
<https://clyde.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=491>
Why this is even in question demonstrates the idiocy of those who
support Trans agenda.
'Dr. Kumar pushed back, telling him such questions are “really
missing the point” at a hearing about abortion, before affirming his >>>> response.
“Somebody with a uterus may have the capability of becoming pregnant, >>>> whether they’re a woman or a man,” Dr. Kumar said.'
He never said that a biological male could get pregnant.
And how many biological males do you know who are born with a uterus
and ovaries?
And how many men have carried a baby to term and given birth? My guess is
zero.
Go ahead, Alan, you can say it. Zero.
Set up another straw man, Ron.
This one has rotted away.
On 2026-03-15 9:54 p.m., rbowman wrote:
On Sun, 15 Mar 2026 21:00:16 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
Yep, Rebel News already covered this. British Columbia is a silly place. >>> My wife used to want to move there and hoped that her next promotion
would force us there, but she's now discussing getting out of North
America entirely and moving to the Azores to live a simple life. Our
country is a joke complete.
What do you expect from British California?
It's a beautiful place that's been tainted by leftism. It's gotten even worse now: the government there made a deal with an indigenous tribe consisting of no more than 1,400 people to give them ownership of the
land in Vancouver and other metropolitan areas. Essentially, if you
bought a house there, the government is planning to simply give it away
to the Indians.
On 2026-03-15 3:04 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-15, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 10:54 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-15, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 19:25, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-14, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-13 22:11, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-14, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-13 17:03, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-13, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:You don't know if it's a big problem or not.
On 2026-03-13 04:37, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-13, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-12 19:01, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-12, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-12 13:52, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-12, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-12 05:52, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2026-03-11 10:11 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-11, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2026-03-11 06:42, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-11, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2026-03-10 17:25, pothead wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2026-03-10, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2026-03-10 14:04, CrudeSausage wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2026-03-10 1:37 p.m., Chris Ahlstrom wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> DFS wrote this screed in ALL-CAPS: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I care if they try to groom my kids (or grandkids) with that bullshit.On 3/9/2026 9:21 PM, CrudeSausage wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Nevertheless, you shouldn't ignore that Apple is pushing AI
too in the
form of "Apple Intelligence." Heck, even Mozilla is pushing
it now.
There's no escaping this crap anymore. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Google AI Overview has gotten damn good at answering
programming
questions. Which makes sense, as millions and millions of
developers
have asked and answered the same questions for decades.
A lot of good coding info is stored on Stack Overflow or Usenet
programming groups; not sure if that info is collected for AI
usage by
Google and MS, etc.
The Google question parsing is really good now, and the best
answers
have been captured (with large-language models I suppose), and
what you
get back is usually amazingly on-target and sufficient to get
you past
an obstacle.
<snip interesting stuff>
I find Google's AI useful, but sometimes it answers the wrong
question.
Why does Google insist on telling you that it's okay to be a
homosexual?
Why would you care?
Classic leftist, democrat response. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Another false equivalency.
Just because a person brings up point in a discussion doesn't mean
that person
cares or doesn't care.
The leftist democrats love to project. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So do you think he DOESN'T care?
Or have you just not been paying attention? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Do YOU care if someone says it's okay to be homosexual? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No one is trying to groom your kids... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
...well except for all the priests and pastors who keep getting arrested
for it.
They're even trying to pass laws legalizing pedophilia in California.
Don't
give me your bullshit. I'm not buying it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Hollywood would be overjoyed if they could now legally rape the kids
they're already raping.
"Hollywood"?
Really?
Yeah, really. It's not like it's a secret.
Cites then, please.
Do your own research if you think it's necessary.
So you've got nothing.
That's what I expected.
I guess you don't know how to use Google...
I know that none of those links show that "Hollywood"--a whole community
of people--would be "overjoyed" about raping kids...
...or that anything like a significant fraction of that community has
ever done so.
Certainly, you provide no metrics that people in "Hollywood" are any
more likely to commit these crimes than any other group.
Whether you "know it" or not, it's a big problem in Hollywood. Of course you
argue with a strawman by attempting to put words in mouth and moving the
goalposts.
Typical response.
Yes, I do.
How?
It's certainly got a lot of publicity, but that doesn't actually make it
big. Remember the "satanic panic"?
Epstein didn't get a lot of publicity either. Until it did. Do you think it
was a small problem?
I don't think the two are comparable.
Yeah, Hollywood's sexual abuse is more widespread.\
You simply do NOT know that sexual abuse in Hollywood is any more
widespread than in any other group of people who have power...
Yeah, I do. I follow the news.
What do you call it when someone minimizes a problem by changing the
parameters? Goal post moving? Anal seems to idolize his mentor Snit.
...such as evangelist christian pastors.
...and public school teachers.
I can confirm that public school teachers, even here in Quebec, are
routinely arrested for such behaviour. In fact, a teacher from a
prestigious private school here in Montréal was recently arrested for
having child pornography on his computer and of having communicated with >>> an underage person with the goal of committing such an infraction.
Anywhere children (or even women and old folks) are "captive" you'll find
abuse. Schools, orphanages, foster homes, prisons, old folks homes,
synagogues, movie sets and, unfortunately, churches. I just find the
selective "outrage" to be telling of their anti-Christian agenda. It seems >> like the knee-jerk reaction is to defend the perverts who prey on the weak —
in all these locations.
When I was in Bible College, a church's preacher (in the same Protestant
"sect" of Christianity as the Bible College) was fired because he molested >> (at least) one girl. The girl's brother attended the Bible College. He was a >> huge German kid. I could never understand why he didn't beat that preacher >> into pure pulp. But what really pissed me off about this is the old biddies >> in the church were saying, "Well, at least he has his Amway business to fall >> back on." The son-of-a-bitch should have either been dead or in prison, as >> far as I was concerned. (I never went to that Church, but my brother's wife >> attended it. That's the only reason I was aware of what happened there.)
Imagine finding out that someone is a pedophile and sympathizing with
the pedophile when his life is ruined from the revelation. It seems like
a very leftist thing to do.
On 2026-03-16, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:You think your last comment was more than a '"clever" quip'?
On 2026-03-14 19:45, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-14, Jason Basso <jasonbasso1959@hotmail.org> wrote:
On Sat, 14 Mar 2026 11:04:55 -0700
Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 07:26, Lissajous wrote:
RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote inWhy must you lie?
news:slrn10r9r2d.1e5h.ronb02NOSPAM@3020m.home:
On 2026-03-14, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-13 17:01, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-13, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-13 16:35, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-13, chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote:
CrudeSausage wrote:
chrisv wrote:
It's a continuous spectrum, and a natural condition of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> animals. What percentage that can be called "homo" depends >>>>>>>>>>>>>> on where you draw the line.
Disagreed. This is playing right into the narrative of the >>>>>>>>>>>>> faggot community.
The assertion that all people are attracted to one sex or >>>>>>>>>>>> another, and never both, is absurd. Obviously and
demonstratively false.
Homosexuality is a real thing. Why? I have no idea. But
pretending a man can "become" a woman and carry a baby (for >>>>>>>>>>> example) is delusional BS. And what we're supposed to "accept" >>>>>>>>>>> this stupidity.
No one I have ever seen has actually claimed that.
Actually they have. And in some idiot countries you can be jailed >>>>>>>>> for denying this stupidity.
https://www.feministcurrent.com/2022/07/22/christina-ellingsen-is-fac >>>>>>>>> ing-prison-time-for-saying-that-men-cant-be-women/
Sorry, but that doesn't prove the converse.
So no, you're claiming your being asked to "accept" that which >>>>>>>>>> is not being claimed.
Right. You really don't keep with the news, do you?
https://www.gbnews.com/news/us/liberal-doctor-can-men-get-pregnant-se >>>>>>>>> nator-watch-video
Refusing to answer an absurd question doesn't mean she thinks they >>>>>>>> can.
They were asking this question because these idiots claim that men >>>>>>> can have babies. I see you ignored the other link. Interesting.
"Planned Parenthood doctor tells committee that ‘men can have
pregnancies, especially trans men’"
<https://clyde.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=491>
Why this is even in question demonstrates the idiocy of those who
support Trans agenda.
'Dr. Kumar pushed back, telling him such questions are “really
missing the point” at a hearing about abortion, before affirming his >>>>> response.
“Somebody with a uterus may have the capability of becoming pregnant, >>>>> whether they’re a woman or a man,” Dr. Kumar said.'
He never said that a biological male could get pregnant.
And how many biological males do you know who are born with a uterus
and ovaries?
And how many men have carried a baby to term and given birth? My guess is >>> zero.
Go ahead, Alan, you can say it. Zero.
Set up another straw man, Ron.
This one has rotted away.
Adios Alan. If it's just going to be "clever" quips, I've better things to
do with my time.
On 2026-03-16, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-15 3:04 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-15, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 10:54 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-15, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 19:25, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-14, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-13 22:11, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-14, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-13 17:03, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-13, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:You don't know if it's a big problem or not.
On 2026-03-13 04:37, RonB wrote:Whether you "know it" or not, it's a big problem in Hollywood. Of course you
On 2026-03-13, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-12 19:01, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-12, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-12 13:52, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-12, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2026-03-12 05:52, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2026-03-11 10:11 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-11, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2026-03-11 06:42, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-11, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2026-03-10 17:25, pothead wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2026-03-10, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2026-03-10 14:04, CrudeSausage wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2026-03-10 1:37 p.m., Chris Ahlstrom wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> DFS wrote this screed in ALL-CAPS: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I care if they try to groom my kids (or grandkids) with that bullshit.Or have you just not been paying attention? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 3/9/2026 9:21 PM, CrudeSausage wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I find Google's AI useful, but sometimes it answers the wrong
Nevertheless, you shouldn't ignore that Apple is pushing AI
too in the
form of "Apple Intelligence." Heck, even Mozilla is pushing
it now.
There's no escaping this crap anymore. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Google AI Overview has gotten damn good at answering
programming
questions. Which makes sense, as millions and millions of
developers
have asked and answered the same questions for decades.
A lot of good coding info is stored on Stack Overflow or Usenet
programming groups; not sure if that info is collected for AI
usage by
Google and MS, etc.
The Google question parsing is really good now, and the best
answers
have been captured (with large-language models I suppose), and
what you
get back is usually amazingly on-target and sufficient to get
you past
an obstacle.
<snip interesting stuff> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
question.
Why does Google insist on telling you that it's okay to be a
homosexual?
Why would you care?
Classic leftist, democrat response. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Another false equivalency.
Just because a person brings up point in a discussion doesn't mean
that person
cares or doesn't care.
The leftist democrats love to project. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So do you think he DOESN'T care? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Do YOU care if someone says it's okay to be homosexual? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No one is trying to groom your kids... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
...well except for all the priests and pastors who keep getting arrested
for it.
They're even trying to pass laws legalizing pedophilia in California.
Don't
give me your bullshit. I'm not buying it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Hollywood would be overjoyed if they could now legally rape the kids
they're already raping.
"Hollywood"?
Really?
Yeah, really. It's not like it's a secret.
Cites then, please.
Do your own research if you think it's necessary. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
So you've got nothing.
That's what I expected.
I guess you don't know how to use Google...
I know that none of those links show that "Hollywood"--a whole community
of people--would be "overjoyed" about raping kids...
...or that anything like a significant fraction of that community has
ever done so.
Certainly, you provide no metrics that people in "Hollywood" are any
more likely to commit these crimes than any other group. >>>>>>>>>>>
argue with a strawman by attempting to put words in mouth and moving the
goalposts.
Typical response.
Yes, I do.
How?
It's certainly got a lot of publicity, but that doesn't actually make it
big. Remember the "satanic panic"?
Epstein didn't get a lot of publicity either. Until it did. Do you think it
was a small problem?
I don't think the two are comparable.
Yeah, Hollywood's sexual abuse is more widespread.\
You simply do NOT know that sexual abuse in Hollywood is any more
widespread than in any other group of people who have power...
Yeah, I do. I follow the news.
What do you call it when someone minimizes a problem by changing the
parameters? Goal post moving? Anal seems to idolize his mentor Snit.
...such as evangelist christian pastors.
...and public school teachers.
I can confirm that public school teachers, even here in Quebec, are
routinely arrested for such behaviour. In fact, a teacher from a
prestigious private school here in Montréal was recently arrested for >>>> having child pornography on his computer and of having communicated with >>>> an underage person with the goal of committing such an infraction.
Anywhere children (or even women and old folks) are "captive" you'll find >>> abuse. Schools, orphanages, foster homes, prisons, old folks homes,
synagogues, movie sets and, unfortunately, churches. I just find the
selective "outrage" to be telling of their anti-Christian agenda. It seems >>> like the knee-jerk reaction is to defend the perverts who prey on the weak —
in all these locations.
When I was in Bible College, a church's preacher (in the same Protestant >>> "sect" of Christianity as the Bible College) was fired because he molested >>> (at least) one girl. The girl's brother attended the Bible College. He was a
huge German kid. I could never understand why he didn't beat that preacher >>> into pure pulp. But what really pissed me off about this is the old biddies >>> in the church were saying, "Well, at least he has his Amway business to fall
back on." The son-of-a-bitch should have either been dead or in prison, as >>> far as I was concerned. (I never went to that Church, but my brother's wife >>> attended it. That's the only reason I was aware of what happened there.)
Imagine finding out that someone is a pedophile and sympathizing with
the pedophile when his life is ruined from the revelation. It seems like
a very leftist thing to do.
Unfortunately it's done a lot — and not always by leftists. I think it's hard to believe that someone you think you know is, deep down, is an evil bastard (or at least VERY troubled). My sympathy is for the kids, not pervs.
On 2026-03-16, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 19:45, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-14, Jason Basso <jasonbasso1959@hotmail.org> wrote:
On Sat, 14 Mar 2026 11:04:55 -0700
Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 07:26, Lissajous wrote:
RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote inWhy must you lie?
news:slrn10r9r2d.1e5h.ronb02NOSPAM@3020m.home:
On 2026-03-14, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-13 17:01, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-13, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-13 16:35, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-13, chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote:
CrudeSausage wrote:
chrisv wrote:
It's a continuous spectrum, and a natural condition of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> animals. What percentage that can be called "homo" depends >>>>>>>>>>>>>> on where you draw the line.
Disagreed. This is playing right into the narrative of the >>>>>>>>>>>>> faggot community.
The assertion that all people are attracted to one sex or >>>>>>>>>>>> another, and never both, is absurd. Obviously and
demonstratively false.
Homosexuality is a real thing. Why? I have no idea. But
pretending a man can "become" a woman and carry a baby (for >>>>>>>>>>> example) is delusional BS. And what we're supposed to "accept" >>>>>>>>>>> this stupidity.
No one I have ever seen has actually claimed that.
Actually they have. And in some idiot countries you can be jailed >>>>>>>>> for denying this stupidity.
https://www.feministcurrent.com/2022/07/22/christina-ellingsen-is-fac >>>>>>>>> ing-prison-time-for-saying-that-men-cant-be-women/
Sorry, but that doesn't prove the converse.
So no, you're claiming your being asked to "accept" that which >>>>>>>>>> is not being claimed.
Right. You really don't keep with the news, do you?
https://www.gbnews.com/news/us/liberal-doctor-can-men-get-pregnant-se >>>>>>>>> nator-watch-video
Refusing to answer an absurd question doesn't mean she thinks they >>>>>>>> can.
They were asking this question because these idiots claim that men >>>>>>> can have babies. I see you ignored the other link. Interesting.
"Planned Parenthood doctor tells committee that ‘men can have
pregnancies, especially trans men’"
<https://clyde.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=491>
Why this is even in question demonstrates the idiocy of those who
support Trans agenda.
'Dr. Kumar pushed back, telling him such questions are “really
missing the point” at a hearing about abortion, before affirming his >>>>> response.
“Somebody with a uterus may have the capability of becoming pregnant, >>>>> whether they’re a woman or a man,” Dr. Kumar said.'
He never said that a biological male could get pregnant.
And how many biological males do you know who are born with a uterus
and ovaries?
And how many men have carried a baby to term and given birth? My guess is >>> zero.
Go ahead, Alan, you can say it. Zero.
Set up another straw man, Ron.
This one has rotted away.
Adios Alan. If it's just going to be "clever" quips, I've better things to do with my time.
Say hi to Snit for me in my killfile.
On 3/16/2026 6:52 PM, Alan wrote:
On 2026-03-14 19:44, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-14, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 07:26, Lissajous wrote:
Why must you lie?
"Planned Parenthood doctor tells committee that ‘men can have
pregnancies, especially trans men’"
<https://clyde.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=491>
Why this is even in question demonstrates the idiocy of those who
support
Trans agenda.
'Dr. Kumar pushed back, telling him such questions are “really missing >>>> the point” at a hearing about abortion, before affirming his response. >>>>
“Somebody with a uterus may have the capability of becoming pregnant, >>>> whether they’re a woman or a man,” Dr. Kumar said.'
He never said that a biological male could get pregnant.
Yeah, it *does* matter if the person has a uterus or not because men
*don't*
have them. Period. Good grief, are you really this gullible to defend a
lying moron when he goes into weasel word mode? Again, straining at a
gnat
and swallowing a camel. Typical lying, delusional bullshit instead of
acknowledging scientific fact.
You have yet to support your claim that anyone has ever claimed that a
biological male could bear a child:
'But pretending a man can "become" a woman and carry a baby (for
example) is delusional BS. And what we're supposed to "accept" this
stupidity.'
Come back to supporting that.
Ron is so moronic that he's actually trying to use that case of Sen. Fuckface Hawley berating a woman, not letting her answer the question properly, these people are *scum*.
Trans men do get pregnant, that isn't a "biomale" getting pregnant yeah, but that is the point, they are
trying to make it about something it isn't.
So fuck Ron, may his house
burn down.
On 3/15/2026 2:30 PM, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 3/15/2026 2:26 PM, DFS wrote:
Ron, kill yourself and your wife for being stupid enough to marry
your retarded hick cracker ass. You're a fuckface, a moron, go play >>>> with Mint for 18 *more* years, illiterate monkey ass.
wtf? You on another bender, Joel?
Why are you so triggered by biology and reality?
I'm triggered by it? Not you and Ron for being in such utter *denial*
of this? At least Ron has the excuse he's been brainwashed by the
childrape cult of Catholicism, you're an avowed atheist, you should
see why this would exist.
I'm confused. Maybe 'cause I didn't read the whole thread, and I'm responding to just your last rant.
Ron and I are in denial of what?
Why are you frothing? Is it that you think men can get pregnant?
Do you actually think your online boyfriend is a female just because he plays dress-up?
I wonder what it’s for? Is it basically a more expensive Chromebook?
Because it’s too underpowered to run Adobe stuff. And what good is a
Mac that can’t run Adobe stuff?
On 2026-03-16, Joel W. Crump <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/16/2026 6:52 PM, Alan wrote:
On 2026-03-14 19:44, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-14, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 07:26, Lissajous wrote:
Why must you lie?
"Planned Parenthood doctor tells committee that ‘men can have
pregnancies, especially trans men’"
<https://clyde.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=491>
Why this is even in question demonstrates the idiocy of those who
support
Trans agenda.
'Dr. Kumar pushed back, telling him such questions are “really missing >>>>> the point” at a hearing about abortion, before affirming his response. >>>>>
“Somebody with a uterus may have the capability of becoming pregnant, >>>>> whether they’re a woman or a man,” Dr. Kumar said.'
He never said that a biological male could get pregnant.
Yeah, it *does* matter if the person has a uterus or not because men
*don't*
have them. Period. Good grief, are you really this gullible to defend a >>>> lying moron when he goes into weasel word mode? Again, straining at a
gnat
and swallowing a camel. Typical lying, delusional bullshit instead of
acknowledging scientific fact.
You have yet to support your claim that anyone has ever claimed that a
biological male could bear a child:
'But pretending a man can "become" a woman and carry a baby (for
example) is delusional BS. And what we're supposed to "accept" this
stupidity.'
Come back to supporting that.
Ron is so moronic that he's actually trying to use that case of Sen.
Fuckface Hawley berating a woman, not letting her answer the question
properly, these people are *scum*.
She was asked a simple, basic yes/no question 12 times and chose to dodge
the question 12 times.
In a criminal court she would have been held in contempt of court.
Trans men do get pregnant, that isn't a "biomale" getting pregnant yeah, but that is the point, they are
trying to make it about something it isn't.
He was referring to biological males pretending to be females.
Of course a biological female pretending to be a male can get pregnant assuming of course the hormone
treatments have not had an effect on her fertility and so forth.
So fuck Ron, may his house
burn down.
LOL.
Typical unhinged leftist lunatic projecting again.
I wonder what it’s for? Is it basically a more expensive Chromebook?
Because it’s too underpowered to run Adobe stuff. And what good is a
Mac that can’t run Adobe stuff?
On 3/17/2026 9:27 AM, pothead wrote:
So fuck Ron, may his house
burn down.
LOL.
Typical unhinged leftist lunatic projecting again.
<plonk> Fucking unhinged retard cracker. Kill yourself.
Most users could just about get away with using Chromebooks. I wouldn't
wish them on anyone, now that I've tested them, but for most (or at
least many( folks they would work fine.
I didn't realize that the MacBook Neo is using an iPhone CPU. Apparently
a pretty powerful one. It seems like they could make a dock for the
iPhone and you could use that for a computer.
On 14/03/2026 21:09, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
I wonder what it’s for? Is it basically a more expensive Chromebook?
Because it’s too underpowered to run Adobe stuff. And what good is a
Mac that can’t run Adobe stuff?
Apple's website is clearly targeting it at students.
If I needed a new laptop, I'd consider one. But then all I need is
email, a browser and to ssh into an actual computer.
On 3/17/2026 11:34 AM, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 3/17/2026 9:27 AM, pothead wrote:
So fuck Ron, may his house
burn down.
LOL.
Typical unhinged leftist lunatic projecting again.
<plonk> Fucking unhinged retard cracker. Kill yourself.
May you have a delusional break with reality and suffer a lifetime of schizoid beliefs and substance addictions... oh wait...
When they were little (my oldest kids) we took them to Disneyland when I
was working at 29 Psalms Marine Base (installing phone switches). I
think for all of us the cost was about $150. When I was teenager (living
in Ventura) they had CB (Construction Battalion) night. (The base is in
Port Hueneme.) My brother had a friend in the CBs (Seabees) and I think
our full night (till 12) tickets were $15. The place was almost empty
and all the rides were included. (This was back in the days of E
tickets, etc.)
On 2026-03-16, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-15 2:28 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-15, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 10:35 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-14, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 1:04 a.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-14, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-13 17:01, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-13, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-13 16:35, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-13, chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote:No one I have ever seen has actually claimed that.
CrudeSausage wrote:Homosexuality is a real thing. Why? I have no idea. But pretending a
chrisv wrote:
It's a continuous spectrum, and a natural condition of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> animals. What percentage that can be called "homo" depends on >>>>>>>>>>>>>> where you draw the line.
Disagreed. This is playing right into the narrative of the >>>>>>>>>>>>> faggot community.
The assertion that all people are attracted to one sex or another, >>>>>>>>>>>> and never both, is absurd. Obviously and demonstratively false. >>>>>>>>>>>
man can "become" a woman and carry a baby (for example) is >>>>>>>>>>> delusional BS. And what we're supposed to "accept" this stupidity. >>>>>>>>>>
Actually they have. And in some idiot countries you can be jailed for >>>>>>>>> denying this stupidity.
https://www.feministcurrent.com/2022/07/22/christina-ellingsen-is-facing-prison-time-for-saying-that-men-cant-be-women/
Sorry, but that doesn't prove the converse.
So no, you're claiming your being asked to "accept" that which is not
being claimed.
Right. You really don't keep with the news, do you?
https://www.gbnews.com/news/us/liberal-doctor-can-men-get-pregnant-senator-watch-video
Refusing to answer an absurd question doesn't mean she thinks they can.
They were asking this question because these idiots claim that men can have
babies. I see you ignored the other link. Interesting.
I figured out that Anal was a leftist. Why am I not even remotely
shocked that an obnoxious, know-it all zealot is a leftist?
Being a Woke leftist is one thing. Being ignorant of obvious facts is >>>>> another. If he's ging to argue, he should at least know what he's talking >>>>> about.
No sexual abuse problems in Hollywood... Yeah, right.
You would think that by now, the Operation Mockingbird sources Anal
relies on would have admitted that Harvey Weinstein was a problem or
that Hollywood actresses do allow themselves to be groomed at a young
age in exchange for roles. Oh wait, they did: Anal just purposefully
ignored them in order to needlessly argue here in Snit-like fashion.
Apparently not just Weinstein, Disney seems to a have serious grooming issue
with child actors.
Or at least did. Hopefully the Weinstein jailing has made child actor
parents more vigilant by now.
I'm still pissed that Magic Kingdom cost my wife and I $600 a ticket
when we went there last week. There is absolutely nothing special about
the place that it would cost that much. Orlando was nice, but the Disney
stuff is a serious rip-off.
When they were little (my oldest kids) we took them to Disneyland when I was working at 29 Psalms Marine Base (installing phone switches). I think for
all of us the cost was about $150. When I was teenager (living in Ventura) they had CB (Construction Battalion) night. (The base is in Port Hueneme.)
My brother had a friend in the CBs (Seabees) and I think our full night
(till 12) tickets were $15. The place was almost empty and all the rides
were included. (This was back in the days of E tickets, etc.)
$600 a ticket is just pure insanity. And I hear a big chunk of DisneyWorld
is shut down.
On 2026-03-16, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-15 2:35 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-15, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 10:45 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-14, Jason Basso <jasonbasso1959@hotmail.org> wrote:
On Sat, 14 Mar 2026 11:04:55 -0700
Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 07:26, Lissajous wrote:
RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote inWhy must you lie?
news:slrn10r9r2d.1e5h.ronb02NOSPAM@3020m.home:
On 2026-03-14, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-13 17:01, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-13, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-13 16:35, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-13, chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> CrudeSausage wrote:
chrisv wrote:
It's a continuous spectrum, and a natural condition of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> animals. What percentage that can be called "homo" depends >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on where you draw the line.
Disagreed. This is playing right into the narrative of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> faggot community.
The assertion that all people are attracted to one sex or >>>>>>>>>>>>>> another, and never both, is absurd. Obviously and >>>>>>>>>>>>>> demonstratively false.
Homosexuality is a real thing. Why? I have no idea. But >>>>>>>>>>>>> pretending a man can "become" a woman and carry a baby (for >>>>>>>>>>>>> example) is delusional BS. And what we're supposed to "accept" >>>>>>>>>>>>> this stupidity.
No one I have ever seen has actually claimed that.
Actually they have. And in some idiot countries you can be jailed >>>>>>>>>>> for denying this stupidity.
https://www.feministcurrent.com/2022/07/22/christina-ellingsen-is-fac
ing-prison-time-for-saying-that-men-cant-be-women/
Sorry, but that doesn't prove the converse.
So no, you're claiming your being asked to "accept" that which >>>>>>>>>>>> is not being claimed.
Right. You really don't keep with the news, do you?
https://www.gbnews.com/news/us/liberal-doctor-can-men-get-pregnant-se
nator-watch-video
Refusing to answer an absurd question doesn't mean she thinks they >>>>>>>>>> can.
They were asking this question because these idiots claim that men >>>>>>>>> can have babies. I see you ignored the other link. Interesting. >>>>>>>>
"Planned Parenthood doctor tells committee that ‘men can have >>>>>>>> pregnancies, especially trans men’"
<https://clyde.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=491> >>>>>>>>
Why this is even in question demonstrates the idiocy of those who >>>>>>>> support Trans agenda.
'Dr. Kumar pushed back, telling him such questions are “really >>>>>>> missing the point” at a hearing about abortion, before affirming his >>>>>>> response.
“Somebody with a uterus may have the capability of becoming pregnant, >>>>>>> whether they’re a woman or a man,” Dr. Kumar said.'
He never said that a biological male could get pregnant.
And how many biological males do you know who are born with a uterus >>>>>> and ovaries?
And how many men have carried a baby to term and given birth? My guess is >>>>> zero.
Go ahead, Alan, you can say it. Zero.
Cue Anal finding some discredited faggot source to say the opposite.
No, the Woke choose to use weasel words when this comes up. They don't want >>> to give up on their delusional bullshit agenda, even though they *know* they
can't defend the delusional bullshit it's based on. The reality wall gets in
their way, so they ignore the question or weasel word around it — never >>> giving a straight answer. It's a chickenshit maneuver, but it's all they've >>> got.
At this point in my life, the moment I find out that someone is a
leftist, I just walk away. I don't even bother trying to talk to them
about anything, no matter how inane.
Not much point in it most of the time. They just parrot non-stop propaganda and get angry if you don't agree. When I was young I used to be able to
argue politics and still be friends with people. Now, if you disagree with them, you're automatically branded as a "hater," or a "racist," or a "Nazi." So much for inclusivity, or even civility. Unfortunately I'm too often not civil either... I should work to change that.
On 2026-03-16, Joel W. Crump <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/16/2026 6:52 PM, Alan wrote:
On 2026-03-14 19:44, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-14, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 07:26, Lissajous wrote:
Why must you lie?
"Planned Parenthood doctor tells committee that ‘men can have
pregnancies, especially trans men’"
<https://clyde.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=491>
Why this is even in question demonstrates the idiocy of those who
support
Trans agenda.
'Dr. Kumar pushed back, telling him such questions are “really missing >>>>> the point” at a hearing about abortion, before affirming his response. >>>>>
“Somebody with a uterus may have the capability of becoming pregnant, >>>>> whether they’re a woman or a man,” Dr. Kumar said.'
He never said that a biological male could get pregnant.
Yeah, it *does* matter if the person has a uterus or not because men
*don't*
have them. Period. Good grief, are you really this gullible to defend a >>>> lying moron when he goes into weasel word mode? Again, straining at a
gnat
and swallowing a camel. Typical lying, delusional bullshit instead of
acknowledging scientific fact.
You have yet to support your claim that anyone has ever claimed that a
biological male could bear a child:
'But pretending a man can "become" a woman and carry a baby (for
example) is delusional BS. And what we're supposed to "accept" this
stupidity.'
Come back to supporting that.
Ron is so moronic that he's actually trying to use that case of Sen.
Fuckface Hawley berating a woman, not letting her answer the question
properly, these people are *scum*.
She was asked a simple, basic yes/no question 12 times and chose to dodge
the question 12 times.
In a criminal court she would have been held in contempt of court.
On 2026-03-16, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-15 2:42 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-15, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 11:33 p.m., DFS wrote:
On 3/14/2026 5:09 PM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
what good is a Mac that can’t run Adobe stuff?
What good is a GuhNoo/Linux crapbox that can't run Adobe OR Microsoft OR >>>>> Apple stuff?
It's great for those of us who don't want to run Microsoft or Adobe crap, and
don't like Mac OS. Choose what you want DuFuS. I'll choose what I want. Not >>> everyone needs or wants Adobe and/or Microsoft crap.
96 in 100 say "Not much".
Only if their gullible enough to pay high rental prices for Adobe and
Microsoft crap. I'm not into that software rental bullshit.
Honestly, people who choose Linux don't really need the Microsoft, Adobe >>>> or Apple stuff. You can easily live without Microsoft Office by
installing WPS Office or compromising with LibreOffice. If that's not
good enough, relying on the web versions like vallor does will do the
trick (albeit without all the functionality). As for not having the
Adobe stuff, not everyone manipulates images. In fact, practically no
one does. If they _absolutely_ need to use Photoshop, they can do so on >>>> Windows or Mac, but what percentage of people do?
It's always Microsoft Office or niche products like overpriced Adobe crap >>> that Windows FUDsters point to. As if Linux users give a crap.
My apologies for commandeering your post to respond to the DuFuS.
I don't mind at all. You're entirely correct, either way. I mean, I use
Windows to run open-source applications. The only reason I use Windows
is because I know that my hardware works right in it and don't have to
worry that one of the open-source titles is broken because some
dependency is missing or whatever.
I understand. If you had simple, business computers, like mine, your experience would probably be much better. (But then you wouldn't be able to do what you want to do with your computer.)
The MacBook Neo idea is gone. My wife needs a bigger screen. But she's still interested in using a Mac for her work (on her big monitor). She was told that a Mac Mini (with 512 GBs) would work well for her. But then I saw the new one (with an M5 CPU) was coming out fairly soon, so I think it would be wise to wait for that one. That one is going to come standard with 512 GB,
so we wouldn't have to pay an extra $200 for an extra 256 GBs of storage. (They'll probably jump the price of the base model, though.)
I didn't realize that the MacBook Neo is using an iPhone CPU. Apparently a pretty powerful one. It seems like they could make a dock for the iPhone and you could use that for a computer.
On 2026-03-17 06:27, pothead wrote:
On 2026-03-16, Joel W. Crump <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/16/2026 6:52 PM, Alan wrote:
On 2026-03-14 19:44, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-14, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 07:26, Lissajous wrote:
Why must you lie?
"Planned Parenthood doctor tells committee that ‘men can have
pregnancies, especially trans men’"
<https://clyde.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=491> >>>>>>>
Why this is even in question demonstrates the idiocy of those who >>>>>>> support
Trans agenda.
'Dr. Kumar pushed back, telling him such questions are “really
missing
the point” at a hearing about abortion, before affirming his
response.
“Somebody with a uterus may have the capability of becoming pregnant, >>>>>> whether they’re a woman or a man,” Dr. Kumar said.'
He never said that a biological male could get pregnant.
Yeah, it *does* matter if the person has a uterus or not because men >>>>> *don't*
have them. Period. Good grief, are you really this gullible to
defend a
lying moron when he goes into weasel word mode? Again, straining at a >>>>> gnat
and swallowing a camel. Typical lying, delusional bullshit instead of >>>>> acknowledging scientific fact.
You have yet to support your claim that anyone has ever claimed that a >>>> biological male could bear a child:
'But pretending a man can "become" a woman and carry a baby (for
example) is delusional BS. And what we're supposed to "accept" this
stupidity.'
Come back to supporting that.
Ron is so moronic that he's actually trying to use that case of Sen.
Fuckface Hawley berating a woman, not letting her answer the question
properly, these people are *scum*.
She was asked a simple, basic yes/no question 12 times and chose to dodge
the question 12 times.
In a criminal court she would have been held in contempt of court.
Nope.
Because in a court of LAW, her lawyer would have stood up and said, "Objection. Relevance."
"Sustained".
On 3/17/2026 11:34 AM, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 3/17/2026 9:27 AM, pothead wrote:
So fuck Ron, may his house
burn down.
LOL.
Typical unhinged leftist lunatic projecting again.
<plonk> Fucking unhinged retard cracker. Kill yourself.
May you have a delusional break with reality and suffer a lifetime of schizoid beliefs and substance addictions... oh wait...The homosexual leprechaun Joel Crump wants someone to kill themselves
On 2026-03-16, Joel W. Crump <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/16/2026 6:52 PM, Alan wrote:
On 2026-03-14 19:44, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-14, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 07:26, Lissajous wrote:
Why must you lie?
"Planned Parenthood doctor tells committee that ‘men can have
pregnancies, especially trans men’"
<https://clyde.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=491>
Why this is even in question demonstrates the idiocy of those who >>>>>> support
Trans agenda.
'Dr. Kumar pushed back, telling him such questions are “really missing >>>>> the point” at a hearing about abortion, before affirming his response. >>>>>
“Somebody with a uterus may have the capability of becoming pregnant, >>>>> whether they’re a woman or a man,” Dr. Kumar said.'
He never said that a biological male could get pregnant.
Yeah, it *does* matter if the person has a uterus or not because men
*don't*
have them. Period. Good grief, are you really this gullible to defend a >>>> lying moron when he goes into weasel word mode? Again, straining at a >>>> gnat
and swallowing a camel. Typical lying, delusional bullshit instead of
acknowledging scientific fact.
You have yet to support your claim that anyone has ever claimed that a
biological male could bear a child:
'But pretending a man can "become" a woman and carry a baby (for
example) is delusional BS. And what we're supposed to "accept" this
stupidity.'
Come back to supporting that.
Ron is so moronic that he's actually trying to use that case of Sen.
Fuckface Hawley berating a woman, not letting her answer the question
properly, these people are *scum*.
She was asked a simple, basic yes/no question 12 times and chose to dodge
the question 12 times.
In a criminal court she would have been held in contempt of court.
Trans men do get pregnant, that isn't a "biomale" getting pregnant yeah, but that is the point, they are
trying to make it about something it isn't.
He was referring to biological males pretending to be females.
Of course a biological female pretending to be a male can get pregnant assuming of course the hormone
treatments have not had an effect on her fertility and so forth.
So fuck Ron, may his house
burn down.
LOL.
Typical unhinged leftist lunatic projecting again.
On 2026-03-17 12:00 p.m., DFS wrote:
On 3/17/2026 11:34 AM, Joel W. Crump wrote:The homosexual leprechaun Joel Crump wants someone to kill themselves
On 3/17/2026 9:27 AM, pothead wrote:
So fuck Ron, may his house
burn down.
LOL.
Typical unhinged leftist lunatic projecting again.
<plonk> Fucking unhinged retard cracker. Kill yourself.
May you have a delusional break with reality and suffer a lifetime of
schizoid beliefs and substance addictions... oh wait...
again. How very leftist of him.
On 2026-03-16 9:53 p.m., DFS wrote:
On 3/15/2026 2:30 PM, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 3/15/2026 2:26 PM, DFS wrote:
Ron, kill yourself and your wife for being stupid enough to marry
your retarded hick cracker ass. You're a fuckface, a moron, go play >>>>> with Mint for 18 *more* years, illiterate monkey ass.
wtf? You on another bender, Joel?
Why are you so triggered by biology and reality?
I'm triggered by it? Not you and Ron for being in such utter *denial* >>> of this? At least Ron has the excuse he's been brainwashed by the
childrape cult of Catholicism, you're an avowed atheist, you should
see why this would exist.
I'm confused. Maybe 'cause I didn't read the whole thread, and I'm
responding to just your last rant.
Ron and I are in denial of what?
Why are you frothing? Is it that you think men can get pregnant?
Do you actually think your online boyfriend is a female just because he
plays dress-up?
In any other man's world, his inability to pick up a real woman and
settle for a man playing dress up would cause him to commit suicide or
at least get very depressed. Nevertheless, Joel's ability to delude
himself is so strong that he resists both obvious consequences in a vain effort to make himself happy.
On Tue, 17 Mar 2026 05:05:45 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
Most users could just about get away with using Chromebooks. I wouldn't
wish them on anyone, now that I've tested them, but for most (or at
least many( folks they would work fine.
We bought a Chromebook to test the web app. It wasn't a fantastic
experience but it wasn't as bad as I had anticipated.
On Tue, 17 Mar 2026 05:33:53 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
I didn't realize that the MacBook Neo is using an iPhone CPU. Apparently
a pretty powerful one. It seems like they could make a dock for the
iPhone and you could use that for a computer.
From the benchmarks I've seen it's more or less equivalent to the original M1. Apple's terminology confused me. In the ARM world Cortex-M are the
MCUs and Cortex-A are the MPUs. There is also a Cortex-R for hard realtime applications.
On 2026-03-17, pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-16, Joel W. Crump <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/16/2026 6:52 PM, Alan wrote:
On 2026-03-14 19:44, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-14, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 07:26, Lissajous wrote:
Why must you lie?
"Planned Parenthood doctor tells committee that ‘men can have
pregnancies, especially trans men’"
<https://clyde.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=491> >>>>>>>
Why this is even in question demonstrates the idiocy of those who >>>>>>> support
Trans agenda.
'Dr. Kumar pushed back, telling him such questions are “really missing >>>>>> the point” at a hearing about abortion, before affirming his response. >>>>>>
“Somebody with a uterus may have the capability of becoming pregnant, >>>>>> whether they’re a woman or a man,” Dr. Kumar said.'
He never said that a biological male could get pregnant.
Yeah, it *does* matter if the person has a uterus or not because men >>>>> *don't*
have them. Period. Good grief, are you really this gullible to defend a >>>>> lying moron when he goes into weasel word mode? Again, straining at a >>>>> gnat
and swallowing a camel. Typical lying, delusional bullshit instead of >>>>> acknowledging scientific fact.
You have yet to support your claim that anyone has ever claimed that a >>>> biological male could bear a child:
'But pretending a man can "become" a woman and carry a baby (for
example) is delusional BS. And what we're supposed to "accept" this
stupidity.'
Come back to supporting that.
Ron is so moronic that he's actually trying to use that case of Sen.
Fuckface Hawley berating a woman, not letting her answer the question
properly, these people are *scum*.
She was asked a simple, basic yes/no question 12 times and chose to dodge
the question 12 times.
In a criminal court she would have been held in contempt of court.
Not the first time some Woke idiot has done this. Their delusions don't sync well with reality.
Trans men do get pregnant, that isn't a "biomale" getting pregnant yeah, but that is the point, they are
trying to make it about something it isn't.
He was referring to biological males pretending to be females.
Of course a biological female pretending to be a male can get pregnant assuming of course the hormone
treatments have not had an effect on her fertility and so forth.
So Joel thinks a woman, pretending to be a man, is a man when she gets pregnant? Apparently for him a brain would just get in his way.
So fuck Ron, may his house
burn down.
And there's the typical Woke response. The height of their "wit."
--LOL.
Typical unhinged leftist lunatic projecting again.
Yep. I'm happy that I killfiled this Joel moron a long time ago.
On Tue, 17 Mar 2026 05:17:59 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
When they were little (my oldest kids) we took them to Disneyland when I
was working at 29 Psalms Marine Base (installing phone switches). I
think for all of us the cost was about $150. When I was teenager (living
in Ventura) they had CB (Construction Battalion) night. (The base is in
Port Hueneme.) My brother had a friend in the CBs (Seabees) and I think
our full night (till 12) tickets were $15. The place was almost empty
and all the rides were included. (This was back in the days of E
tickets, etc.)
I never went to Disneyland. The terminal for the company I drove for was
at State College and Ball, not far from Mouseland, and I happened to be there during the Rodney king riots. I was sitting in the truck reading
when the nightly fireworks show went off. Out of the truck, locked and loaded, until I figured out what it was.
Growing up in the sticks of northern NY California culture was a mystery with jokes about tacos and Knott's Berry Farm. I finally went to Knott's.
It was fun.
On 2026-03-17, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
On Tue, 17 Mar 2026 05:33:53 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
I didn't realize that the MacBook Neo is using an iPhone CPU. Apparently >>> a pretty powerful one. It seems like they could make a dock for the
iPhone and you could use that for a computer.
From the benchmarks I've seen it's more or less equivalent to the original >> M1. Apple's terminology confused me. In the ARM world Cortex-M are the
MCUs and Cortex-A are the MPUs. There is also a Cortex-R for hard realtime >> applications.
I have no idea what MCU, MPU means. (I'll have to look it up.)
I asked people on the Mac Reddit channel if my wife should wait for the M5 Mac Mini. Several said no, that it will come out with Tahoe, which they
claim is the Vista of Mac OSes. That's not very encouraging.
On 2026-03-17 1:17 a.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-16, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-15 2:28 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-15, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 10:35 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-14, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 1:04 a.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-14, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-13 17:01, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-13, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-13 16:35, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-13, chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote:No one I have ever seen has actually claimed that.
CrudeSausage wrote:Homosexuality is a real thing. Why? I have no idea. But pretending a
chrisv wrote:
It's a continuous spectrum, and a natural condition of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> animals. What percentage that can be called "homo" depends on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> where you draw the line.
Disagreed. This is playing right into the narrative of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> faggot community.
The assertion that all people are attracted to one sex or another,
and never both, is absurd. Obviously and demonstratively false. >>>>>>>>>>>>
man can "become" a woman and carry a baby (for example) is >>>>>>>>>>>> delusional BS. And what we're supposed to "accept" this stupidity. >>>>>>>>>>>
Actually they have. And in some idiot countries you can be jailed for
denying this stupidity.
https://www.feministcurrent.com/2022/07/22/christina-ellingsen-is-facing-prison-time-for-saying-that-men-cant-be-women/
Sorry, but that doesn't prove the converse.
So no, you're claiming your being asked to "accept" that which is not
being claimed.
Right. You really don't keep with the news, do you?
https://www.gbnews.com/news/us/liberal-doctor-can-men-get-pregnant-senator-watch-video
Refusing to answer an absurd question doesn't mean she thinks they can.
They were asking this question because these idiots claim that men can have
babies. I see you ignored the other link. Interesting.
I figured out that Anal was a leftist. Why am I not even remotely >>>>>>> shocked that an obnoxious, know-it all zealot is a leftist?
Being a Woke leftist is one thing. Being ignorant of obvious facts is >>>>>> another. If he's ging to argue, he should at least know what he's talking
about.
No sexual abuse problems in Hollywood... Yeah, right.
You would think that by now, the Operation Mockingbird sources Anal
relies on would have admitted that Harvey Weinstein was a problem or >>>>> that Hollywood actresses do allow themselves to be groomed at a young >>>>> age in exchange for roles. Oh wait, they did: Anal just purposefully >>>>> ignored them in order to needlessly argue here in Snit-like fashion.
Apparently not just Weinstein, Disney seems to a have serious grooming issue
with child actors.
Or at least did. Hopefully the Weinstein jailing has made child actor
parents more vigilant by now.
I'm still pissed that Magic Kingdom cost my wife and I $600 a ticket
when we went there last week. There is absolutely nothing special about
the place that it would cost that much. Orlando was nice, but the Disney >>> stuff is a serious rip-off.
When they were little (my oldest kids) we took them to Disneyland when I was >> working at 29 Psalms Marine Base (installing phone switches). I think for
all of us the cost was about $150. When I was teenager (living in Ventura) >> they had CB (Construction Battalion) night. (The base is in Port Hueneme.) >> My brother had a friend in the CBs (Seabees) and I think our full night
(till 12) tickets were $15. The place was almost empty and all the rides
were included. (This was back in the days of E tickets, etc.)
$600 a ticket is just pure insanity. And I hear a big chunk of DisneyWorld >> is shut down.
I wouldn't know what it used to be like, but the way it is currently is
no better than the local amusement park in Montreal minus the Disney branding everywhere. Our amusement park also doesn't have as many shops filled with overpriced items and more restaurants. Either way, it was a waste of time but an experience we had to at least do once to learn that
it was a rip-off. I imagine it is similar to how muhammedans need to
travel to see that rock they worshiped before the pedophile muhammad
(piss be upon him) even existed.
On 2026-03-17 1:25 a.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-16, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-15 2:35 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-15, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 10:45 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-14, Jason Basso <jasonbasso1959@hotmail.org> wrote:
On Sat, 14 Mar 2026 11:04:55 -0700
Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 07:26, Lissajous wrote:
RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote inWhy must you lie?
news:slrn10r9r2d.1e5h.ronb02NOSPAM@3020m.home:
On 2026-03-14, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-13 17:01, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-13, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-13 16:35, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-13, chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CrudeSausage wrote:
chrisv wrote:
It's a continuous spectrum, and a natural condition of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> animals. What percentage that can be called "homo" depends >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on where you draw the line.
Disagreed. This is playing right into the narrative of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> faggot community.
The assertion that all people are attracted to one sex or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> another, and never both, is absurd. Obviously and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> demonstratively false.
Homosexuality is a real thing. Why? I have no idea. But >>>>>>>>>>>>>> pretending a man can "become" a woman and carry a baby (for >>>>>>>>>>>>>> example) is delusional BS. And what we're supposed to "accept" >>>>>>>>>>>>>> this stupidity.
No one I have ever seen has actually claimed that.
Actually they have. And in some idiot countries you can be jailed >>>>>>>>>>>> for denying this stupidity.
https://www.feministcurrent.com/2022/07/22/christina-ellingsen-is-fac
ing-prison-time-for-saying-that-men-cant-be-women/
Sorry, but that doesn't prove the converse.
So no, you're claiming your being asked to "accept" that which >>>>>>>>>>>>> is not being claimed.
Right. You really don't keep with the news, do you?
https://www.gbnews.com/news/us/liberal-doctor-can-men-get-pregnant-se
nator-watch-video
Refusing to answer an absurd question doesn't mean she thinks they >>>>>>>>>>> can.
They were asking this question because these idiots claim that men >>>>>>>>>> can have babies. I see you ignored the other link. Interesting. >>>>>>>>>
"Planned Parenthood doctor tells committee that ‘men can have >>>>>>>>> pregnancies, especially trans men’"
<https://clyde.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=491> >>>>>>>>>
Why this is even in question demonstrates the idiocy of those who >>>>>>>>> support Trans agenda.
'Dr. Kumar pushed back, telling him such questions are “really >>>>>>>> missing the point” at a hearing about abortion, before affirming his >>>>>>>> response.
“Somebody with a uterus may have the capability of becoming pregnant,
whether they’re a woman or a man,” Dr. Kumar said.'
He never said that a biological male could get pregnant.
And how many biological males do you know who are born with a uterus >>>>>>> and ovaries?
And how many men have carried a baby to term and given birth? My guess is
zero.
Go ahead, Alan, you can say it. Zero.
Cue Anal finding some discredited faggot source to say the opposite.
No, the Woke choose to use weasel words when this comes up. They don't want
to give up on their delusional bullshit agenda, even though they *know* they
can't defend the delusional bullshit it's based on. The reality wall gets in
their way, so they ignore the question or weasel word around it — never >>>> giving a straight answer. It's a chickenshit maneuver, but it's all they've
got.
At this point in my life, the moment I find out that someone is a
leftist, I just walk away. I don't even bother trying to talk to them
about anything, no matter how inane.
Not much point in it most of the time. They just parrot non-stop propaganda >> and get angry if you don't agree. When I was young I used to be able to
argue politics and still be friends with people. Now, if you disagree with >> them, you're automatically branded as a "hater," or a "racist," or a "Nazi." >> So much for inclusivity, or even civility. Unfortunately I'm too often not >> civil either... I should work to change that.
The same way they label us haters, I label them retards. It's literally impossible to talk to them because it is like talking to a television screen.
On 2026-03-17, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-17 1:25 a.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-16, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-15 2:35 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-15, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 10:45 p.m., RonB wrote:No, the Woke choose to use weasel words when this comes up. They don't want
On 2026-03-14, Jason Basso <jasonbasso1959@hotmail.org> wrote:
On Sat, 14 Mar 2026 11:04:55 -0700
Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 07:26, Lissajous wrote:
RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote inWhy must you lie?
news:slrn10r9r2d.1e5h.ronb02NOSPAM@3020m.home:
On 2026-03-14, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-13 17:01, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-13, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-13 16:35, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-13, chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CrudeSausage wrote:
chrisv wrote:
It's a continuous spectrum, and a natural condition of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> animals. What percentage that can be called "homo" depends >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on where you draw the line.
Disagreed. This is playing right into the narrative of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> faggot community.
The assertion that all people are attracted to one sex or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> another, and never both, is absurd. Obviously and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> demonstratively false.
Homosexuality is a real thing. Why? I have no idea. But >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pretending a man can "become" a woman and carry a baby (for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> example) is delusional BS. And what we're supposed to "accept" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this stupidity.
No one I have ever seen has actually claimed that.
Actually they have. And in some idiot countries you can be jailed >>>>>>>>>>>>> for denying this stupidity.
https://www.feministcurrent.com/2022/07/22/christina-ellingsen-is-fac
ing-prison-time-for-saying-that-men-cant-be-women/
Sorry, but that doesn't prove the converse.
So no, you're claiming your being asked to "accept" that which >>>>>>>>>>>>>> is not being claimed.
Right. You really don't keep with the news, do you?
https://www.gbnews.com/news/us/liberal-doctor-can-men-get-pregnant-se
nator-watch-video
Refusing to answer an absurd question doesn't mean she thinks they >>>>>>>>>>>> can.
They were asking this question because these idiots claim that men >>>>>>>>>>> can have babies. I see you ignored the other link. Interesting. >>>>>>>>>>
"Planned Parenthood doctor tells committee that ‘men can have >>>>>>>>>> pregnancies, especially trans men’"
<https://clyde.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=491> >>>>>>>>>>
Why this is even in question demonstrates the idiocy of those who >>>>>>>>>> support Trans agenda.
'Dr. Kumar pushed back, telling him such questions are “really >>>>>>>>> missing the point” at a hearing about abortion, before affirming his
response.
“Somebody with a uterus may have the capability of becoming pregnant,
whether they’re a woman or a man,” Dr. Kumar said.'
He never said that a biological male could get pregnant.
And how many biological males do you know who are born with a uterus >>>>>>>> and ovaries?
And how many men have carried a baby to term and given birth? My guess is
zero.
Go ahead, Alan, you can say it. Zero.
Cue Anal finding some discredited faggot source to say the opposite. >>>>>
to give up on their delusional bullshit agenda, even though they *know* they
can't defend the delusional bullshit it's based on. The reality wall gets in
their way, so they ignore the question or weasel word around it — never >>>>> giving a straight answer. It's a chickenshit maneuver, but it's all they've
got.
At this point in my life, the moment I find out that someone is a
leftist, I just walk away. I don't even bother trying to talk to them
about anything, no matter how inane.
Not much point in it most of the time. They just parrot non-stop propaganda >>> and get angry if you don't agree. When I was young I used to be able to
argue politics and still be friends with people. Now, if you disagree with >>> them, you're automatically branded as a "hater," or a "racist," or a "Nazi."
So much for inclusivity, or even civility. Unfortunately I'm too often not >>> civil either... I should work to change that.
The same way they label us haters, I label them retards. It's literally
impossible to talk to them because it is like talking to a television
screen.
Yep. If it's not in their scripted response, they lose it. (I guess, "you
all should die" is part of their idiot script.)
On 3/14/26 5:09 PM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
I wonder what it’s for? Is it basically a more expensive
Chromebook?
Because it’s too underpowered to run Adobe stuff. And what good is
a Mac that can’t run Adobe stuff?
It's actually useful without an internet connection?
On Tue, 17 Mar 2026 10:13:57 -0400, Tom Elam wrote:
On 3/14/26 5:09 PM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
I wonder what it’s for? Is it basically a more expensive
Chromebook?
Because it’s too underpowered to run Adobe stuff. And what good is
a Mac that can’t run Adobe stuff?
It's actually useful without an internet connection?
I’ll give you that ... if it’s actually true. ;)
How useful is a Mac without an Internet connection?
Particularly in the education setting, which others are claiming is
what Apple is aiming the product at?
On 2026-03-17 1:33 a.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-16, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-15 2:42 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-15, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 11:33 p.m., DFS wrote:
On 3/14/2026 5:09 PM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
what good is a Mac that can’t run Adobe stuff?
What good is a GuhNoo/Linux crapbox that can't run Adobe OR Microsoft OR >>>>>> Apple stuff?
It's great for those of us who don't want to run Microsoft or Adobe crap, and
don't like Mac OS. Choose what you want DuFuS. I'll choose what I want. Not
everyone needs or wants Adobe and/or Microsoft crap.
96 in 100 say "Not much".
Only if their gullible enough to pay high rental prices for Adobe and
Microsoft crap. I'm not into that software rental bullshit.
Honestly, people who choose Linux don't really need the Microsoft, Adobe >>>>> or Apple stuff. You can easily live without Microsoft Office by
installing WPS Office or compromising with LibreOffice. If that's not >>>>> good enough, relying on the web versions like vallor does will do the >>>>> trick (albeit without all the functionality). As for not having the
Adobe stuff, not everyone manipulates images. In fact, practically no >>>>> one does. If they _absolutely_ need to use Photoshop, they can do so on >>>>> Windows or Mac, but what percentage of people do?
It's always Microsoft Office or niche products like overpriced Adobe crap >>>> that Windows FUDsters point to. As if Linux users give a crap.
My apologies for commandeering your post to respond to the DuFuS.
I don't mind at all. You're entirely correct, either way. I mean, I use
Windows to run open-source applications. The only reason I use Windows
is because I know that my hardware works right in it and don't have to
worry that one of the open-source titles is broken because some
dependency is missing or whatever.
I understand. If you had simple, business computers, like mine, your
experience would probably be much better. (But then you wouldn't be able to >> do what you want to do with your computer.)
The MacBook Neo idea is gone. My wife needs a bigger screen. But she's still >> interested in using a Mac for her work (on her big monitor). She was told
that a Mac Mini (with 512 GBs) would work well for her. But then I saw the >> new one (with an M5 CPU) was coming out fairly soon, so I think it would be >> wise to wait for that one. That one is going to come standard with 512 GB, >> so we wouldn't have to pay an extra $200 for an extra 256 GBs of storage.
(They'll probably jump the price of the base model, though.)
I didn't realize that the MacBook Neo is using an iPhone CPU. Apparently a >> pretty powerful one. It seems like they could make a dock for the iPhone and >> you could use that for a computer.
With education pricing, I can get either of those two computers for a
great price (even in CAD). However, I really don't need to upgrade
anything I own yet. This 2019 ThinkPad has been upgraded with a 512GB
NVMe and I turned the 1TB SSD the seller gave me with the machine into storage for the movies I use with the kids. It's not super fast, but it doesn't need to be; it just needs to store my movies and documents and duplicate my screen from time. As for the gaming machine I have at home, it's almost five-year-old but it still plays anything I want to run. I learned that the difference betwene the RTX 3060 mobile I use and the
RTX 5060 mobile they are selling on new computers is like 50%. There's
no point in plonking another 2k for a new machine for that little
benefit. If it were an M1 MacBook Air I would have bought around the
same time, I might have been looking to upgrade if only to avoid Apple cutting me off from updates, but there is otherwise no point in
changing. I like that we've gotten to a point where even
fifteen-year-old machines are still more than usable.
On 2026-03-17, pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-16, Joel W. Crump <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/16/2026 6:52 PM, Alan wrote:
On 2026-03-14 19:44, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-14, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 07:26, Lissajous wrote:
Why must you lie?
"Planned Parenthood doctor tells committee that ‘men can have
pregnancies, especially trans men’"
<https://clyde.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=491> >>>>>>>
Why this is even in question demonstrates the idiocy of those who >>>>>>> support
Trans agenda.
'Dr. Kumar pushed back, telling him such questions are “really missing >>>>>> the point” at a hearing about abortion, before affirming his response. >>>>>>
“Somebody with a uterus may have the capability of becoming pregnant, >>>>>> whether they’re a woman or a man,” Dr. Kumar said.'
He never said that a biological male could get pregnant.
Yeah, it *does* matter if the person has a uterus or not because men >>>>> *don't*
have them. Period. Good grief, are you really this gullible to defend a >>>>> lying moron when he goes into weasel word mode? Again, straining at a >>>>> gnat
and swallowing a camel. Typical lying, delusional bullshit instead of >>>>> acknowledging scientific fact.
You have yet to support your claim that anyone has ever claimed that a >>>> biological male could bear a child:
'But pretending a man can "become" a woman and carry a baby (for
example) is delusional BS. And what we're supposed to "accept" this
stupidity.'
Come back to supporting that.
Ron is so moronic that he's actually trying to use that case of Sen.
Fuckface Hawley berating a woman, not letting her answer the question
properly, these people are *scum*.
She was asked a simple, basic yes/no question 12 times and chose to dodge
the question 12 times.
In a criminal court she would have been held in contempt of court.
Not the first time some Woke idiot has done this. Their delusions don't sync well with reality.
Trans men do get pregnant, that isn't a "biomale" getting pregnant yeah, but that is the point, they are
trying to make it about something it isn't.
He was referring to biological males pretending to be females.
Of course a biological female pretending to be a male can get pregnant assuming of course the hormone
treatments have not had an effect on her fertility and so forth.
So Joel thinks a woman, pretending to be a man, is a man when she gets pregnant? Apparently for him a brain would just get in his way.
So fuck Ron, may his house
burn down.
And there's the typical Woke response. The height of their "wit."
LOL.
Typical unhinged leftist lunatic projecting again.
Yep. I'm happy that I killfiled this Joel moron a long time ago.
On 2026-03-17, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-17 12:00 p.m., DFS wrote:
On 3/17/2026 11:34 AM, Joel W. Crump wrote:The homosexual leprechaun Joel Crump wants someone to kill themselves
On 3/17/2026 9:27 AM, pothead wrote:
So fuck Ron, may his house
burn down.
LOL.
Typical unhinged leftist lunatic projecting again.
<plonk> Fucking unhinged retard cracker. Kill yourself.
May you have a delusional break with reality and suffer a lifetime of
schizoid beliefs and substance addictions... oh wait...
again. How very leftist of him.
This is what Woke "inclusivity" produces. Rabid and unhinged morons.
On 2026-03-17, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-17 1:17 a.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-16, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-15 2:28 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-15, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 10:35 p.m., RonB wrote:Apparently not just Weinstein, Disney seems to a have serious grooming issue
On 2026-03-14, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 1:04 a.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-14, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-13 17:01, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-13, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-13 16:35, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-13, chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> CrudeSausage wrote:
Homosexuality is a real thing. Why? I have no idea. But pretending a
chrisv wrote:
It's a continuous spectrum, and a natural condition of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> animals. What percentage that can be called "homo" depends on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> where you draw the line.
Disagreed. This is playing right into the narrative of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> faggot community.
The assertion that all people are attracted to one sex or another,
and never both, is absurd. Obviously and demonstratively false. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
man can "become" a woman and carry a baby (for example) is >>>>>>>>>>>>> delusional BS. And what we're supposed to "accept" this stupidity.
No one I have ever seen has actually claimed that.
Actually they have. And in some idiot countries you can be jailed for
denying this stupidity.
https://www.feministcurrent.com/2022/07/22/christina-ellingsen-is-facing-prison-time-for-saying-that-men-cant-be-women/
Sorry, but that doesn't prove the converse.
So no, you're claiming your being asked to "accept" that which is not
being claimed.
Right. You really don't keep with the news, do you?
https://www.gbnews.com/news/us/liberal-doctor-can-men-get-pregnant-senator-watch-video
Refusing to answer an absurd question doesn't mean she thinks they can.
They were asking this question because these idiots claim that men can have
babies. I see you ignored the other link. Interesting.
I figured out that Anal was a leftist. Why am I not even remotely >>>>>>>> shocked that an obnoxious, know-it all zealot is a leftist?
Being a Woke leftist is one thing. Being ignorant of obvious facts is >>>>>>> another. If he's ging to argue, he should at least know what he's talking
about.
No sexual abuse problems in Hollywood... Yeah, right.
You would think that by now, the Operation Mockingbird sources Anal >>>>>> relies on would have admitted that Harvey Weinstein was a problem or >>>>>> that Hollywood actresses do allow themselves to be groomed at a young >>>>>> age in exchange for roles. Oh wait, they did: Anal just purposefully >>>>>> ignored them in order to needlessly argue here in Snit-like fashion. >>>>>
with child actors.
Or at least did. Hopefully the Weinstein jailing has made child actor >>>>> parents more vigilant by now.
I'm still pissed that Magic Kingdom cost my wife and I $600 a ticket
when we went there last week. There is absolutely nothing special about >>>> the place that it would cost that much. Orlando was nice, but the Disney >>>> stuff is a serious rip-off.
When they were little (my oldest kids) we took them to Disneyland when I was
working at 29 Psalms Marine Base (installing phone switches). I think for >>> all of us the cost was about $150. When I was teenager (living in Ventura) >>> they had CB (Construction Battalion) night. (The base is in Port Hueneme.) >>> My brother had a friend in the CBs (Seabees) and I think our full night
(till 12) tickets were $15. The place was almost empty and all the rides >>> were included. (This was back in the days of E tickets, etc.)
$600 a ticket is just pure insanity. And I hear a big chunk of DisneyWorld >>> is shut down.
I wouldn't know what it used to be like, but the way it is currently is
no better than the local amusement park in Montreal minus the Disney
branding everywhere. Our amusement park also doesn't have as many shops
filled with overpriced items and more restaurants. Either way, it was a
waste of time but an experience we had to at least do once to learn that
it was a rip-off. I imagine it is similar to how muhammedans need to
travel to see that rock they worshiped before the pedophile muhammad
(piss be upon him) even existed.
We had a membership with Six Flags Over Texas for a couple years. (Much cheaper than your $600 price for one day at DisneyLand.) A remember a lot of watching my kids standing in line in 100 degree heat. I liked it better in the early spring or late fall, when it was cooler, even though a lot of the rides were shut down. I don't think amusement parks (in general) are doing that well. Kind of like malls, their heyday is over.
On 2026-03-17, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-17 1:33 a.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-16, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-15 2:42 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-15, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 11:33 p.m., DFS wrote:
On 3/14/2026 5:09 PM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
what good is a Mac that can’t run Adobe stuff?
What good is a GuhNoo/Linux crapbox that can't run Adobe OR Microsoft OR
Apple stuff?
It's great for those of us who don't want to run Microsoft or Adobe crap, and
don't like Mac OS. Choose what you want DuFuS. I'll choose what I want. Not
everyone needs or wants Adobe and/or Microsoft crap.
96 in 100 say "Not much".
Only if their gullible enough to pay high rental prices for Adobe and >>>>> Microsoft crap. I'm not into that software rental bullshit.
Honestly, people who choose Linux don't really need the Microsoft, Adobe >>>>>> or Apple stuff. You can easily live without Microsoft Office by
installing WPS Office or compromising with LibreOffice. If that's not >>>>>> good enough, relying on the web versions like vallor does will do the >>>>>> trick (albeit without all the functionality). As for not having the >>>>>> Adobe stuff, not everyone manipulates images. In fact, practically no >>>>>> one does. If they _absolutely_ need to use Photoshop, they can do so on >>>>>> Windows or Mac, but what percentage of people do?
It's always Microsoft Office or niche products like overpriced Adobe crap >>>>> that Windows FUDsters point to. As if Linux users give a crap.
My apologies for commandeering your post to respond to the DuFuS.
I don't mind at all. You're entirely correct, either way. I mean, I use >>>> Windows to run open-source applications. The only reason I use Windows >>>> is because I know that my hardware works right in it and don't have to >>>> worry that one of the open-source titles is broken because some
dependency is missing or whatever.
I understand. If you had simple, business computers, like mine, your
experience would probably be much better. (But then you wouldn't be able to >>> do what you want to do with your computer.)
The MacBook Neo idea is gone. My wife needs a bigger screen. But she's still
interested in using a Mac for her work (on her big monitor). She was told >>> that a Mac Mini (with 512 GBs) would work well for her. But then I saw the >>> new one (with an M5 CPU) was coming out fairly soon, so I think it would be >>> wise to wait for that one. That one is going to come standard with 512 GB, >>> so we wouldn't have to pay an extra $200 for an extra 256 GBs of storage. >>> (They'll probably jump the price of the base model, though.)
I didn't realize that the MacBook Neo is using an iPhone CPU. Apparently a >>> pretty powerful one. It seems like they could make a dock for the iPhone and
you could use that for a computer.
With education pricing, I can get either of those two computers for a
great price (even in CAD). However, I really don't need to upgrade
anything I own yet. This 2019 ThinkPad has been upgraded with a 512GB
NVMe and I turned the 1TB SSD the seller gave me with the machine into
storage for the movies I use with the kids. It's not super fast, but it
doesn't need to be; it just needs to store my movies and documents and
duplicate my screen from time. As for the gaming machine I have at home,
it's almost five-year-old but it still plays anything I want to run. I
learned that the difference betwene the RTX 3060 mobile I use and the
RTX 5060 mobile they are selling on new computers is like 50%. There's
no point in plonking another 2k for a new machine for that little
benefit. If it were an M1 MacBook Air I would have bought around the
same time, I might have been looking to upgrade if only to avoid Apple
cutting me off from updates, but there is otherwise no point in
changing. I like that we've gotten to a point where even
fifteen-year-old machines are still more than usable.
You know I like old computers. My nephew called me yesterday and said he found two more Lenovo ThinkCentre M910q "tinys" in the e-waste at his company. He asked me if I wanted them. I told him, "no," I've got several computers that I need to get rid of as it is. I told him put 256 GB NVMe
SSDs in them and sell them for $150 each. (These have i7-7700T CPUs so they sell for more, and people seem to be looking for low power, small computers these days.) I actually like the i5 Dell Micros better, they run cooler.
I mentioned that we were thinking of getting a Mac Mini for my wife's work. Almost everyone said get the M4, the M5 comes with the "Vista of Mac OSes, Tahoe." That doesn't sound good. Is Apple doing their own version of Windows 11, going all in for AI crap?
On 2026-03-17, RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-17, pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-16, Joel W. Crump <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/16/2026 6:52 PM, Alan wrote:
On 2026-03-14 19:44, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-14, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 07:26, Lissajous wrote:
Why must you lie?
"Planned Parenthood doctor tells committee that ‘men can have >>>>>>>> pregnancies, especially trans men’"
<https://clyde.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=491> >>>>>>>>
Why this is even in question demonstrates the idiocy of those who >>>>>>>> support
Trans agenda.
'Dr. Kumar pushed back, telling him such questions are “really missing
the point” at a hearing about abortion, before affirming his response.
“Somebody with a uterus may have the capability of becoming pregnant, >>>>>>> whether they’re a woman or a man,” Dr. Kumar said.'
He never said that a biological male could get pregnant.
Yeah, it *does* matter if the person has a uterus or not because men >>>>>> *don't*
have them. Period. Good grief, are you really this gullible to defend a >>>>>> lying moron when he goes into weasel word mode? Again, straining at a >>>>>> gnat
and swallowing a camel. Typical lying, delusional bullshit instead of >>>>>> acknowledging scientific fact.
You have yet to support your claim that anyone has ever claimed that a >>>>> biological male could bear a child:
'But pretending a man can "become" a woman and carry a baby (for
example) is delusional BS. And what we're supposed to "accept" this >>>>> stupidity.'
Come back to supporting that.
Ron is so moronic that he's actually trying to use that case of Sen.
Fuckface Hawley berating a woman, not letting her answer the question
properly, these people are *scum*.
She was asked a simple, basic yes/no question 12 times and chose to dodge >>> the question 12 times.
In a criminal court she would have been held in contempt of court.
Not the first time some Woke idiot has done this. Their delusions don't sync
well with reality.
And if her lawyer objected, the prosecutor would ask to treat the witness as a hostile witness.
Those type of dodges may work in congressional hearings but don't hold up in a real court.
Trans men do get pregnant, that isn't a "biomale" getting pregnant yeah, but that is the point, they are
trying to make it about something it isn't.
He was referring to biological males pretending to be females.
Of course a biological female pretending to be a male can get pregnant assuming of course the hormone
treatments have not had an effect on her fertility and so forth.
So Joel thinks a woman, pretending to be a man, is a man when she gets
pregnant? Apparently for him a brain would just get in his way.
He keeps dodging and weaving so at this point I have no idea what he thinks assuming he thinks at all which is obviously in question.
So fuck Ron, may his house
burn down.
And there's the typical Woke response. The height of their "wit."
The party of the left, progressives, democrats, whatever they call themselves these days, demonstrating how they truly are the party of acceptance.
What a laugh!
--LOL.
Typical unhinged leftist lunatic projecting again.
Yep. I'm happy that I killfiled this Joel moron a long time ago.
On 2026-03-17 5:01 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-17, pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-16, Joel W. Crump <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/16/2026 6:52 PM, Alan wrote:
On 2026-03-14 19:44, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-14, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 07:26, Lissajous wrote:
Why must you lie?
"Planned Parenthood doctor tells committee that ‘men can have >>>>>>>> pregnancies, especially trans men’"
<https://clyde.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=491> >>>>>>>>
Why this is even in question demonstrates the idiocy of those who >>>>>>>> support
Trans agenda.
'Dr. Kumar pushed back, telling him such questions are “really missing
the point” at a hearing about abortion, before affirming his response.
“Somebody with a uterus may have the capability of becoming pregnant, >>>>>>> whether they’re a woman or a man,” Dr. Kumar said.'
He never said that a biological male could get pregnant.
Yeah, it *does* matter if the person has a uterus or not because men >>>>>> *don't*
have them. Period. Good grief, are you really this gullible to defend a >>>>>> lying moron when he goes into weasel word mode? Again, straining at a >>>>>> gnat
and swallowing a camel. Typical lying, delusional bullshit instead of >>>>>> acknowledging scientific fact.
You have yet to support your claim that anyone has ever claimed that a >>>>> biological male could bear a child:
'But pretending a man can "become" a woman and carry a baby (for
example) is delusional BS. And what we're supposed to "accept" this
stupidity.'
Come back to supporting that.
Ron is so moronic that he's actually trying to use that case of Sen.
Fuckface Hawley berating a woman, not letting her answer the question
properly, these people are *scum*.
She was asked a simple, basic yes/no question 12 times and chose to dodge >>> the question 12 times.
In a criminal court she would have been held in contempt of court.
Not the first time some Woke idiot has done this. Their delusions don't sync >> well with reality.
Trans men do get pregnant, that isn't a "biomale" getting pregnant yeah, but that is the point, they are
trying to make it about something it isn't.
He was referring to biological males pretending to be females.
Of course a biological female pretending to be a male can get pregnant assuming of course the hormone
treatments have not had an effect on her fertility and so forth.
So Joel thinks a woman, pretending to be a man, is a man when she gets
pregnant? Apparently for him a brain would just get in his way.
Since we're all so ignorant, Joel needs to explain biology to us and how
a man ejaculating into the ass of a man dressed as a woman leads to pregnancy.
So fuck Ron, may his house
burn down.
And there's the typical Woke response. The height of their "wit."
LOL.
Typical unhinged leftist lunatic projecting again.
Yep. I'm happy that I killfiled this Joel moron a long time ago.
You've done the right thing. I did the same thing when he blasphemed
against God. I gave him chances to redeem himself, but he is clearly a moron.
On 2026-03-17 5:02 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-17, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-17 12:00 p.m., DFS wrote:
On 3/17/2026 11:34 AM, Joel W. Crump wrote:The homosexual leprechaun Joel Crump wants someone to kill themselves
On 3/17/2026 9:27 AM, pothead wrote:
So fuck Ron, may his house
burn down.
LOL.
Typical unhinged leftist lunatic projecting again.
<plonk> Fucking unhinged retard cracker. Kill yourself.
May you have a delusional break with reality and suffer a lifetime of
schizoid beliefs and substance addictions... oh wait...
again. How very leftist of him.
This is what Woke "inclusivity" produces. Rabid and unhinged morons.
Anyone who disagrees with whatever idiocy they created today all need to kill themselves. If not, they will be killed by the state once they have their Communist utopia. This, of course, is loving of them.
On 2026-03-17 5:36 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-17, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-17 1:17 a.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-16, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-15 2:28 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-15, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 10:35 p.m., RonB wrote:Apparently not just Weinstein, Disney seems to a have serious grooming issue
On 2026-03-14, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 1:04 a.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-14, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-13 17:01, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-13, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-13 16:35, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-13, chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CrudeSausage wrote:
chrisv wrote:
It's a continuous spectrum, and a natural condition of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> animals. What percentage that can be called "homo" depends on
where you draw the line.
Disagreed. This is playing right into the narrative of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> faggot community.
The assertion that all people are attracted to one sex or another,
and never both, is absurd. Obviously and demonstratively false.
Homosexuality is a real thing. Why? I have no idea. But pretending a
man can "become" a woman and carry a baby (for example) is >>>>>>>>>>>>>> delusional BS. And what we're supposed to "accept" this stupidity.
No one I have ever seen has actually claimed that.
Actually they have. And in some idiot countries you can be jailed for
denying this stupidity.
https://www.feministcurrent.com/2022/07/22/christina-ellingsen-is-facing-prison-time-for-saying-that-men-cant-be-women/
Sorry, but that doesn't prove the converse.
So no, you're claiming your being asked to "accept" that which is not
being claimed.
Right. You really don't keep with the news, do you?
https://www.gbnews.com/news/us/liberal-doctor-can-men-get-pregnant-senator-watch-video
Refusing to answer an absurd question doesn't mean she thinks they can.
They were asking this question because these idiots claim that men can have
babies. I see you ignored the other link. Interesting.
I figured out that Anal was a leftist. Why am I not even remotely >>>>>>>>> shocked that an obnoxious, know-it all zealot is a leftist?
Being a Woke leftist is one thing. Being ignorant of obvious facts is >>>>>>>> another. If he's ging to argue, he should at least know what he's talking
about.
No sexual abuse problems in Hollywood... Yeah, right.
You would think that by now, the Operation Mockingbird sources Anal >>>>>>> relies on would have admitted that Harvey Weinstein was a problem or >>>>>>> that Hollywood actresses do allow themselves to be groomed at a young >>>>>>> age in exchange for roles. Oh wait, they did: Anal just purposefully >>>>>>> ignored them in order to needlessly argue here in Snit-like fashion. >>>>>>
with child actors.
Or at least did. Hopefully the Weinstein jailing has made child actor >>>>>> parents more vigilant by now.
I'm still pissed that Magic Kingdom cost my wife and I $600 a ticket >>>>> when we went there last week. There is absolutely nothing special about >>>>> the place that it would cost that much. Orlando was nice, but the Disney >>>>> stuff is a serious rip-off.
When they were little (my oldest kids) we took them to Disneyland when I was
working at 29 Psalms Marine Base (installing phone switches). I think for >>>> all of us the cost was about $150. When I was teenager (living in Ventura) >>>> they had CB (Construction Battalion) night. (The base is in Port Hueneme.) >>>> My brother had a friend in the CBs (Seabees) and I think our full night >>>> (till 12) tickets were $15. The place was almost empty and all the rides >>>> were included. (This was back in the days of E tickets, etc.)
$600 a ticket is just pure insanity. And I hear a big chunk of DisneyWorld >>>> is shut down.
I wouldn't know what it used to be like, but the way it is currently is
no better than the local amusement park in Montreal minus the Disney
branding everywhere. Our amusement park also doesn't have as many shops
filled with overpriced items and more restaurants. Either way, it was a
waste of time but an experience we had to at least do once to learn that >>> it was a rip-off. I imagine it is similar to how muhammedans need to
travel to see that rock they worshiped before the pedophile muhammad
(piss be upon him) even existed.
We had a membership with Six Flags Over Texas for a couple years. (Much
cheaper than your $600 price for one day at DisneyLand.) A remember a lot of >> watching my kids standing in line in 100 degree heat. I liked it better in >> the early spring or late fall, when it was cooler, even though a lot of the >> rides were shut down. I don't think amusement parks (in general) are doing >> that well. Kind of like malls, their heyday is over.
It's hard for these places to compete with the fun provided by video
games and Netflix, admittedly. Part of the fun of going to amusement
parks was going with a bunch of friends, but they can't be bothered to
leave the house to go to a park in the same way they can't be bothered
to come out and play street hockey.
On 2026-03-17 5:50 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-17, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-17 1:33 a.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-16, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-15 2:42 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-15, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 11:33 p.m., DFS wrote:
On 3/14/2026 5:09 PM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
what good is a Mac that can’t run Adobe stuff?
What good is a GuhNoo/Linux crapbox that can't run Adobe OR Microsoft OR
Apple stuff?
It's great for those of us who don't want to run Microsoft or Adobe crap, and
don't like Mac OS. Choose what you want DuFuS. I'll choose what I want. Not
everyone needs or wants Adobe and/or Microsoft crap.
96 in 100 say "Not much".
Only if their gullible enough to pay high rental prices for Adobe and >>>>>> Microsoft crap. I'm not into that software rental bullshit.
Honestly, people who choose Linux don't really need the Microsoft, Adobe
or Apple stuff. You can easily live without Microsoft Office by
installing WPS Office or compromising with LibreOffice. If that's not >>>>>>> good enough, relying on the web versions like vallor does will do the >>>>>>> trick (albeit without all the functionality). As for not having the >>>>>>> Adobe stuff, not everyone manipulates images. In fact, practically no >>>>>>> one does. If they _absolutely_ need to use Photoshop, they can do so on >>>>>>> Windows or Mac, but what percentage of people do?
It's always Microsoft Office or niche products like overpriced Adobe crap
that Windows FUDsters point to. As if Linux users give a crap.
My apologies for commandeering your post to respond to the DuFuS.
I don't mind at all. You're entirely correct, either way. I mean, I use >>>>> Windows to run open-source applications. The only reason I use Windows >>>>> is because I know that my hardware works right in it and don't have to >>>>> worry that one of the open-source titles is broken because some
dependency is missing or whatever.
I understand. If you had simple, business computers, like mine, your
experience would probably be much better. (But then you wouldn't be able to
do what you want to do with your computer.)
The MacBook Neo idea is gone. My wife needs a bigger screen. But she's still
interested in using a Mac for her work (on her big monitor). She was told >>>> that a Mac Mini (with 512 GBs) would work well for her. But then I saw the >>>> new one (with an M5 CPU) was coming out fairly soon, so I think it would be
wise to wait for that one. That one is going to come standard with 512 GB, >>>> so we wouldn't have to pay an extra $200 for an extra 256 GBs of storage. >>>> (They'll probably jump the price of the base model, though.)
I didn't realize that the MacBook Neo is using an iPhone CPU. Apparently a >>>> pretty powerful one. It seems like they could make a dock for the iPhone and
you could use that for a computer.
With education pricing, I can get either of those two computers for a
great price (even in CAD). However, I really don't need to upgrade
anything I own yet. This 2019 ThinkPad has been upgraded with a 512GB
NVMe and I turned the 1TB SSD the seller gave me with the machine into
storage for the movies I use with the kids. It's not super fast, but it
doesn't need to be; it just needs to store my movies and documents and
duplicate my screen from time. As for the gaming machine I have at home, >>> it's almost five-year-old but it still plays anything I want to run. I
learned that the difference betwene the RTX 3060 mobile I use and the
RTX 5060 mobile they are selling on new computers is like 50%. There's
no point in plonking another 2k for a new machine for that little
benefit. If it were an M1 MacBook Air I would have bought around the
same time, I might have been looking to upgrade if only to avoid Apple
cutting me off from updates, but there is otherwise no point in
changing. I like that we've gotten to a point where even
fifteen-year-old machines are still more than usable.
You know I like old computers. My nephew called me yesterday and said he
found two more Lenovo ThinkCentre M910q "tinys" in the e-waste at his
company. He asked me if I wanted them. I told him, "no," I've got several
computers that I need to get rid of as it is. I told him put 256 GB NVMe
SSDs in them and sell them for $150 each. (These have i7-7700T CPUs so they >> sell for more, and people seem to be looking for low power, small computers >> these days.) I actually like the i5 Dell Micros better, they run cooler.
I mentioned that we were thinking of getting a Mac Mini for my wife's work. >> Almost everyone said get the M4, the M5 comes with the "Vista of Mac OSes, >> Tahoe." That doesn't sound good. Is Apple doing their own version of Windows >> 11, going all in for AI crap?
Honestly, I don't know what makes Tahoe any worse than any other MacOS. There is no doubt that they're going all in with the AI stuff though.
They make sure to remind you that buying a new iPhone, iPad or Mac means that you're getting the latest edition of "Apple Intelligence."
On 2026-03-17, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-17 5:36 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-17, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-17 1:17 a.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-16, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-15 2:28 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-15, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 10:35 p.m., RonB wrote:Apparently not just Weinstein, Disney seems to a have serious grooming issue
On 2026-03-14, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 1:04 a.m., RonB wrote:Being a Woke leftist is one thing. Being ignorant of obvious facts is >>>>>>>>> another. If he's ging to argue, he should at least know what he's talking
On 2026-03-14, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-13 17:01, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-13, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-13 16:35, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-13, chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CrudeSausage wrote:
chrisv wrote:
It's a continuous spectrum, and a natural condition of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> animals. What percentage that can be called "homo" depends on
where you draw the line.
Disagreed. This is playing right into the narrative of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> faggot community.
The assertion that all people are attracted to one sex or another,
and never both, is absurd. Obviously and demonstratively false.
Homosexuality is a real thing. Why? I have no idea. But pretending a
man can "become" a woman and carry a baby (for example) is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> delusional BS. And what we're supposed to "accept" this stupidity.
No one I have ever seen has actually claimed that.
Actually they have. And in some idiot countries you can be jailed for
denying this stupidity.
https://www.feministcurrent.com/2022/07/22/christina-ellingsen-is-facing-prison-time-for-saying-that-men-cant-be-women/
Sorry, but that doesn't prove the converse.
So no, you're claiming your being asked to "accept" that which is not
being claimed.
Right. You really don't keep with the news, do you?
https://www.gbnews.com/news/us/liberal-doctor-can-men-get-pregnant-senator-watch-video
Refusing to answer an absurd question doesn't mean she thinks they can.
They were asking this question because these idiots claim that men can have
babies. I see you ignored the other link. Interesting.
I figured out that Anal was a leftist. Why am I not even remotely >>>>>>>>>> shocked that an obnoxious, know-it all zealot is a leftist? >>>>>>>>>
about.
No sexual abuse problems in Hollywood... Yeah, right.
You would think that by now, the Operation Mockingbird sources Anal >>>>>>>> relies on would have admitted that Harvey Weinstein was a problem or >>>>>>>> that Hollywood actresses do allow themselves to be groomed at a young >>>>>>>> age in exchange for roles. Oh wait, they did: Anal just purposefully >>>>>>>> ignored them in order to needlessly argue here in Snit-like fashion. >>>>>>>
with child actors.
Or at least did. Hopefully the Weinstein jailing has made child actor >>>>>>> parents more vigilant by now.
I'm still pissed that Magic Kingdom cost my wife and I $600 a ticket >>>>>> when we went there last week. There is absolutely nothing special about >>>>>> the place that it would cost that much. Orlando was nice, but the Disney >>>>>> stuff is a serious rip-off.
When they were little (my oldest kids) we took them to Disneyland when I was
working at 29 Psalms Marine Base (installing phone switches). I think for >>>>> all of us the cost was about $150. When I was teenager (living in Ventura)
they had CB (Construction Battalion) night. (The base is in Port Hueneme.)
My brother had a friend in the CBs (Seabees) and I think our full night >>>>> (till 12) tickets were $15. The place was almost empty and all the rides >>>>> were included. (This was back in the days of E tickets, etc.)
$600 a ticket is just pure insanity. And I hear a big chunk of DisneyWorld
is shut down.
I wouldn't know what it used to be like, but the way it is currently is >>>> no better than the local amusement park in Montreal minus the Disney
branding everywhere. Our amusement park also doesn't have as many shops >>>> filled with overpriced items and more restaurants. Either way, it was a >>>> waste of time but an experience we had to at least do once to learn that >>>> it was a rip-off. I imagine it is similar to how muhammedans need to
travel to see that rock they worshiped before the pedophile muhammad
(piss be upon him) even existed.
We had a membership with Six Flags Over Texas for a couple years. (Much
cheaper than your $600 price for one day at DisneyLand.) A remember a lot of
watching my kids standing in line in 100 degree heat. I liked it better in >>> the early spring or late fall, when it was cooler, even though a lot of the >>> rides were shut down. I don't think amusement parks (in general) are doing >>> that well. Kind of like malls, their heyday is over.
It's hard for these places to compete with the fun provided by video
games and Netflix, admittedly. Part of the fun of going to amusement
parks was going with a bunch of friends, but they can't be bothered to
leave the house to go to a park in the same way they can't be bothered
to come out and play street hockey.
Yep. "Social Media" (so-called) has isolated everyone. Malls used to be
where kids got together. Now it's the damned smartphones. And a lot of them don't care if their "friends" are AI creations or not because they're all parroting the same thing anyhow. It's a sick world.
I still remember my dad telling me about two teenagers he saw (a boy and a girl) sitting across the table (presumably on a date) texting to each other. It can't get more stupid than that.
On 2026-03-17, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-17 5:01 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-17, pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-16, Joel W. Crump <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/16/2026 6:52 PM, Alan wrote:
On 2026-03-14 19:44, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-14, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 07:26, Lissajous wrote:
Why must you lie?
"Planned Parenthood doctor tells committee that ‘men can have >>>>>>>>> pregnancies, especially trans men’"
<https://clyde.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=491> >>>>>>>>>
Why this is even in question demonstrates the idiocy of those who >>>>>>>>> support
Trans agenda.
'Dr. Kumar pushed back, telling him such questions are “really missing
the point” at a hearing about abortion, before affirming his response.
“Somebody with a uterus may have the capability of becoming pregnant,
whether they’re a woman or a man,” Dr. Kumar said.'
He never said that a biological male could get pregnant.
Yeah, it *does* matter if the person has a uterus or not because men >>>>>>> *don't*
have them. Period. Good grief, are you really this gullible to defend a >>>>>>> lying moron when he goes into weasel word mode? Again, straining at a >>>>>>> gnat
and swallowing a camel. Typical lying, delusional bullshit instead of >>>>>>> acknowledging scientific fact.
You have yet to support your claim that anyone has ever claimed that a >>>>>> biological male could bear a child:
'But pretending a man can "become" a woman and carry a baby (for
example) is delusional BS. And what we're supposed to "accept" this >>>>>> stupidity.'
Come back to supporting that.
Ron is so moronic that he's actually trying to use that case of Sen. >>>>> Fuckface Hawley berating a woman, not letting her answer the question >>>>> properly, these people are *scum*.
She was asked a simple, basic yes/no question 12 times and chose to dodge >>>> the question 12 times.
In a criminal court she would have been held in contempt of court.
Not the first time some Woke idiot has done this. Their delusions don't sync
well with reality.
Trans men do get pregnant, that isn't a "biomale" getting pregnant yeah, >>>>> but that is the point, they are
trying to make it about something it isn't.
He was referring to biological males pretending to be females.
Of course a biological female pretending to be a male can get pregnant >>>> assuming of course the hormone
treatments have not had an effect on her fertility and so forth.
So Joel thinks a woman, pretending to be a man, is a man when she gets
pregnant? Apparently for him a brain would just get in his way.
Since we're all so ignorant, Joel needs to explain biology to us and how
a man ejaculating into the ass of a man dressed as a woman leads to
pregnancy.
So fuck Ron, may his house
burn down.
And there's the typical Woke response. The height of their "wit."
LOL.
Typical unhinged leftist lunatic projecting again.
Yep. I'm happy that I killfiled this Joel moron a long time ago.
You've done the right thing. I did the same thing when he blasphemed
against God. I gave him chances to redeem himself, but he is clearly a
moron.
There's only so much time in the day for this kind of crap. I waste too much of my time with it as it is.
On 2026-03-17 5:01 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-17, pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-16, Joel W. Crump <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/16/2026 6:52 PM, Alan wrote:
On 2026-03-14 19:44, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-14, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 07:26, Lissajous wrote:
Why must you lie?
"Planned Parenthood doctor tells committee that ‘men can have >>>>>>>> pregnancies, especially trans men’"
<https://clyde.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=491> >>>>>>>>
Why this is even in question demonstrates the idiocy of those who >>>>>>>> support
Trans agenda.
'Dr. Kumar pushed back, telling him such questions are “really missing
the point” at a hearing about abortion, before affirming his response.
“Somebody with a uterus may have the capability of becoming pregnant, >>>>>>> whether they’re a woman or a man,” Dr. Kumar said.'
He never said that a biological male could get pregnant.
Yeah, it *does* matter if the person has a uterus or not because men >>>>>> *don't*
have them. Period. Good grief, are you really this gullible to defend a >>>>>> lying moron when he goes into weasel word mode? Again, straining at a >>>>>> gnat
and swallowing a camel. Typical lying, delusional bullshit instead of >>>>>> acknowledging scientific fact.
You have yet to support your claim that anyone has ever claimed that a >>>>> biological male could bear a child:
'But pretending a man can "become" a woman and carry a baby (for
example) is delusional BS. And what we're supposed to "accept" this
stupidity.'
Come back to supporting that.
Ron is so moronic that he's actually trying to use that case of Sen.
Fuckface Hawley berating a woman, not letting her answer the question
properly, these people are *scum*.
She was asked a simple, basic yes/no question 12 times and chose to dodge >>> the question 12 times.
In a criminal court she would have been held in contempt of court.
Not the first time some Woke idiot has done this. Their delusions don't sync >> well with reality.
Trans men do get pregnant, that isn't a "biomale" getting pregnant yeah, >>>> but that is the point, they are
trying to make it about something it isn't.
He was referring to biological males pretending to be females.
Of course a biological female pretending to be a male can get pregnant
assuming of course the hormone
treatments have not had an effect on her fertility and so forth.
So Joel thinks a woman, pretending to be a man, is a man when she gets
pregnant? Apparently for him a brain would just get in his way.
Since we're all so ignorant, Joel needs to explain biology to us and how
a man ejaculating into the ass of a man dressed as a woman leads to pregnancy.
So fuck Ron, may his house
burn down.
And there's the typical Woke response. The height of their "wit."
LOL.
Typical unhinged leftist lunatic projecting again.
Yep. I'm happy that I killfiled this Joel moron a long time ago.
You've done the right thing. I did the same thing when he blasphemed
against God. I gave him chances to redeem himself, but he is clearly a
moron.
On 2026-03-17 5:02 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-17, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-17 12:00 p.m., DFS wrote:
On 3/17/2026 11:34 AM, Joel W. Crump wrote:The homosexual leprechaun Joel Crump wants someone to kill themselves
On 3/17/2026 9:27 AM, pothead wrote:
So fuck Ron, may his house
burn down.
LOL.
Typical unhinged leftist lunatic projecting again.
<plonk> Fucking unhinged retard cracker. Kill yourself.
May you have a delusional break with reality and suffer a lifetime of
schizoid beliefs and substance addictions... oh wait...
again. How very leftist of him.
This is what Woke "inclusivity" produces. Rabid and unhinged morons.
Anyone who disagrees with whatever idiocy they created today all need to
kill themselves. If not, they will be killed by the state once they have their Communist utopia. This, of course, is loving of them.
On Tue, 17 Mar 2026 10:13:57 -0400, Tom Elam wrote:
On 3/14/26 5:09 PM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
I wonder what it’s for? Is it basically a more expensive
Chromebook?
Because it’s too underpowered to run Adobe stuff. And what good is
a Mac that can’t run Adobe stuff?
It's actually useful without an internet connection?
I’ll give you that ... if it’s actually true. ;)
How useful is a Mac without an Internet connection?
Particularly in the education setting, which others are claiming is
what Apple is aiming the product at?
On 2026-03-17, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-17 5:01 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-17, pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-16, Joel W. Crump <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/16/2026 6:52 PM, Alan wrote:
On 2026-03-14 19:44, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-14, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 07:26, Lissajous wrote:
Why must you lie?
"Planned Parenthood doctor tells committee that ‘men can have >>>>>>>>> pregnancies, especially trans men’"
<https://clyde.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=491> >>>>>>>>>
Why this is even in question demonstrates the idiocy of those who >>>>>>>>> support
Trans agenda.
'Dr. Kumar pushed back, telling him such questions are “really missing
the point” at a hearing about abortion, before affirming his response.
“Somebody with a uterus may have the capability of becoming pregnant,
whether they’re a woman or a man,” Dr. Kumar said.'
He never said that a biological male could get pregnant.
Yeah, it *does* matter if the person has a uterus or not because men >>>>>>> *don't*
have them. Period. Good grief, are you really this gullible to defend a >>>>>>> lying moron when he goes into weasel word mode? Again, straining at a >>>>>>> gnat
and swallowing a camel. Typical lying, delusional bullshit instead of >>>>>>> acknowledging scientific fact.
You have yet to support your claim that anyone has ever claimed that a >>>>>> biological male could bear a child:
'But pretending a man can "become" a woman and carry a baby (for
example) is delusional BS. And what we're supposed to "accept" this >>>>>> stupidity.'
Come back to supporting that.
Ron is so moronic that he's actually trying to use that case of Sen. >>>>> Fuckface Hawley berating a woman, not letting her answer the question >>>>> properly, these people are *scum*.
She was asked a simple, basic yes/no question 12 times and chose to dodge >>>> the question 12 times.
In a criminal court she would have been held in contempt of court.
Not the first time some Woke idiot has done this. Their delusions don't sync
well with reality.
Trans men do get pregnant, that isn't a "biomale" getting pregnant yeah, but that is the point, they are
trying to make it about something it isn't.
He was referring to biological males pretending to be females.
Of course a biological female pretending to be a male can get pregnant assuming of course the hormone
treatments have not had an effect on her fertility and so forth.
So Joel thinks a woman, pretending to be a man, is a man when she gets
pregnant? Apparently for him a brain would just get in his way.
Since we're all so ignorant, Joel needs to explain biology to us and how
a man ejaculating into the ass of a man dressed as a woman leads to
pregnancy.
So fuck Ron, may his house
burn down.
And there's the typical Woke response. The height of their "wit."
LOL.
Typical unhinged leftist lunatic projecting again.
Yep. I'm happy that I killfiled this Joel moron a long time ago.
You've done the right thing. I did the same thing when he blasphemed
against God. I gave him chances to redeem himself, but he is clearly a
moron.
There's only so much time in the day for this kind of crap. I waste too much of my time with it as it is.
On 2026-03-17, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-17 5:02 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-17, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-17 12:00 p.m., DFS wrote:
On 3/17/2026 11:34 AM, Joel W. Crump wrote:The homosexual leprechaun Joel Crump wants someone to kill themselves
On 3/17/2026 9:27 AM, pothead wrote:
So fuck Ron, may his house
burn down.
LOL.
Typical unhinged leftist lunatic projecting again.
<plonk> Fucking unhinged retard cracker. Kill yourself.
May you have a delusional break with reality and suffer a lifetime of >>>>> schizoid beliefs and substance addictions... oh wait...
again. How very leftist of him.
This is what Woke "inclusivity" produces. Rabid and unhinged morons.
Anyone who disagrees with whatever idiocy they created today all need to
kill themselves. If not, they will be killed by the state once they have
their Communist utopia. This, of course, is loving of them.
Exactly. That's one good thing the Trump election did. It kind of paused
this insane Woke crap. The Democrats finally figured out it was a losing agenda. But Trump has screwed up so badly that the Woke crap will probably come back after the midterms.
Trump's main job was to fix the economy (if that was possible). Instead he's pissed away his support with multiple stupid wars as he plays "Emperor of
the World" instead of President of the United States.
On 2026-03-17, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-17 5:36 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-17, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-17 1:17 a.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-16, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-15 2:28 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-15, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 10:35 p.m., RonB wrote:Apparently not just Weinstein, Disney seems to a have serious grooming issue
On 2026-03-14, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 1:04 a.m., RonB wrote:Being a Woke leftist is one thing. Being ignorant of obvious facts is >>>>>>>>> another. If he's ging to argue, he should at least know what he's talking
On 2026-03-14, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-13 17:01, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-13, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-13 16:35, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-13, chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CrudeSausage wrote:
chrisv wrote:
It's a continuous spectrum, and a natural condition of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> animals. What percentage that can be called "homo" depends on
where you draw the line.
Disagreed. This is playing right into the narrative of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> faggot community.
The assertion that all people are attracted to one sex or another,
and never both, is absurd. Obviously and demonstratively false.
Homosexuality is a real thing. Why? I have no idea. But pretending a
man can "become" a woman and carry a baby (for example) is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> delusional BS. And what we're supposed to "accept" this stupidity.
No one I have ever seen has actually claimed that.
Actually they have. And in some idiot countries you can be jailed for
denying this stupidity.
https://www.feministcurrent.com/2022/07/22/christina-ellingsen-is-facing-prison-time-for-saying-that-men-cant-be-women/
Sorry, but that doesn't prove the converse.
So no, you're claiming your being asked to "accept" that which is not
being claimed.
Right. You really don't keep with the news, do you?
https://www.gbnews.com/news/us/liberal-doctor-can-men-get-pregnant-senator-watch-video
Refusing to answer an absurd question doesn't mean she thinks they can.
They were asking this question because these idiots claim that men can have
babies. I see you ignored the other link. Interesting.
I figured out that Anal was a leftist. Why am I not even remotely >>>>>>>>>> shocked that an obnoxious, know-it all zealot is a leftist? >>>>>>>>>
about.
No sexual abuse problems in Hollywood... Yeah, right.
You would think that by now, the Operation Mockingbird sources Anal >>>>>>>> relies on would have admitted that Harvey Weinstein was a problem or >>>>>>>> that Hollywood actresses do allow themselves to be groomed at a young >>>>>>>> age in exchange for roles. Oh wait, they did: Anal just purposefully >>>>>>>> ignored them in order to needlessly argue here in Snit-like fashion. >>>>>>>
with child actors.
Or at least did. Hopefully the Weinstein jailing has made child actor >>>>>>> parents more vigilant by now.
I'm still pissed that Magic Kingdom cost my wife and I $600 a ticket >>>>>> when we went there last week. There is absolutely nothing special about >>>>>> the place that it would cost that much. Orlando was nice, but the Disney >>>>>> stuff is a serious rip-off.
When they were little (my oldest kids) we took them to Disneyland when I was
working at 29 Psalms Marine Base (installing phone switches). I think for >>>>> all of us the cost was about $150. When I was teenager (living in Ventura)
they had CB (Construction Battalion) night. (The base is in Port Hueneme.)
My brother had a friend in the CBs (Seabees) and I think our full night >>>>> (till 12) tickets were $15. The place was almost empty and all the rides >>>>> were included. (This was back in the days of E tickets, etc.)
$600 a ticket is just pure insanity. And I hear a big chunk of DisneyWorld
is shut down.
I wouldn't know what it used to be like, but the way it is currently is >>>> no better than the local amusement park in Montreal minus the Disney
branding everywhere. Our amusement park also doesn't have as many shops >>>> filled with overpriced items and more restaurants. Either way, it was a >>>> waste of time but an experience we had to at least do once to learn that >>>> it was a rip-off. I imagine it is similar to how muhammedans need to
travel to see that rock they worshiped before the pedophile muhammad
(piss be upon him) even existed.
We had a membership with Six Flags Over Texas for a couple years. (Much
cheaper than your $600 price for one day at DisneyLand.) A remember a lot of
watching my kids standing in line in 100 degree heat. I liked it better in >>> the early spring or late fall, when it was cooler, even though a lot of the >>> rides were shut down. I don't think amusement parks (in general) are doing >>> that well. Kind of like malls, their heyday is over.
It's hard for these places to compete with the fun provided by video
games and Netflix, admittedly. Part of the fun of going to amusement
parks was going with a bunch of friends, but they can't be bothered to
leave the house to go to a park in the same way they can't be bothered
to come out and play street hockey.
Yep. "Social Media" (so-called) has isolated everyone. Malls used to be
where kids got together. Now it's the damned smartphones. And a lot of them don't care if their "friends" are AI creations or not because they're all parroting the same thing anyhow. It's a sick world.
I still remember my dad telling me about two teenagers he saw (a boy and a girl) sitting across the table (presumably on a date) texting to each other. It can't get more stupid than that.
On 2026-03-17 6:26 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-17, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-17 5:36 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-17, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-17 1:17 a.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-16, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-15 2:28 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-15, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 10:35 p.m., RonB wrote:Apparently not just Weinstein, Disney seems to a have serious grooming issue
On 2026-03-14, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 1:04 a.m., RonB wrote:Being a Woke leftist is one thing. Being ignorant of obvious facts is
On 2026-03-14, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-13 17:01, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-13, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-13 16:35, RonB wrote:Actually they have. And in some idiot countries you can be jailed for
On 2026-03-13, chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CrudeSausage wrote:
chrisv wrote:
It's a continuous spectrum, and a natural condition of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> animals. What percentage that can be called "homo" depends on
where you draw the line.
Disagreed. This is playing right into the narrative of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> faggot community.
The assertion that all people are attracted to one sex or another,
and never both, is absurd. Obviously and demonstratively false.
Homosexuality is a real thing. Why? I have no idea. But pretending a
man can "become" a woman and carry a baby (for example) is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> delusional BS. And what we're supposed to "accept" this stupidity.
No one I have ever seen has actually claimed that. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
denying this stupidity.
https://www.feministcurrent.com/2022/07/22/christina-ellingsen-is-facing-prison-time-for-saying-that-men-cant-be-women/
Sorry, but that doesn't prove the converse.
So no, you're claiming your being asked to "accept" that which is not
being claimed.
Right. You really don't keep with the news, do you? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.gbnews.com/news/us/liberal-doctor-can-men-get-pregnant-senator-watch-video
Refusing to answer an absurd question doesn't mean she thinks they can.
They were asking this question because these idiots claim that men can have
babies. I see you ignored the other link. Interesting.
I figured out that Anal was a leftist. Why am I not even remotely >>>>>>>>>>> shocked that an obnoxious, know-it all zealot is a leftist? >>>>>>>>>>
another. If he's ging to argue, he should at least know what he's talking
about.
No sexual abuse problems in Hollywood... Yeah, right.
You would think that by now, the Operation Mockingbird sources Anal >>>>>>>>> relies on would have admitted that Harvey Weinstein was a problem or >>>>>>>>> that Hollywood actresses do allow themselves to be groomed at a young >>>>>>>>> age in exchange for roles. Oh wait, they did: Anal just purposefully >>>>>>>>> ignored them in order to needlessly argue here in Snit-like fashion. >>>>>>>>
with child actors.
Or at least did. Hopefully the Weinstein jailing has made child actor >>>>>>>> parents more vigilant by now.
I'm still pissed that Magic Kingdom cost my wife and I $600 a ticket >>>>>>> when we went there last week. There is absolutely nothing special about >>>>>>> the place that it would cost that much. Orlando was nice, but the Disney
stuff is a serious rip-off.
When they were little (my oldest kids) we took them to Disneyland when I was
working at 29 Psalms Marine Base (installing phone switches). I think for
all of us the cost was about $150. When I was teenager (living in Ventura)
they had CB (Construction Battalion) night. (The base is in Port Hueneme.)
My brother had a friend in the CBs (Seabees) and I think our full night >>>>>> (till 12) tickets were $15. The place was almost empty and all the rides >>>>>> were included. (This was back in the days of E tickets, etc.)
$600 a ticket is just pure insanity. And I hear a big chunk of DisneyWorld
is shut down.
I wouldn't know what it used to be like, but the way it is currently is >>>>> no better than the local amusement park in Montreal minus the Disney >>>>> branding everywhere. Our amusement park also doesn't have as many shops >>>>> filled with overpriced items and more restaurants. Either way, it was a >>>>> waste of time but an experience we had to at least do once to learn that >>>>> it was a rip-off. I imagine it is similar to how muhammedans need to >>>>> travel to see that rock they worshiped before the pedophile muhammad >>>>> (piss be upon him) even existed.
We had a membership with Six Flags Over Texas for a couple years. (Much >>>> cheaper than your $600 price for one day at DisneyLand.) A remember a lot of
watching my kids standing in line in 100 degree heat. I liked it better in >>>> the early spring or late fall, when it was cooler, even though a lot of the
rides were shut down. I don't think amusement parks (in general) are doing >>>> that well. Kind of like malls, their heyday is over.
It's hard for these places to compete with the fun provided by video
games and Netflix, admittedly. Part of the fun of going to amusement
parks was going with a bunch of friends, but they can't be bothered to
leave the house to go to a park in the same way they can't be bothered
to come out and play street hockey.
Yep. "Social Media" (so-called) has isolated everyone. Malls used to be
where kids got together. Now it's the damned smartphones. And a lot of them >> don't care if their "friends" are AI creations or not because they're all
parroting the same thing anyhow. It's a sick world.
I still remember my dad telling me about two teenagers he saw (a boy and a >> girl) sitting across the table (presumably on a date) texting to each other. >> It can't get more stupid than that.
And I believe it too. It is exactly what I would expect them to do. It's actually funny, the school I am at is a perfect representation of how
bad things have gotten. I know of two students with boyfriends or girlfriends, but everyone else is single and behaves like they're going
to be for the rest of their lives. Technology has made it that even approaching a girl has become difficult for them and vice versa.
Meanwhile, you should see the joy in the kids' faces knowing that
they're part of the very few who might get to kiss a member of the
opposite gender.
I also doubt that any of the kids will be content to get sodomized by Wretched Stallman in a wig the way that our resident limp-wristed--
leprechaun Joel does.
On 2026-03-17 6:17 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-17, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-17 5:01 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-17, pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-16, Joel W. Crump <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/16/2026 6:52 PM, Alan wrote:
On 2026-03-14 19:44, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-14, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 07:26, Lissajous wrote:
Why must you lie?
"Planned Parenthood doctor tells committee that ‘men can have >>>>>>>>>> pregnancies, especially trans men’"
<https://clyde.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=491> >>>>>>>>>>
Why this is even in question demonstrates the idiocy of those who >>>>>>>>>> support
Trans agenda.
'Dr. Kumar pushed back, telling him such questions are “really missing
the point” at a hearing about abortion, before affirming his response.
“Somebody with a uterus may have the capability of becoming pregnant,
whether they’re a woman or a man,” Dr. Kumar said.'
He never said that a biological male could get pregnant.
Yeah, it *does* matter if the person has a uterus or not because men >>>>>>>> *don't*
have them. Period. Good grief, are you really this gullible to defend a
lying moron when he goes into weasel word mode? Again, straining at a >>>>>>>> gnat
and swallowing a camel. Typical lying, delusional bullshit instead of >>>>>>>> acknowledging scientific fact.
You have yet to support your claim that anyone has ever claimed that a >>>>>>> biological male could bear a child:
'But pretending a man can "become" a woman and carry a baby (for >>>>>>> example) is delusional BS. And what we're supposed to "accept" this >>>>>>> stupidity.'
Come back to supporting that.
Ron is so moronic that he's actually trying to use that case of Sen. >>>>>> Fuckface Hawley berating a woman, not letting her answer the question >>>>>> properly, these people are *scum*.
She was asked a simple, basic yes/no question 12 times and chose to dodge >>>>> the question 12 times.
In a criminal court she would have been held in contempt of court.
Not the first time some Woke idiot has done this. Their delusions don't sync
well with reality.
Trans men do get pregnant, that isn't a "biomale" getting pregnant yeah, >>>>>> but that is the point, they are
trying to make it about something it isn't.
He was referring to biological males pretending to be females.
Of course a biological female pretending to be a male can get pregnant >>>>> assuming of course the hormone
treatments have not had an effect on her fertility and so forth.
So Joel thinks a woman, pretending to be a man, is a man when she gets >>>> pregnant? Apparently for him a brain would just get in his way.
Since we're all so ignorant, Joel needs to explain biology to us and how >>> a man ejaculating into the ass of a man dressed as a woman leads to
pregnancy.
So fuck Ron, may his house
burn down.
And there's the typical Woke response. The height of their "wit."
LOL.
Typical unhinged leftist lunatic projecting again.
Yep. I'm happy that I killfiled this Joel moron a long time ago.
You've done the right thing. I did the same thing when he blasphemed
against God. I gave him chances to redeem himself, but he is clearly a
moron.
There's only so much time in the day for this kind of crap. I waste too much >> of my time with it as it is.
Even a second wasted on a Joel Crump post is a second too many. He's
like Snit except that he's out of the closet rather than in it.
I have no idea what MCU, MPU means. (I'll have to look it up.)
I wouldn't know what it used to be like, but the way it is currently is
no better than the local amusement park in Montreal minus the Disney
branding everywhere. Our amusement park also doesn't have as many shops filled with overpriced items and more restaurants.
We had a membership with Six Flags Over Texas for a couple years. (Much cheaper than your $600 price for one day at DisneyLand.) A remember a
lot of watching my kids standing in line in 100 degree heat. I liked it better in the early spring or late fall, when it was cooler, even though
a lot of the rides were shut down. I don't think amusement parks (in
general) are doing that well. Kind of like malls, their heyday is over.
I remember Knott's Berry Farm (vaguely). I was pretty young when we went there. I think I remember fake gunfights.
You know I like old computers. My nephew called me yesterday and said he found two more Lenovo ThinkCentre M910q "tinys" in the e-waste at his company. He asked me if I wanted them. I told him, "no," I've got
several computers that I need to get rid of as it is. I told him put 256
GB NVMe SSDs in them and sell them for $150 each. (These have i7-7700T
CPUs so they sell for more, and people seem to be looking for low power, small computers these days.) I actually like the i5 Dell Micros better,
they run cooler.
On Mar 17, 2026 at 6:11:17 PM MST, "CrudeSausage" wrote <ZYmuR.47620$nkY9.2877@fx12.iad>:
On 2026-03-17 6:26 p.m., RonB wrote:
I still remember my dad telling me about two teenagers he saw (a boy and a >>> girl) sitting across the table (presumably on a date) texting to each other.
It can't get more stupid than that.
And I believe it too. It is exactly what I would expect them to do. It's
actually funny, the school I am at is a perfect representation of how
bad things have gotten. I know of two students with boyfriends or
girlfriends, but everyone else is single and behaves like they're going
to be for the rest of their lives. Technology has made it that even
approaching a girl has become difficult for them and vice versa.
Meanwhile, you should see the joy in the kids' faces knowing that
they're part of the very few who might get to kiss a member of the
opposite gender.
You don't know people who date? Odd.
I also doubt that any of the kids will be content to get sodomized by
Wretched Stallman in a wig the way that our resident limp-wristed
leprechaun Joel does.
On Tue, 17 Mar 2026 21:36:49 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
We had a membership with Six Flags Over Texas for a couple years. (Much
cheaper than your $600 price for one day at DisneyLand.) A remember a
lot of watching my kids standing in line in 100 degree heat. I liked it
better in the early spring or late fall, when it was cooler, even though
a lot of the rides were shut down. I don't think amusement parks (in
general) are doing that well. Kind of like malls, their heyday is over.
I went to a Six Flags Over Something. I can't remember which but I think
it was Texas. I didn't know it beforehand but the Pure Prairie League was playing that night for a bonus.
That was better than the night I went to Billy Bob's Texas and No-show
Jones didn't.
On 2026-03-17 6:17 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-17, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-17 5:01 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-17, pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-16, Joel W. Crump <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/16/2026 6:52 PM, Alan wrote:
On 2026-03-14 19:44, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-14, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 07:26, Lissajous wrote:
Why must you lie?
"Planned Parenthood doctor tells committee that ‘men can have >>>>>>>>>> pregnancies, especially trans men’"
<https://clyde.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=491> >>>>>>>>>>
Why this is even in question demonstrates the idiocy of those who >>>>>>>>>> support
Trans agenda.
'Dr. Kumar pushed back, telling him such questions are “really missing
the point” at a hearing about abortion, before affirming his response.
“Somebody with a uterus may have the capability of becoming pregnant,
whether they’re a woman or a man,” Dr. Kumar said.'
He never said that a biological male could get pregnant.
Yeah, it *does* matter if the person has a uterus or not because men >>>>>>>> *don't*
have them. Period. Good grief, are you really this gullible to defend a
lying moron when he goes into weasel word mode? Again, straining at a >>>>>>>> gnat
and swallowing a camel. Typical lying, delusional bullshit instead of >>>>>>>> acknowledging scientific fact.
You have yet to support your claim that anyone has ever claimed that a >>>>>>> biological male could bear a child:
'But pretending a man can "become" a woman and carry a baby (for >>>>>>> example) is delusional BS. And what we're supposed to "accept" this >>>>>>> stupidity.'
Come back to supporting that.
Ron is so moronic that he's actually trying to use that case of Sen. >>>>>> Fuckface Hawley berating a woman, not letting her answer the question >>>>>> properly, these people are *scum*.
She was asked a simple, basic yes/no question 12 times and chose to dodge >>>>> the question 12 times.
In a criminal court she would have been held in contempt of court.
Not the first time some Woke idiot has done this. Their delusions don't sync
well with reality.
Trans men do get pregnant, that isn't a "biomale" getting pregnant yeah, but that is the point, they are
trying to make it about something it isn't.
He was referring to biological males pretending to be females.
Of course a biological female pretending to be a male can get pregnant assuming of course the hormone
treatments have not had an effect on her fertility and so forth.
So Joel thinks a woman, pretending to be a man, is a man when she gets >>>> pregnant? Apparently for him a brain would just get in his way.
Since we're all so ignorant, Joel needs to explain biology to us and how >>> a man ejaculating into the ass of a man dressed as a woman leads to
pregnancy.
So fuck Ron, may his house
burn down.
And there's the typical Woke response. The height of their "wit."
LOL.
Typical unhinged leftist lunatic projecting again.
Yep. I'm happy that I killfiled this Joel moron a long time ago.
You've done the right thing. I did the same thing when he blasphemed
against God. I gave him chances to redeem himself, but he is clearly a
moron.
There's only so much time in the day for this kind of crap. I waste too much >> of my time with it as it is.
Even a second wasted on a Joel Crump post is a second too many. He's
like Snit except that he's out of the closet rather than in it.
On 2026-03-17 6:22 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-17, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-17 5:02 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-17, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-17 12:00 p.m., DFS wrote:
On 3/17/2026 11:34 AM, Joel W. Crump wrote:The homosexual leprechaun Joel Crump wants someone to kill themselves >>>>> again. How very leftist of him.
On 3/17/2026 9:27 AM, pothead wrote:
So fuck Ron, may his house
burn down.
LOL.
Typical unhinged leftist lunatic projecting again.
<plonk> Fucking unhinged retard cracker. Kill yourself.
May you have a delusional break with reality and suffer a lifetime of >>>>>> schizoid beliefs and substance addictions... oh wait...
This is what Woke "inclusivity" produces. Rabid and unhinged morons.
Anyone who disagrees with whatever idiocy they created today all need to >>> kill themselves. If not, they will be killed by the state once they have >>> their Communist utopia. This, of course, is loving of them.
Exactly. That's one good thing the Trump election did. It kind of paused
this insane Woke crap. The Democrats finally figured out it was a losing
agenda. But Trump has screwed up so badly that the Woke crap will probably >> come back after the midterms.
Trump's main job was to fix the economy (if that was possible). Instead he's >> pissed away his support with multiple stupid wars as he plays "Emperor of
the World" instead of President of the United States.
I'm going to wait until his term is over to make a judgement. All I can
say is that I'm in a leftist paradise here in Canada, and I hate this
place. They're trying to pass a censorship bill and bribing members of
the opposition party to cross the aisle so they can get a majority and
force the bill through. Soon, this country will be just like the United Kingdom where they will ignore anything blacks or muhammedans do but
arrest anyone who posts a mean tweet.
On Tue, 17 Mar 2026 21:12:13 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
I have no idea what MCU, MPU means. (I'll have to look it up.)
MCU -- microcontroller. In the RaspberryPi world, that would be the Pico MPU -- mocroprocessor The Raspberry Pi itself, sort of
https://www.voragotech.com/technology/mcu-vs-mpu-gui
I say sort of for the Pi because it is a Cortex-A76 MPU but has GPIOs. A cleaner example is the new Arduino Q. It has a DragonWing Cortex-A53 MPU
and a STM32 Cortex-M33 MCU on the other side of the board.
I haven't played with the Q and the setup sounds a little weird, sort of like if you hung a Pico off a Pi and used it for the i/o.
On Tue, 17 Mar 2026 21:36:49 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
We had a membership with Six Flags Over Texas for a couple years. (Much
cheaper than your $600 price for one day at DisneyLand.) A remember a
lot of watching my kids standing in line in 100 degree heat. I liked it
better in the early spring or late fall, when it was cooler, even though
a lot of the rides were shut down. I don't think amusement parks (in
general) are doing that well. Kind of like malls, their heyday is over.
I went to a Six Flags Over Something. I can't remember which but I think
it was Texas. I didn't know it beforehand but the Pure Prairie League was playing that night for a bonus.
That was better than the night I went to Billy Bob's Texas and No-show
Jones didn't.
On Tue, 17 Mar 2026 21:29:17 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
I remember Knott's Berry Farm (vaguely). I was pretty young when we went
there. I think I remember fake gunfights.
There were several low rent operations in the Adirondacks. It's long gone but Frontier Town had stage coach rides with holdups, gun fights, pony express riders, and so forth. Santa's Workshop had better legs.
https://www.northpoleny.com/
There are historical sites from the French & Indian War and Revolution
mixed in with natural attractions like Ausable Chasm.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ausable_Chasm
It was an interesting place to grow up. The big thing this time of year
was the sugar houses over on the Vermont side of the border. 'jack wax'
was maple syrup boiled down to candy making consistency and poured on
snow.
On Tue, 17 Mar 2026 21:50:29 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
You know I like old computers. My nephew called me yesterday and said he
found two more Lenovo ThinkCentre M910q "tinys" in the e-waste at his
company. He asked me if I wanted them. I told him, "no," I've got
several computers that I need to get rid of as it is. I told him put 256
GB NVMe SSDs in them and sell them for $150 each. (These have i7-7700T
CPUs so they sell for more, and people seem to be looking for low power,
small computers these days.) I actually like the i5 Dell Micros better,
they run cooler.
It was sort of rainy today so I dug out the old eeePC. It now is running antiX. I had the Damn Small Linux iso and it says it is 32-bit compatible but it stalled out loading from the Ventoy stick. It is derived from antiX so I got the 32bit iso and it worked.
"Proudly anti-fascist "antiX Magic" in an environment suitable for old and new computers."
No problem. The Fascists were Italian and I'm not Italian. The learning experience for the day was getting Conky to show the battery level.
RonB wrote:
Homosexuality is a real thing. Why? I have no idea. But pretending a
man can "become" a woman and carry a baby (for example) is
delusional BS. And what we're supposed to "accept" this stupidity.
No one I have ever seen has actually claimed that.
So no, you're claiming your being asked to "accept" that which is not
being claimed.
On Tue, 17 Mar 2026 13:48:05 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
I wouldn't know what it used to be like, but the way it is currently is
no better than the local amusement park in Montreal minus the Disney
branding everywhere. Our amusement park also doesn't have as many shops
filled with overpriced items and more restaurants.
Is that on the Expo 68 site? I thought Disney had moved one of the World's Fair '64 pavilions to Orlando but I don't see it on the list.
Alan wrote:
RonB wrote:
Homosexuality is a real thing. Why? I have no idea. But pretending a
man can "become" a woman and carry a baby (for example) is
delusional BS. And what we're supposed to "accept" this stupidity.
No one I have ever seen has actually claimed that.
So no, you're claiming your being asked to "accept" that which is not
being claimed.
But we are asked to accept that a man can become a woman. Which is
false. Hell, we are asked to accept that any man who simply *claims*
to be a woman is a woman! The word "ridiculous" does not suffice!
On 2026-03-18, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-17 6:17 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-17, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-17 5:01 p.m., RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-17, pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-16, Joel W. Crump <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/16/2026 6:52 PM, Alan wrote:
On 2026-03-14 19:44, RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-14, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2026-03-14 07:26, Lissajous wrote:
Why must you lie?
"Planned Parenthood doctor tells committee that ‘men can have >>>>>>>>>>> pregnancies, especially trans men’"
<https://clyde.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=491> >>>>>>>>>>>
Why this is even in question demonstrates the idiocy of those who >>>>>>>>>>> support
Trans agenda.
'Dr. Kumar pushed back, telling him such questions are “really missing
the point” at a hearing about abortion, before affirming his response.
“Somebody with a uterus may have the capability of becoming pregnant,
whether they’re a woman or a man,” Dr. Kumar said.'
He never said that a biological male could get pregnant.
Yeah, it *does* matter if the person has a uterus or not because men >>>>>>>>> *don't*
have them. Period. Good grief, are you really this gullible to defend a
lying moron when he goes into weasel word mode? Again, straining at a >>>>>>>>> gnat
and swallowing a camel. Typical lying, delusional bullshit instead of >>>>>>>>> acknowledging scientific fact.
You have yet to support your claim that anyone has ever claimed that a >>>>>>>> biological male could bear a child:
'But pretending a man can "become" a woman and carry a baby (for >>>>>>>> example) is delusional BS. And what we're supposed to "accept" this >>>>>>>> stupidity.'
Come back to supporting that.
Ron is so moronic that he's actually trying to use that case of Sen. >>>>>>> Fuckface Hawley berating a woman, not letting her answer the question >>>>>>> properly, these people are *scum*.
She was asked a simple, basic yes/no question 12 times and chose to dodge
the question 12 times.
In a criminal court she would have been held in contempt of court.
Not the first time some Woke idiot has done this. Their delusions don't sync
well with reality.
Trans men do get pregnant, that isn't a "biomale" getting pregnant yeah,
but that is the point, they are
trying to make it about something it isn't.
He was referring to biological males pretending to be females.
Of course a biological female pretending to be a male can get pregnant >>>>>> assuming of course the hormone
treatments have not had an effect on her fertility and so forth.
So Joel thinks a woman, pretending to be a man, is a man when she gets >>>>> pregnant? Apparently for him a brain would just get in his way.
Since we're all so ignorant, Joel needs to explain biology to us and how >>>> a man ejaculating into the ass of a man dressed as a woman leads to
pregnancy.
So fuck Ron, may his house
burn down.
And there's the typical Woke response. The height of their "wit."
LOL.
Typical unhinged leftist lunatic projecting again.
Yep. I'm happy that I killfiled this Joel moron a long time ago.
You've done the right thing. I did the same thing when he blasphemed
against God. I gave him chances to redeem himself, but he is clearly a >>>> moron.
There's only so much time in the day for this kind of crap. I waste too much
of my time with it as it is.
Even a second wasted on a Joel Crump post is a second too many. He's
like Snit except that he's out of the closet rather than in it.
Snit was more of a real troll. He used to pretend he was finding some points of agreement with you, then suddenly rewind to where he started. Joel just seems completely unhinged. I can see him frothing on his keyboard as he types.
Alan wrote:
RonB wrote:
Homosexuality is a real thing. Why? I have no idea. But pretending a
man can "become" a woman and carry a baby (for example) is
delusional BS. And what we're supposed to "accept" this stupidity.
No one I have ever seen has actually claimed that.
So no, you're claiming your being asked to "accept" that which is not
being claimed.
But we are asked to accept that a man can become a woman. Which is
false. Hell, we are asked to accept that any man who simply *claims*
to be a woman is a woman! The word "ridiculous" does not suffice!
I went to the Six Flags near DC (very near, same area as the Commanders stadium in Maryland) long before it was a Six Flags, it was "Wild
World", and later they changed the name to Adventure World, before Six
Flags took it over. Kind of a fun park, at the time at least. Then
again, amusement parks are overrated.
George Jones? When I was in Bible "college" in Scottsbluff, Nebraska,
Tom T.
Hall and Jeannie C. Riley came to the Western Nebraska Community College
to put on a show. Hall was so drunk that when it came to his turn to
sing,
he sloshed through a couple songs and Riley had to come back out and
finish the show.
On 2026-03-17 12:00 p.m., DFS wrote:
On 3/17/2026 11:34 AM, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 3/17/2026 9:27 AM, pothead wrote:
So fuck Ron, may his house
burn down.
LOL.
Typical unhinged leftist lunatic projecting again.
<plonk> Fucking unhinged retard cracker. Kill yourself.
May you have a delusional break with reality and suffer a lifetime of
schizoid beliefs and substance addictions... oh wait...
The homosexual leprechaun Joel Crump wants someone to kill themselves
again. How very leftist of him.
I went to the Six Flags near DC (very near, same area as the Commanders
stadium in Maryland) long before it was a Six Flags, it was "Wild
World", and later they changed the name to Adventure World, before Six
Flags took it over. Kind of a fun park, at the time at least. Then
again, amusement parks are overrated.
Was that the one where someone was killed on a faulty ride? What I find fascinating about the Six Flags franchise is they can plunk one down
anywhere and dig up history to show the area had been under 6 flags.
On 3/17/2026 2:11 PM, CrudeSausage wrote:
On 2026-03-17 12:00 p.m., DFS wrote:
On 3/17/2026 11:34 AM, Joel W. Crump wrote:
On 3/17/2026 9:27 AM, pothead wrote:
So fuck Ron, may his house
burn down.
LOL.
Typical unhinged leftist lunatic projecting again.
<plonk> Fucking unhinged retard cracker. Kill yourself.
May you have a delusional break with reality and suffer a lifetime of
schizoid beliefs and substance addictions... oh wait...
The homosexual leprechaun Joel Crump wants someone to kill themselves
again. How very leftist of him.
"kill yourself <Windows user>" used to be a fairly frequent refrain from
the crazy Linux advocates here on cola.
On 2026-03-17 9:46 p.m., rbowman wrote:
On Tue, 17 Mar 2026 13:48:05 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
I wouldn't know what it used to be like, but the way it is currently
is no better than the local amusement park in Montreal minus the
Disney branding everywhere. Our amusement park also doesn't have as
many shops filled with overpriced items and more restaurants.
Is that on the Expo 68 site? I thought Disney had moved one of the
World's Fair '64 pavilions to Orlando but I don't see it on the list.
I imagine that Epcot would be the World's Fair pavillion. We didn't
bother to go there.
On 2026-03-18, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
On Tue, 17 Mar 2026 21:12:13 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
I have no idea what MCU, MPU means. (I'll have to look it up.)
MCU -- microcontroller. In the RaspberryPi world, that would be the
Pico MPU -- mocroprocessor The Raspberry Pi itself, sort of
https://www.voragotech.com/technology/mcu-vs-mpu-gui
I say sort of for the Pi because it is a Cortex-A76 MPU but has GPIOs.
A cleaner example is the new Arduino Q. It has a DragonWing Cortex-A53
MPU and a STM32 Cortex-M33 MCU on the other side of the board.
I haven't played with the Q and the setup sounds a little weird, sort
of like if you hung a Pico off a Pi and used it for the i/o.
I should have figured this out just by the terms. Thanks for the link.
My brother likes to mess with MCUs.
You know a lot more about the guts of computers than I do. I can just
replace parts, load Linux, and use them. I do remember the EEPCs though.
When did they come out in the 90s or early 2000s? (I've got a good
memory,
but it's short.)
I always wanted to see that part of the country. New England and the mountains in New York, especially in the fall. Never made it up there. Maryland had true seasons and rolling hills but no real mountains. (At
least not in Riesterstown, which I guess is just a Baltimore suburb by
now.) Kind of makes me sick thinking about that.
Alan wrote:
RonB wrote:
Homosexuality is a real thing. Why? I have no idea. But pretending a
man can "become" a woman and carry a baby (for example) is
delusional BS. And what we're supposed to "accept" this stupidity.
No one I have ever seen has actually claimed that.
So no, you're claiming your being asked to "accept" that which is not >>being claimed.
But we are asked to accept that a man can become a woman. Which is
false. Hell, we are asked to accept that any man who simply *claims*
to be a woman is a woman! The word "ridiculous" does not suffice!
On 2026-03-18 8:09 a.m., chrisv wrote:
Alan wrote:
RonB wrote:
Homosexuality is a real thing. Why? I have no idea. But pretending a
man can "become" a woman and carry a baby (for example) is
delusional BS. And what we're supposed to "accept" this stupidity.
No one I have ever seen has actually claimed that.
So no, you're claiming your being asked to "accept" that which is not
being claimed.
But we are asked to accept that a man can become a woman. Which is
false. Hell, we are asked to accept that any man who simply *claims*
to be a woman is a woman! The word "ridiculous" does not suffice!
They were planning on fining them for each installlation wich doesn't
verify the age. How they would enforce that is beyond me, especially
since they never seem to know how many installs there are and who is
using them.
On Wed, 18 Mar 2026 07:20:04 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
George Jones? When I was in Bible "college" in Scottsbluff, Nebraska,
Tom T.
Hall and Jeannie C. Riley came to the Western Nebraska Community College
to put on a show. Hall was so drunk that when it came to his turn to
sing,
he sloshed through a couple songs and Riley had to come back out and
finish the show.
Yeah, The Possum didn't have the greatest track record. That was another case where I didn't know he was even scheduled. I only wanted to see 'the world's largest honky tonk' even though my honky tonking days were over.
I have an interview with Mostek but on the final approach to DFW I knew
that wasn't going to work. Texas doesn't get interesting until you're
almost in New Mexico.
On Wed, 18 Mar 2026 07:00:58 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
On 2026-03-18, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
On Tue, 17 Mar 2026 21:12:13 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
I have no idea what MCU, MPU means. (I'll have to look it up.)
MCU -- microcontroller. In the RaspberryPi world, that would be the
Pico MPU -- mocroprocessor The Raspberry Pi itself, sort of
https://www.voragotech.com/technology/mcu-vs-mpu-gui
I say sort of for the Pi because it is a Cortex-A76 MPU but has GPIOs.
A cleaner example is the new Arduino Q. It has a DragonWing Cortex-A53
MPU and a STM32 Cortex-M33 MCU on the other side of the board.
I haven't played with the Q and the setup sounds a little weird, sort
of like if you hung a Pico off a Pi and used it for the i/o.
I should have figured this out just by the terms. Thanks for the link.
My brother likes to mess with MCUs.
My entry into programming via industrial control systems was embedded
stuff. The last 25 years were computer aided dispatch systems, mostly electrons on a screen. I like getting back to my roots with little processors that interact with the real world. There a lot more
sophisticated now than the MCS8048s or even Z80s.
On Wed, 18 Mar 2026 07:31:07 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
You know a lot more about the guts of computers than I do. I can just
replace parts, load Linux, and use them. I do remember the EEPCs though.
When did they come out in the 90s or early 2000s? (I've got a good
memory,
but it's short.)
2007.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asus_Eee_PC
I wanted something I could toss into a motorcycle saddle bag and not be
out much if it was stolen or destroyed. The original Xandros Linux was
okay but it didn't support WPA2.
Even antiX just about fills the 4 GB internal drive. It does have a SD
slot that shows up as sdb. It had a 4 GB actual SD but I had a 64 GB
microSD I got for the Raspberry Pi. I put it in an adapter and now I have
to see if I can move the OS to it or reinstall.
The 4 GB of RAM is okay with antiX. The RAM is socketed but it won't recognize more than 4 $B.
On Wed, 18 Mar 2026 07:27:28 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
I always wanted to see that part of the country. New England and the
mountains in New York, especially in the fall. Never made it up there.
Maryland had true seasons and rolling hills but no real mountains. (At
least not in Riesterstown, which I guess is just a Baltimore suburb by
now.) Kind of makes me sick thinking about that.
I grew up in upstate NY but have lived in MA, VT, NH, and ME. I hiked
quite a bit in the Adirondacks, Greens in VT, Whites in NH, and some of
the lower ranges like the Berkshires. I took a 3 month contract at GE Fort Wayne that lasted over a year. I don't do well in flatland and was happy
to get back to NH.
I do miss the hardwoods. Except for the city where they planted maples and oaks most of the landscape is ponderosa pines, western larch, and douglas fir with cottonwood along the river. The larch get sort of a golden color
in the fall but that's about it.
On 2026-03-18, chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote:
Alan wrote:
RonB wrote:
Homosexuality is a real thing. Why? I have no idea. But pretending a
man can "become" a woman and carry a baby (for example) is
delusional BS. And what we're supposed to "accept" this stupidity.
No one I have ever seen has actually claimed that.
So no, you're claiming your being asked to "accept" that which is not
being claimed.
But we are asked to accept that a man can become a woman. Which is
false. Hell, we are asked to accept that any man who simply *claims*
to be a woman is a woman! The word "ridiculous" does not suffice!
It's delusional insanity. Only extremely gullible idiots would fall for this lying crap. Reality wins out every time.
On 2026-03-18, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2026-03-18 8:09 a.m., chrisv wrote:
Alan wrote:
RonB wrote:
Homosexuality is a real thing. Why? I have no idea. But pretending a >>>>> man can "become" a woman and carry a baby (for example) is
delusional BS. And what we're supposed to "accept" this stupidity.
No one I have ever seen has actually claimed that.
So no, you're claiming your being asked to "accept" that which is not
being claimed.
But we are asked to accept that a man can become a woman. Which is
false. Hell, we are asked to accept that any man who simply *claims*
to be a woman is a woman! The word "ridiculous" does not suffice!
They were planning on fining them for each installlation wich doesn't
verify the age. How they would enforce that is beyond me, especially
since they never seem to know how many installs there are and who is
using them.
I think they want to force the Linux distributions to include an age verification API (?) in the installation process.
Zilog's headquarters used to be just down the freeway from where I live. About fifteen years ago the Zilog sign went down. The Z80s were in
everything for awhile.
I never actually had an eePC. I would probably look into one but I've
already got way too many computers that I need to get rid of.
I think they want to force the Linux distributions to include an age verification API (?) in the installation process.
I didn't realize George Jones wasn't reliable. There were only a few of
his songs I liked. I guess he was mostly before my time.
I have an interview with Mostek but on the final approach to DFW I knew
that wasn't going to work. Texas doesn't get interesting until you're
almost in New Mexico.
You don't like flat, humid swamp land?
On Thu, 19 Mar 2026 08:06:53 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
Zilog's headquarters used to be just down the freeway from where I live.
About fifteen years ago the Zilog sign went down. The Z80s were in
everything for awhile.
I have a Captain Zilog t-shirt from a Zilog seminar promoting the Z8000. I had hopes for the processor but it was not to be. The scuttlebutt was IBM was in a pissing contest with Exxon, who owned Zilog, so it wasn't even considered.
https://thechipletter.substack.com/p/captain-zilog-crushed-the-story-of--
On Thu, 19 Mar 2026 08:09:22 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
I never actually had an eePC. I would probably look into one but I've
already got way too many computers that I need to get rid of.
You didn't miss much although I think the later 900s were better. Arguably it was the first 'netbook'. I've got a 2011 Acer netbook with Mint that is
a more pleasant experience, bigger display and better keyboard. 800x600 is limited.
Tablets ended the netbook era but we've come full circle with low cost laptops, even the Neo. In 2007 laptops were still pricey. iirc the Asus
was around $600. Even without considering inflation $600 buys you a lot more now.
On Thu, 19 Mar 2026 08:04:18 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
I didn't realize George Jones wasn't reliable. There were only a few of
his songs I liked. I guess he was mostly before my time.
He had a booze problem with no June Carter Cash to keep him on the
straight and narrow.
I have an interview with Mostek but on the final approach to DFW I knew
that wasn't going to work. Texas doesn't get interesting until you're
almost in New Mexico.
You don't like flat, humid swamp land?
Dallas isn't swampy; that's east Texas. You need gills to live in
Houston.
Maybe not a swamp, but it was built along a river that flooded the
lowland on a regular basis. Close enough to a swamp for me, though
Houston and San Antonio are much worse.
On Fri, 20 Mar 2026 04:58:16 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
Maybe not a swamp, but it was built along a river that flooded the
lowland on a regular basis. Close enough to a swamp for me, though
Houston and San Antonio are much worse.
Sprague started moving their operations south, ultimately to Mexico, but
San Antonio was the intermediate location. One of the techs was eager to relocate; he wanted a palm tree in the yard.
I passed through there but it wasn't bad. The Alamo was a little disconcerting. All the photos I'd ever seen were cropped, giving the impression it wasn't in the middle of a city. The River Walk was pleasant.
I think they have the river tamed.
I've got to admit, however, that the one time I stayed in Houston
(actually Galveston) was in the spring. We rented one of those houses on stilts by the beach for a couple days (extended family thing). We got
lucky, low humidity and nice temperatures and not many people.
On Sat, 21 Mar 2026 01:02:08 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
I've got to admit, however, that the one time I stayed in Houston
(actually Galveston) was in the spring. We rented one of those houses on
stilts by the beach for a couple days (extended family thing). We got
lucky, low humidity and nice temperatures and not many people.
After hearing 'Galveston' on the radio endlessly I had to go there. It was the end of the 4th of July holiday. Rather than backtracking I took the ferry to Bolivar Peninsula. Smooth sailing going east but I felt sorry for the poor bastards going west. There had to be a better way than waiting hours for the ferry.
I'd been to Laredo/Nuevo Laredo and came up through what Part of the King Ranch. There was a smell, not a bad smell but the land baking in the sun, and Conway Twitty's 'Lost in the Feeling' was getting a lot of airplay. I sometimes still smell that smell when the song plays. Those were the days when you could go to Mexico without an armed escort.
On Fri, 20 Mar 2026 04:58:16 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
Maybe not a swamp, but it was built along a river that flooded the
lowland on a regular basis. Close enough to a swamp for me, though
Houston and San Antonio are much worse.
Sprague started moving their operations south, ultimately to Mexico, but
San Antonio was the intermediate location. One of the techs was eager to relocate; he wanted a palm tree in the yard.
I passed through there but it wasn't bad. The Alamo was a little disconcerting. All the photos I'd ever seen were cropped, giving the impression it wasn't in the middle of a city.
The River Walk was pleasant.
I think they have the river tamed.
rbowman wrote this screed in ALL-CAPS:
On Fri, 20 Mar 2026 04:58:16 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
Maybe not a swamp, but it was built along a river that flooded the
lowland on a regular basis. Close enough to a swamp for me, though
Houston and San Antonio are much worse.
Sprague started moving their operations south, ultimately to Mexico, but
San Antonio was the intermediate location. One of the techs was eager to
relocate; he wanted a palm tree in the yard.
I passed through there but it wasn't bad. The Alamo was a little
disconcerting. All the photos I'd ever seen were cropped, giving the
impression it wasn't in the middle of a city.
I remember the same kind of thing when visiting the La Brea Tar
Pits for the first time.
Btw, that tar pits are featured in a scene in Philip Jose Farmer's
"Behind the Walls of Terra".
The River Walk was pleasant.
I think they have the river tamed.
You want a tamed river? Go to L.A. The concrete river is featured
in the second "Terminator" movie, as I recall.
On 3/21/26 06:13, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
rbowman wrote this screed in ALL-CAPS:
On Fri, 20 Mar 2026 04:58:16 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:
Maybe not a swamp, but it was built along a river that flooded the
lowland on a regular basis. Close enough to a swamp for me, though
Houston and San Antonio are much worse.
Sprague started moving their operations south, ultimately to Mexico, but >>> San Antonio was the intermediate location. One of the techs was eager to >>> relocate; he wanted a palm tree in the yard.
I passed through there but it wasn't bad. The Alamo was a little
disconcerting. All the photos I'd ever seen were cropped, giving the
impression it wasn't in the middle of a city.
I remember the same kind of thing when visiting the La Brea Tar
Pits for the first time.
Btw, that tar pits are featured in a scene in Philip Jose Farmer's
"Behind the Walls of Terra".
The River Walk was pleasant.
I think they have the river tamed.
You want a tamed river? Go to L.A. The concrete river is featured
in the second "Terminator" movie, as I recall.
Oh, that basin's been in plenty of other productions too, such as in the 1978 production of 'Grease' (John Travolta & Olivia Newton-John): car
drag race scene.
You want a tamed river? Go to L.A. The concrete river is featured in the second "Terminator" movie, as I recall.
I remember the same kind of thing when visiting the La Brea Tar
Pits for the first time.
Btw, that tar pits are featured in a scene in Philip Jose Farmer's
"Behind the Walls of Terra".
The River Walk was pleasant.
I think they have the river tamed.
You want a tamed river? Go to L.A. The concrete river is featured
in the second "Terminator" movie, as I recall.
Oh, that basin's been in plenty of other productions too, such as in
the 1978 production of 'Grease' (John Travolta & Olivia Newton-John):
car drag race scene.
I don't think I ever watched the entirety of Grease (I have testicles),
but it made for an amazing action scene in Terminator 2. That movie
stills holds up 35 years later.
On 2026-03-21 05:48, CrudeSausage wrote:
I remember the same kind of thing when visiting the La Brea Tar
Pits for the first time.
Btw, that tar pits are featured in a scene in Philip Jose Farmer's
"Behind the Walls of Terra".
The River Walk was pleasant.
I think they have the river tamed.
You want a tamed river? Go to L.A. The concrete river is featured
in the second "Terminator" movie, as I recall.
Oh, that basin's been in plenty of other productions too, such as in
the 1978 production of 'Grease' (John Travolta & Olivia Newton-John):
car drag race scene.
I don't think I ever watched the entirety of Grease (I have testicles),
but it made for an amazing action scene in Terminator 2. That movie
stills holds up 35 years later.
Wow.
Are you ever NOT an asshole?
| Sysop: | DaiTengu |
|---|---|
| Location: | Appleton, WI |
| Users: | 1,104 |
| Nodes: | 10 (0 / 10) |
| Uptime: | 492391:23:58 |
| Calls: | 14,151 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 186,281 |
| D/L today: |
4,662 files (1,669M bytes) |
| Messages: | 2,501,259 |
| Posted today: | 1 |