AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize - Page 4

post #121 of 355
10/11/09 at 11:15am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

The Republican's. They really are murdering and crippling their own citizens for profit. It's that simple.

Nothing is that simple. And that you feel anything could be really undermines my opinion of your positions that you take. Whether you care or not. I will not speak for anyone else on this topic.
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #122 of 355
10/11/09 at 11:26am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

The Republican's. They really are murdering and crippling their own citizens for profit. It's that simple.

Forget the boatbuilder's opinion, you're on the money, so to speak.
Reply
Reply
post #123 of 355
10/11/09 at 11:29am
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

The fringe horizon is like the event horizon.

Once inside, they can't ever see the light of day.

And the density of your arrogance and conceit is such that rationality cannot escape.
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #124 of 355
10/11/09 at 11:31am
Quote:
Originally Posted by sammi jo View Post

Since that quote was not from me, how and why did you ascribe it to me?

**

Having said that, it seems that in the United Pavlovian Coerced States of America, to level any form of criticism of Obama "justifies" an accusation of "racism". Similarly, to level any form of criticism towards the (former) Bush Administration rendered one a "terrorist sympathizer". But wait, there's more... to criticize any aspect of Israel.. and you're a "Holocaust denier", or guilty of "anti-semitism". Or if you point out the shortcomings of the US healthcare system and support something more civilized... you're now a "Marxist".. and if you point out the obvious and proven facts that (some) governments use terror attacks to frighten and subsequently enrage the citizens to further military and monetary gains, at best, you're up against a wall of silence, denial and mass "follow my leader" type intellectual cowardice.


Sorry Sammi, my inability to use the quote function properly lead to my post not accurately reflecting that I was quoting your quote from Paul Craig Roberts. I promise I'll try and learn the services of this site, so far I've just ended up messing up though!
The racial quote from your source, I see as racist or at least flippant about race and definitely insulting to any person of color and insulting to the Nobel Peace Prize committee, who he obviously detests.

I agree with you that Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran and Iraq leave plenty to question about Obama's role regarding peace and I am not at all supportive of his actions in those areas. The killing and suffering going on as he embarks on more conflict is shocking and personally rules him out for me as deserving of this award. However, he would claim that his actions are the opposite and to some extent I agree with him. Just walking away, as I see as imperative, he would view as sacrificing future stability and peace. His approach guarantees suffering and carnage now for what he hopes will eventually be peace. My approach guarantees that it won't be US forces dying and being seriously injured and causing further carnage now to millions of poor foreign citizens. Instead leaves it up to the nations involved to seek their own solutions and to reap their own financial rewards. I guess the Nobel Peace Prize committee see things his way.

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply
post #125 of 355
10/11/09 at 11:34am
Quote:
Originally Posted by screener View Post

Forget the boatbuilder's opinion, you're on the money, so to speak.

So only the Republicans do this? The Democrats have no hand in any of this? They are just innocent bystanders who, in spite of the majority they have held for however many years in the Congress were just poor suckers? They have to kowtow to the president because he is an all powerful dictator who can bully his way through anything in his way. However, all that bully power magically evaporated when Obama became president and now the Republican somehow still hold all the power and they have no Majority anywhere.

Forget reality, it is all the republicans fault. It's that simple. Just my opinion there... \
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #126 of 355
10/11/09 at 11:41am
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoahJ View Post

It's reality, it is all the republicans fault.\\

I hate doing this, but, fixed it for you.
Reply
Reply
post #127 of 355
10/11/09 at 11:46am
Quote:
Originally Posted by screener View Post

I hate doing this, but, fixed it for you.

So you buy that line of bull too? \ Ok.
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #128 of 355
10/11/09 at 11:48am
Quote:
Originally Posted by involuntary_serf View Post

I do live in the U.S.

Then he is your President or you should get the f out of this country because you obviously don't believe in any of our founding principles.
Reply
Reply
post #129 of 355
10/11/09 at 11:54am
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoahJ View Post

Nothing is that simple. And that you feel anything could be really undermines my opinion of your positions that you take. Whether you care or not. I will not speak for anyone else on this topic.

Care to explain how so many die from lack of insurance if it's not the repubs fault?

Obviously there are a few grey lines in this equation but not many. Face it and I'll have more respect for the positions you hold, ignore or deny it and I will consider you part of the problem. It's that simple.

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply
post #130 of 355
10/11/09 at 11:55am
Quote:
Originally Posted by involuntary_serf View Post

For me, the "isn't my president" sentiment is not limited to Barack Obama. He just happens to be the one holding the office at this moment in time.

How do you reconcile a, "He's not my president!" position with the constitution? I am not trying to cause a fight, but when a president is elected, he is elected as President of the United States. That being the case, he becomes everyone's president. That does not mean you have to agree with him, but he is your president. Why not?
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #131 of 355
10/11/09 at 11:59am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

Care to explain how so many die from lack of insurance if it's not the repubs fault?

Obviously there are a few grey lines in this equation but not many. Face it and I'll have more respect for the positions you hold, ignore or deny it and I will consider you part of the problem. It's that simple.

Read my next post, and answer that.
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #132 of 355
10/11/09 at 12:02pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoahJ View Post

Read my next post, and answer that.

Err, what next post, a future one?

EDIT, sorry Noah just saw your next post.

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply
post #133 of 355
10/11/09 at 12:06pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by screener View Post

Forget the boatbuilder's opinion, you're on the money, so to speak.

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply
post #134 of 355
10/11/09 at 12:06pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoahJ View Post

So you buy that line of bull too? \ Ok.

The rights actions to date don't prove otherwise.
Reply
Reply
post #135 of 355
10/11/09 at 12:17pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoahJ View Post

So only the Republicans do this? The Democrats have no hand in any of this? They are just innocent bystanders who, in spite of the majority they have held for however many years in the Congress were just poor suckers? They have to kowtow to the president because he is an all powerful dictator who can bully his way through anything in his way. However, all that bully power magically evaporated when Obama became president and now the Republican somehow still hold all the power and they have no Majority anywhere.

Forget reality, it is all the republicans fault. It's that simple. Just my opinion there... \

Is that the only answer to 45,000 dead American's a year you can come up with. Holy _ _ _ _!

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply
post #136 of 355
10/11/09 at 1:43pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by sammi jo View Post

Since that quote was not from me, how and why did you ascribe it to me?

**

Having said that, it seems that in the United Pavlovian Coerced States of America, to level any form of criticism of Obama "justifies" an accusation of "racism". Similarly, to level any form of criticism towards the (former) Bush Administration rendered one a "terrorist sympathizer". But wait, there's more... to criticize any aspect of Israel.. and you're a "Holocaust denier", or guilty of "anti-semitism". Or if you point out the shortcomings of the US healthcare system and support something more civilized... you're now a "Marxist".. and if you point out the obvious and proven facts that (some) governments use terror attacks to frighten and subsequently enrage the citizens to further military and monetary gains, at best, you're up against a wall of silence, denial and mass "follow my leader" type intellectual cowardice.


WTF?

Why does the article you linked to even bother to mention skin color?

Maybe every article ever written about Obama should mention his skin color, in passing, just to make sure.

You know, like people might forget, if his skin color isn't mentioned all the time 247.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #137 of 355
10/11/09 at 1:45pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by sammi jo View Post

And the density of your arrogance and conceit is such that rationality cannot escape.

Still stuck in your own Private Prison Planet, I see.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #138 of 355
10/11/09 at 2:12pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by screener View Post

The rights actions to date don't prove otherwise.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

Is that the only answer to 45,000 dead American's a year you can come up with. Holy _ _ _ _!

I rarely ever do this, but proper punctuation is taking a beating in this thread.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #139 of 355
10/11/09 at 2:15pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

I rarely ever do this, but proper punctuation is taking a beating in this thread.

Yeah, and pious religionites are dopes, so what.
Reply
Reply
post #140 of 355
10/11/09 at 2:22pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

Then he is your President or you should get the f out of this country because you obviously don't believe in any of our founding principles.



No, he isn't. I won't claim him. I don't support him. I don't take orders from him. I do not recognize his authority. Until he actually wants to honor and adhere to the founding principles and documents of this country, then he's not my president.

And yes I do believe the founding principles of the this country. On the contrary it is people who support many of the actions Obama proposes and many of the actions Bush did (and several presidents before both of them) who are in disagreement with both the founding principles and the governing document of this country.
Reply
Reply
post #141 of 355
10/11/09 at 2:30pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by involuntary_serf View Post

I don't support him. I don't take orders from him. I do not recognize his authority.

Wow.
A couple of steps ahead of the usual rightwing nutbars.

You walk around armed with cute signs around your neck or printed on your t-shirt as well?

A Mises serf.
Reply
Reply
post #142 of 355
10/11/09 at 2:37pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by screener View Post

Wow.
A couple of steps ahead of the usual rightwing nutbars.

You walk around armed with cute signs around your neck or printed on your t-shirt as well?

A Mises serf.

Think and say whatever you like. Mock as you wish. You're entitled to your opinion. I don't care that mine doesn't fit within your narrow scope of acceptability. I've thought this through, and as far as I'm concerned, elected officials (including the president) who choose to violate the basic founding principles and documents of the country are in defacto breach of contract and effectively invalidate their own legitimacy to hold the office. I realize this is a rather minority opinion especially given the downright worshipful attitude many have toward the president and the presidency. I'm comfortable with that since I don't require the comfort of the majority to validate my thinking or my opinions.

P.S. I am curious if you would have found this position as objectionable during the Bush administration.
Reply
Reply
post #143 of 355
10/11/09 at 2:44pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by screener View Post

Yeah, and pious religionites are dopes, so what.

That is so clever.

Your constant misuse of punctuation and vocabulary intimidates me.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #144 of 355
10/11/09 at 2:49pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by involuntary_serf View Post

Think and say whatever you like. Mock as you wish. You're entitled to your opinion. I don't care that mine doesn't fit within your narrow scope of acceptability. I've thought this through, and as far as I'm concerned, elected officials (including the president) who choose to violate the basic founding principles and documents of the country are in defacto breach of contract and effectively invalidate their own legitimacy to hold the office. I realize this is a rather minority opinion especially given the downright worshipful attitude many have toward the president and the presidency. I'm comfortable with that since I don't require the comfort of the majority to validate my thinking or my opinions.

I've said before that Clinton would have been my choice but that in no way lessens my respect for the office.

Your lack of respect shows why there is a divide in your country that will take a long time to heal.

Jimmac is right, the right is fucked for quite a long time unless attitudes change, and you are on the far right, like it or not.
Reply
Reply
post #145 of 355
10/11/09 at 2:51pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

That is so clever.

Your constant misuse of punctuation and vocabulary intimidates me.

Doesn't surprise me.
Reply
Reply
post #146 of 355
10/11/09 at 2:53pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by screener View Post

and you are on the far right, like it or not.

Actually, I would not consider myself on the "right" or "conservative" (though I hold what might be considered conservative positions on some issues, I also hold what might be considered "liberal" positions on other issues). But, whatever...labels, labels, labels. Have fun with that. Putting people into boxes and slapping labels on them obviates the need to think. It's at least efficient if not always correct.
Reply
Reply
post #147 of 355
10/11/09 at 2:53pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

I rarely ever do this, but proper punctuation is taking a beating in this thread.

And many others and yet you turn the other cheek. LOL.

Your not a repub, aka Republican are you? That would explain your maneuvering. It reminds me of a snake in the grass. I'd like to think you hear their dying screams and murmurs in your quiet moments, but I guess if they don't fit into your political view they're better not being around for you anyway.

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply
post #148 of 355
10/11/09 at 2:55pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by involuntary_serf View Post

Think and say whatever you like. Mock as you wish. You're entitled to your opinion. I don't care that mine doesn't fit within your narrow scope of acceptability. I've thought this through, and as far as I'm concerned, elected officials (including the president) who choose to violate the basic founding principles and documents of the country are in defacto breach of contract and effectively invalidate their own legitimacy to hold the office. I realize this is a rather minority opinion especially given the downright worshipful attitude many have toward the president and the presidency. I'm comfortable with that since I don't require the comfort of the majority to validate my thinking or my opinions.

P.S. I am curious if you would have found this position as objectionable during the Bush administration.

I have a narrow scope?
Who wants to go back to the 18th century way of thinking.

The constitution is a living document, do you understand what that means?
Reply
Reply
post #149 of 355
10/11/09 at 2:59pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by screener View Post

I have a narrow scope?

It appears so to me. Yes.


Quote:
Originally Posted by screener View Post

Who wants to go back to the 18th century way of thinking.

I don't know. Who?


Quote:
Originally Posted by screener View Post

The constitution is a living document, do you understand what that means?

I think I understand what you think it means. And I don't agree with it. It is living in the sense that it can be changed (for which there is a defined process), not in the sense that it can be twisted and interpreted to mean whatever you want it to mean as it suits your agenda.
Reply
Reply
post #150 of 355
10/11/09 at 2:59pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by involuntary_serf View Post

Actually, I would not consider myself on the "right" or "conservative" (though I hold what might be considered conservative positions on some issues, I also hold what might be considered "liberal" positions on other issues). But, whatever...labels, labels, labels. Have fun with that. Putting people into boxes and slapping labels on them obviates the need to think. It's at least efficient if not always correct.

Are you willing to share what sacrifices to your principles and beliefs you are willing to make, to live in the US?

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply
post #151 of 355
10/11/09 at 3:01pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by involuntary_serf View Post

Actually, I would not consider myself on the "right" or "conservative" (though I hold what might be considered conservative positions on some issues, I also hold what might be considered "liberal" positions on other issues). But, whatever...labels, labels, labels. Have fun with that. Putting people into boxes and slapping labels on them obviates the need to think. It's at least efficient if not always correct.

Who's thinking inside a box, you, Mises or you won't consider a position on a subject that doesn't fit in the box.

Liberals, seems to me, have a more open attitude to change without fear being the bogeyman regarding something new.
Reply
Reply
post #152 of 355
10/11/09 at 3:04pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by involuntary_serf View Post

I think I understand what you think it means. And I don't agree with it. It is living in the sense that it can be changed (for which there is a defined process), not in the sense that it can be twisted and interpreted to mean whatever you want it to mean as it suits your agenda.

And who is it that interprets it in a defined process, by your understanding and who is doing the twisting.
Reply
Reply
post #153 of 355
10/11/09 at 3:04pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by screener View Post

Who's thinking inside a box, you, Mises or you won't consider a position on a subject that doesn't fit in the box.

Liberals, seems to me, have a more open attitude to change without fear being the bogeyman regarding something new.

I have no problem with change. But in terms of changing the constitution? Well, there's a process for that. You don't get to just say it means whatever you think it means.

Furthermore, I think a fair and reasonable reading of it along with corollary documents written at that time would suggest that the massive federal government we have now and its wide and vast intrusiveness is decidedly not consistent with the founding principles or what the founder had in mind.

I would argue (as would many others) that much of what the federal government has done and is doing is in violation of the 10th amendment minimally. Probably the 9th too. But it has also clearly overstepped in bounds in other areas as well.
Reply
Reply
post #154 of 355
10/11/09 at 3:05pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

Are you willing to share what sacrifices to your principles and beliefs you are willing to make, to live in the US?

Do you have something specific in mind? I'm not sure I understand what you're asking. Can you rephrase this?
Reply
Reply
post #155 of 355
10/11/09 at 3:10pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by involuntary_serf View Post

I have no problem with change. But in terms of changing the constitution? Well, there's a process for that. You don't get to just say it means whatever you think it means.

Furthermore, I think a fair and reasonable reading of it along with corollary documents written at that time would suggest that the massive federal government we have now and its wide and vast intrusiveness is decidedly not consistent with the founding principles or what the founder had in mind.

I would argue (as would many others) that much of what the federal government has done and is doing is in violation of the 10th amendment minimally. Probably the 9th too. But it has also clearly overstepped in bounds in other areas as well.

Things are different now.

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply
post #156 of 355
10/11/09 at 3:10pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

Are you willing to share what sacrifices to your principles and beliefs you are willing to make, to live in the US?

I would guess paying taxes to a government, president, he doesn't believe has authority over him is a sacrifice.

What a bitch huh?
Reply
Reply
post #157 of 355
10/11/09 at 3:12pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

Things are different now.

I hear this all the time as if the constitution is some technology like 8-track tapes or something. It isn't. So, in what specific ways are things different that invalidate the core philosophy and principles?
Reply
Reply
post #158 of 355
10/11/09 at 3:15pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by involuntary_serf View Post

Do you have something specific in mind? I'm not sure I understand what you're asking. Can you rephrase this?

It's a pretty straight forward question. I obviously can't know the specifics and that's why I asked. I'll try rephrasing it though. Is there anything that you do, that you would not do, if you were following your beliefs and principles?

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply
post #159 of 355
10/11/09 at 3:29pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by involuntary_serf View Post

I hear this all the time as if the constitution is some technology like 8-track tapes or something. It isn't. So, in what specific ways are things different that invalidate the core philosophy and principles?

A lot. Lot's and lot's. Obviously as much as possible fits as neatly as can be made to fit into the constitution. But like you are aware, there's plenty bulging at the seams. I personally don't know the full extent to which we have veered from the constitution but am sure that a bunch of isolated and racist white men a few hundred years ago had but a few of the answers to today's problems on their minds at the time and would relish a serious make-over.

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply
post #160 of 355
10/11/09 at 3:56pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by involuntary_serf View Post

No, he isn't. I won't claim him. I don't support him. I don't take orders from him. I do not recognize his authority. Until he actually wants to honor and adhere to the founding principles and documents of this country, then he's not my president.

And yes I do believe the founding principles of the this country. On the contrary it is people who support many of the actions Obama proposes and many of the actions Bush did (and several presidents before both of them) who are in disagreement with both the founding principles and the governing document of this country.

1) Would Obama be your president if you owned him?

2) Do you believe that the Constitution should be the only law of the land? In other words, all other laws of the land are deemed unconstitutional since they are not already included per se in the Constitution.

3) Do you routinely break all laws that you deem are not part of the Constitution?

4) You might try to stop with all your Constitutional rhetorical gibberish, you know, you are acting like you're actually using the Constitution as a shield to hide behind. It's beneath contempt.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize