According to a lot of my patriotic brothers in the U.S., Lance is being falsely accused by the evil French. Maybe this is true (the accusations, not the French being evil), but its all pointless until more information comes out. This brings me to my point.
What's worse?
French press dig up old drug tests that may or may not substatiate claims that Lance Armstrong enhanced his way to victory in the '99 Tour.
Lance's buddy George W. fabricates evidence of weapons of mass destruction to justify a war with Iraq.
Don't take this too seriously. I'm just having some fun.
According to a lot of my patriotic brothers in the U.S., Lance is being falsely accused by the evil French. Maybe this is true (the accusations, not the French being evil), but its all pointless until more information comes out. This brings me to my point.
What's worse?
French press dig up old drug tests that may or may not substatiate claims that Lance Armstrong enhanced his way to victory in the '99 Tour.
Lance's buddy George W. fabricates evidence of weapons of mass destruction to justify a war with Iraq.
Don't take this too seriously. I'm just having some fun.
I don't take you very seriously since your question poses a hypothetical between something that is factual and something that is not.
According to a lot of my patriotic brothers in the U.S., Lance is being falsely accused by the evil French. Maybe this is true (the accusations, not the French being evil), but its all pointless until more information comes out. This brings me to my point.
What's worse?
French press dig up old drug tests that may or may not substatiate claims that Lance Armstrong enhanced his way to victory in the '99 Tour.
Lance's buddy George W. fabricates evidence of weapons of mass destruction to justify a war with Iraq.
Don't take this too seriously. I'm just having some fun.
This from a person trying to be smug and pithy with the indirect swipe at the President on a cycling forum?
Do you share these posts with your friends?
BTW - it's "too" and I do.
As long as we're playing the part of High School English teacher, perhaps you should familiarize yourself with the correct usage of the word 'hypothetical.' I should also inform you that I was taking a DIRECT swipe at the President. You should be further informed that this is a forum intended for the discussion of differing topics initiated by persons who may or may not agree with your point of view.
This from a person trying to be smug and pithy with the indirect swipe at the President on a cycling forum?
Do you share these posts with your friends?
BTW - it's "too" and I do.
Please allow me to be pithy with a short poem I composed especially for this occasion:
It's truly a pity you can't use the word "pithy" without sounding completely absurd. In the future your diction might cause far less friction if you'd first look up that type of word.
*a short bow*
But then again, who would expect a decent vocabulary from someone who supports Bush without question?
As long as we're playing the part of High School English teacher, perhaps you should familiarize yourself with the correct usage of the word 'hypothetical.' I should also inform you that I was taking a DIRECT swipe at the President. You should be further informed that this is a forum intended for the discussion of differing topics initiated by persons who may or may not agree with your point of view.
Do you want to be my friend?
Actually, it's grammer school. No, i'm not interested in being your friend and yes it is a hypothetical to contrast a fact to a non-fact.
Furthermore, it's the "Road Racing" forum you have entered not the soap-box.
Actually, it's grammer school. No, i'm not interested in being your friend and yes it is a hypothetical to contrast a fact to a non-fact.
Furthermore, it's the "Road Racing" forum you have entered not the soap-box.
Mr. Homeycheese,
Oh my goodness! I just can't keep up with your level of hostility. I think I might start to cry. However, I'll just remind you of a couple of things. I noticed a few hundred references to Lance Armstrong on this "Road Racing" forum. There might be even more than that. I think the comments I made in my original posting compared two historical events in recent history. One involves Lance Armstrong and the other does not. Why don't you just admit that it's my liberal point of view that irritates you and not my typing skills.
Actually, it's grammer school. No, i'm not interested in being your friend and yes it is a hypothetical to contrast a fact to a non-fact.
Furthermore, it's the "Road Racing" forum you have entered not the soap-box.
Mister, I don't know what "Word-of-the-Day" desk calendar you've been using, but you ought to throw it out immediately. I have to ask you to cease and desist the use of words that you have not checked in a dictionary!
Now, here comes my favorite part: stating what you should already know, but have forgotten in your haste to feel like a big boy by using your feeble vocabulary to put another cyclist down. You brought grammar usage into this Lance Armstrong (a professional road cyclist, in case you needed further clarification) related thread. Furthermore, even if you hadn't, it happens to be a public forum with loosely organized topics. If you don't like the direction a thread is going, do the bright thing - stop reading it.
A) Hit a nerve, did I? B) I post about the actual subject, not rambling off into some political diatribe that has nothing to do with the topic.
Nice try.
If you hit someone's nerve, it wasn't mine. Also, as I initiated the topic of this thread, I don't understand how my postings could have nothing to do with it.
A) Hit a nerve, did I? B) I post about the actual subject, not rambling off into some political diatribe that has nothing to do with the topic.
Nice try.
This one is called, "Ode to Admiral House"
*ahem*
It seems that on this website large and impressive words abound. People want to impress when they write without realizing how foolish they sound. For a diatribe, it seemed quite low-key with no abuse or bitterness present, nor did he denounce so much as a pea, but you hear what you want, as you thrive on dissent. "Miss!" your opponent clearly informs you after you shoot for peg C-23. "You sunk my Battleship," your skewed ears tell you, and you dance on the table with glee.
*thunderous applause*
The underlying messages (in case you missed them): Get a dictionary. Get off your high horse. This is America, and people are supposed to be able to express their opinions freely, through the medium of their choosing.
It seems that on this website large and impressive words abound. People want to impress when they write without realizing how foolish they sound. For a diatribe, it seemed quite low-key with no abuse or bitterness present, nor did he denounce so much as a pea, but you hear what you want, as you thrive on dissent. "Miss!" your opponent clearly informs you after you shoot for peg C-23. "You sunk my Battleship," your skewed ears tell you, and you dance on the table with glee.
*thunderous applause*
The underlying messages (in case you missed them): Get a dictionary. Get off your high horse. This is America, and people are supposed to be able to express their opinions freely, through the medium of their choosing.
Hey, can you communicate without the use of your pitiful poems?
