Black Students Seek Non-White Roomate

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by slickahhughs

I get a sunburn from a 100 watt light bulb reading a chapter in a book .

I request non white when i want to fuck and i want to actually like a women .

It really has nothing to do with race {yes it does iam attracted to asian women ]but more on western going to shit dem culture and fucking oprah type fucking hate men antics ...

I guess you don't get much "sun" then, right?

Would one of those energy saving LED bulbs work better for you?

If you get a reparations check you might one to splurge on one.

[normalguy21]

Iam Irish and Ruddy not Rudy complected and I vote Republican wtf is a recreation check .

From your B.S ?

Sign me up

[DSK]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

"the government" doesn't pay anything.

A HUGE problem with "government people" (people who work in our government (whether elected, appointed, or hired) is they view the money (or credit) existing "in the government" as being "government money" like it is THEIRS TO SPEND. It's not THEIRS TO SPEND.

At the same time I've heard "government people" say about spending the money "budgeted" to them: "It's not my money!" as a "justification" for useless squandering on frivolous matters and "things" ... aka toys.

If you give me $5 to go to the store to buy a loaf of bread, I will go to the store buy the loaf and bring you back the change. "Government people" don't do that. At a minimum they spend your change on some "Twinkies," if they buy the loaf of bread at all.

Reparations is not an alternative to "affirmative action" ... it is an alternative to extended payout welfare checks.

I will give you a realistic example: Katrina evacuee/refugee relocation/housing grants and loans to acquire housing for families who lost their homes in Louisiana from the hurricane.

The got "packages" to provide them an opportunity to have a nice home (most were HUD foreclosures) at low upfront payments with grant money to sustain them until they could obtain employment and settle into their new life (many in the Houston area). They didn't get jobs and lived off the grant money (buying new high dollar vehicles, etc.) and when the grace period on the low payments ended and the grant money was gone they didn't have the income or money to make even the reduced payments, so their new home was RE-foreclosed ... and they left most of those homes trashed worse than section 8 vacancies.

The "government help" they got was a waste in most instances. They pissed off the "free money"!

For what are you paying "reparations"? How big a check does she get?

I agree the reparations should be in lieu of welfare as well as affirmative action.

As for where the money comes from, create it out of thin air like we do now!

$100 grand per person should do it.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by DSK

$100 grand per person should do it.

I've got an idea ....

.. just return the social security contributions everyone has made plus interest computed over the lifetime of the deposits based on the average annual earnings (prime lending rate of interest and markets combined and averaged) for the year in which the deposits were made amortized with interest paid on accumulated interest....

... in a lump sum.

And notify me and everyone else we don't have to keep paying.

I'll waive my reparations check!

[DSK]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

I've got an idea ....

.. just return the social security contributions everyone has made plus interest computed over the lifetime of the deposits based on the average annual earnings (prime lending rate of interest and markets combined and averaged) for the year in which the deposits were made amortized with interest paid on accumulated interest....

... in a lump sum.

And notify me and everyone else we don't have to keep paying.

I'll waive my reparations check!

I'm fine with that but I'm trying to get the [prohibited plurarl word] to quit complaining and rioting all the time

[Rey Lengua]

Originally Posted by DSK

I'm fine with that but I'm trying to get the [prohibited plurarl word] to quit complaining and rioting all the time

Mebbe they just need some " therapy " from assup and EKIM ! ?

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by DSK

I'm fine with that but I'm trying to get the [prohibited plurarl word] to quit complaining and rioting all the time

So you want to bribe them?

That doesn't even work with little kids.

When the "first installment" is gone they want more!!!!!

People who have full time jobs at which they have to do a lot of work are too friggin' tired to loot and burn shit (unless it's a steak in the backyard and that sometimes)!

Kids that have too much leisure time find trouble to entertain them.

[Still want to know how big a check Rice gets?]

[DSK]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

So you want to bribe them?

That doesn't even work with little kids.

When the "first installment" is gone they want more!!!!!

People who have full time jobs at which they have to do a lot of work are too friggin' tired to loot and burn shit (unless it's a steak in the backyard and that sometimes)!

Kids that have too much leisure time find trouble to entertain them.

[Still want to know how big a check Rice gets?]

I know it won't turn them into model citizens, but we won't have to continue affirmative action and welfare. If they riot, shoot the motherfuckers.

[Old-T]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

So exactly whose money do you think "the Government" spends.
Now you are distorting your own words. Pretty awesome if you actually think about it.

Of course the government spends tax payers' money--that wasn't your point in case you are so absent minded that you forget. Your point was that all government organizations are total spendthrifts, incompetent to spend wisely, and acquire completely unneeded things. But then I think your memory isn't quite that bad--I think you know you tried to redefine your statement mid discussion. Tricky--and somewhat sleazy--of you.


And I guess the other question would be .... in all your vast worldly experience in all things government ... Not all, but given your obvious sensitivity to the issue, almost certainly more than you admit to. just how many annual budgets have you proposed, obtained, and controlled that were funded by the taxpayers in a division and/or department within a governmental body? Actually, all the ones I have been associated with have been funded by taxpayers. Did you really think the tooth fairy funded them? I have no idea the point of this rather simplistic question on your part.

You might ask the next camera crew you consult. (If they have anything to do with their budget!)

You just really have a hard-on for camera crews it seems; I don't know what your issue with them is. They tend to be your basic blue collar bunch. Anyway, why would I expect them to have great insights about budgets?

Oh, you are trying to be satirical! You don't like the fact that some of them didn't think very highly of one of your heroes. I get it now! How awesomely clever of you!

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by Old-T

You just really have a hard-on for camera crews it seems; I don't know what your issue with them is. They tend to be your basic blue collar bunch. Anyway, why would I expect them to have great insights about budgets?

Oh, you are trying to be satirical! You don't like the fact that some of them didn't think very highly of one of your heroes. I get it now! How awesomely clever of you!

Actually, camera crews don't turn me on. You are getting confused.

I don't have an "issue" with camera crews, it is my recollection that at one time you professed you got your inside information from camera crew members since they had the "inside scope" in D.C.!!!

My budget experience in my own business and examining other businesses was helpful, but the relevant experience of mine was handling budget proposals and presentations, overseeing and monitoring the expenditures during the budget year, and reconciling at the end of the year in anticipation of the upcoming cycle ... which included bidding on projects or submitting proposals to demonstrate the exception to the mandatory bidding process ... then oversight of the construction projects to assure they were on time and within budget. I was transferred budgets because I was able to procure at substantial savings and remain within budgets, which provided me an opportunity to expand requests for the upcoming year.

It was necessary for me to meet federal guidelines and to the extent the funds were locally consumed, the local guidelines, when there were project issues requiring local regulations. The period of time spanned roughly 35-40 years.

I consider the money to belong to the taxpayers, and not mine, although I was also a taxpayer. That was and is my point.

A legislative body authorizes categories of expenditures, but rarely gets into the weeds of the daily disbursements, paying more attention to broad leakage of funds and not trickles. My responsibility was assuring the expenditures were proper for the category and expectations within the authorizations.

A problem on here with people like you is you "presume" you know more about the topic than anyone else. You repeatedly show you don't!

[roaringfork]

Originally Posted by DSK

The essence of the problem is that POC wish to assert group rights when convenient, and individual rights when convenient.

"You owe me another twenty because you're my friend, and another--because you're my customer."

No wonder so many strippers are also POC.

[DSK]

Originally Posted by roaringfork

"You owe me another twenty because you're my friend, and another--because you're my customer."

No wonder so many strippers are also POC.

LOL - funny but true!

[Old-T]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Actually, camera crews don't turn me on. You are getting confused.

I don't have an "issue" with camera crews, it is my recollection that at one time you professed you got your inside information from camera crew members since they had the "inside scope" in D.C.!!!
As I am quite sure you recollect, the "inside information" you wish to ridicule was the camera crew expressing how they themselves were treated by a certain politician. That is all I claimed it was at the time. I am sorry if it portrayed one of your favorites in a poor light.

My budget experience in my own business and examining other businesses was helpful, but the relevant experience of mine was handling budget proposals and presentations, overseeing and monitoring the expenditures during the budget year, and reconciling at the end of the year in anticipation of the upcoming cycle ... which included bidding on projects or submitting proposals to demonstrate the exception to the mandatory bidding process ... then oversight of the construction projects to assure they were on time and within budget. I was transferred budgets because I was able to procure at substantial savings and remain within budgets, which provided me an opportunity to expand requests for the upcoming year.

It was necessary for me to meet federal guidelines and to the extent the funds were locally consumed, the local guidelines, when there were project issues requiring local regulations. The period of time spanned roughly 35-40 years.
An impressive set of experiences, and I have no reason to question it. I think you will be very hard pressed to find where I have either doubted your financial credentials or claimed mine were better. But that was not the point of your original attack, was it?

I consider the money to belong to the taxpayers, and not mine, although I was also a taxpayer. That was and is my point.
Good for you. Seriously. As I relayed, my experiences are that most government officials I have met do the same. You are the one who impugned a whole collection of gov't officials' honesty without data, not me.


A legislative body authorizes categories of expenditures, but rarely gets into the weeds of the daily disbursements, paying more attention to broad leakage of funds and not trickles. My responsibility was assuring the expenditures were proper for the category and expectations within the authorizations.
I have not disagreed with your point for the most part--but I am at a loss what it has to do with the topic.

Congress pork legislation usually says "Buy more C-130Js from my district", they don't get into the weeds because they don't need to. However I would point out that the FAR and OPM rules can get into some very minute detail/rules at times--many of which legally force fiscally dumb decisions by gov't entities--something your decades of experience does not refute.

A problem on here with people like you is you "presume" you know more about the topic than anyone else. You repeatedly show you don't!

Actually, no I don't. I "presume" very little. I relate personal observations/experiences. It seems you often do not like those observations so they must be untruths. And usually I only make those comments because some myopic poster has made a broad generality that doesn't fit what I have personally seem/heard.

Having said that, yes, some erroneous/incomplete posts in this forum tell me that I do know a lot more than some posters about some topics.

[flghtr65]

Originally Posted by DSK

I agree the reparations should be in lieu of welfare as well as affirmative action.

DSK, Bush43 got admitted into the Harvard MBA program with Affirmative action. No one else on earth can get admitted into Harvard MBA with 'C' average in history from Yale. DSK, if you had applied the same time Bush43 did, he would have taken your spot. I am making the assumption that you did better than a "C" average in a history from your college.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Bush

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by flghtr65

DSK, Bush43 got admitted into the Harvard MBA program with Affirmative action. No one else on earth can get admitted into Harvard MBA with 'C' average in history from Yale. DSK, if you had applied the same time Bush43 did, he would have taken your spot. I am making the assumption that you did better than a "C" average in a history from your college.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Bush

When Bush was seeking admittance into Harvard, Harvard did not have an "affirmative action" for White people. Harvard did have an "affirmative action" program for Black people, which is how Obaminable got admitted, since he doesn't have an LSAT score.

Ted Cruz was admitted into Harvard on his academic credentials and LSAT score. He's academics are available for review and at least one well known Harvard law professor described his academic excellence ....

I guess you are not a Cruz supporter!