Sorry, wrong again.
He's a well known, constant liar and convicted fraud. Reasonable people simply don't listen to known liars and frauds.
The >50% approval number was another Trump lie, and was actually his DISAPPROVAL number, his number only exceeds 50% if you only count those still willing to identify as Republicans, a fast shrinking group. Most polls show below 40% approval, he's never approached 50%, unlike most others. Among Democrats he rates around 10%.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/

That sentence is not English. Try again.

Um....I critically digest information from dozens of reputable sources and take time to verify what they claim and often post my sources, you get "info" from Trump (a well known liar), Rush (known liar, propagandist, and opioid addict/anti drug spokesman), Dore (a naive internet comedian), and Q (absolute insane retardedness only also insane ignorant idiots would consider believing), but you claim I'm being taken for a ride? LMFAHS!
I'll be worried when you don't think so, because what you believe is just bat shit insane and has zero basis in reality and is served up by known, admitted, practiced liars, a fact you just excuse or blindly ignore every time you're forced to face it.

Yeah, I found it on urban dictionary....as I said, it's not English.
So, not only are you incredibly poor at comprehension, you're a complete douchebag....but no, I'm not unjustified, nor does it matter that you posted my private reply to you, I stand behind every word. It only goes to show you are the kind of asshole that posts private comments publicly if you think it helps you be an asshole.
EDIT: What you also failed to comprehend was I posted privately to indicate that I wasn't trying to publicly shame or lambast you for misreading....clearly the sentiment was not mutual, although you failed miserably in the attempt to shame me.
thank you come again....actually don't, I'm done with you're 12 year old girl bullshit. Fuck off, douchebag.
Smell you later, forever.

Aww shucks, I'm honoured you deigned to comment to me directly rather than out here... /eyeroll

ps. "sook"

To sulk, crack a sad and act like a big fat baby when you don't get your own way.

An Australian slang term used to indicate another person is soft, easily upset, or just a plain pussy.

Somewhat appropriate methinks.

edit: Have included the "private" comment to my profile. Newt, if you think you're so justified surely you don't have to post backdoor snipes at people when they're standing right in front of you... =)

BWWWAAAAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA!!!!! Really?!? Too funny.


When you 3-4 repeatedly (intentionally, or from lack of comprehension ability) COMPLETELY misread what I wrote because of your being triggered, yes, it's you.

Tell me when 'Feminism' has worked AGAINST women or FOR men in it's 'sexual equality' mission. You can't. You just whine. 'No no no no no no no....you're wrong'.

Yes, it's you 3-4 who got upset and started misreading from the first post and being insulting because of your failure....it was not 'everyone else in the thread', it was the few who remained in the discussion because they were triggered and/or didn't comprehend.

Well, you completely misunderstood the "bold", and apparently still can't grasp the concept even after being corrected about the meaning, so, yeah, reading comprehension, not your strong point........I have been tested, and I read and comprehend better than 99% of Americans. Again, how did YOU score? EDIT:...or is it my fault for writing at above an 8th grade level?


This ridiculous BS with you triggered 'feminists' is SOOO not worth my completely worthless time. There's absolutely no point conversing with someone who simply can't comprehend something they think they disagree with, or who misreads over and over and fights phantom red herrings like Don Quixote with a windmill.

Thank you, come again.

PS OK, I'll go back and downvote, since you decided to call me a "little sook", whatever the hell that is (it's not English), I'm pretty certain it's MEANT to be an insult....so you're wish is my command, downvoteing the ad hom.

Oh yeah, I'm not a feminist. /grin

Anyone know the relevance of the Aussie flag and 'crikey'? American show, Scottish (not English) host so his accent can't even be mistaken for Australian?

yeah...I'm good at science and math, not English.

>> ^fjules:

Thanks, because it was hard to hear what they say.
>> ^Payback:

On the off chance you are deaf...
Teacher: "STOP TALKING!!" smashes violin, breaks bow
Teacher: stands for a moment, asks "Do you know what day it is?"
Broken Violin Kid: "April 1st?"
Class: Much laughter as they realize they've been had... unlike fjules. High fives and cake.
<div><div style="margin: 10px; overflow: auto; width: 80%; float: left; position: relative;" class="convoPiece"> fjules said:<img style="margin: 4px 10px 10px; float: left; width: 40px;" src="http://static1.videosift.com/avatars/default-s.png" onerror="ph(this)"><div style="position: absolute; margin-left: 52px; padding-top: 1px; font-size: 10px;" class="commentarrow">◄</div><div style="padding: 8px; margin-left: 60px; margin-top: 2px; min-height: 30px;" class="nestedComment box">"Your trolling needs work. Perhaps you should try misspelling words, or going on long rants with lots of unnecessary punctuation."
Oh, how witty! Maybe just answer my comment, geek. I'm not English btw.
</div></div></div>


Ditto especially when one is deaf like me!

I can report that the one in the photos went extremely well with beef sausages and wholegrain mustard.

Thanks for your answer, you've confirmed that we've been calling it exactly what a German would most likely call it too (except perhaps in German and not English).

I would put in a few juniper berries too if they were more obtainable here.
In reply to this comment by luxury_pie:
hi there,
never heard of a name for it, though I'm not a specialist on German cuisine I can imagine that for having around a million recipes for "sauerkraut and potatoes" there is no special name other than what it consists of. It's definitely a popular side dish around here. Fits amazingly well with any kind of meat, i.e. salted pork leg, roast, steak, etc.

In reply to this comment by oritteropo:
Greetings and salutations.

Something's been bugging me... I cook this dish which starts with onion and carraway seeds cooked in olive oil, then I add parboiled potato and coat with oil, then cover with sauerkraut and cook on the back burner on low heat until the rest of my meal is done. Actually that part doesn't bug me at all, it's extremely yummy : What does bug me though is not knowing whether this is a German dish, whether it's all or only part of Germany, and what it's called. Photos for reference:

http://s1100.photobucket.com/albums/g409/oritteropo/food%20glorious
%20food/

I think it's more about where the language is going rather than where it is now.


So you could ask for "orange juice" or "oren tzu" from the bar tender now...but what about the bar tender who's 5 now or yet even born? It would seem to be trending that he simply has stopped giving a shit at appeasing western pronunciation or is even aware of it. It is not "English" any more, they've stopped trying to speak it, they now speak "Panglish". Maybe they stop bothering to hire foreign teachers to aid in teaching English who will make these corrections and they say, "You know, our Panglish teachers are good enough...and cheaper and we don't have to give them accommodation and...".

>> ^draak13:

@artician That's quite interesting. I've known several people from singapore, malaysia, bangladesh, china, japan, vietnam, philipinnes, etc...I've never run into this phenomenon, though far be it from saying it doesn't exist. Though, so long as the standardized english language media is being broadcast, I'd be surprised if the vast majority of the people who spoke 'panglish' couldn't also understand western english.

>> ^criticalthud:

>> ^A10anis:
>> ^criticalthud:
@A10anis
uhh...this is kind of like a story that needs to be told again and again until it is within the very fabric of our society, as religion is. but it isn't right now. this is still almost a fringe viewpoint.
I would add though that in this battle between rationality and superstition lies common ground - the simple understanding that a most religious people, deep down, find religion partly because of some sense of purpose. and that should be honored. We self-called "rational" beings often come off as condescending...and in our young and petty consciousness, our own understanding of the universe and the cosmos is hardly advanced. we are hardly "higher intelligence". and if we want other people to get over themselves, we should probably do the same.

Meaning no disrespect, but could you possibly articulate your points in a way thet people who speak english would understand. If you are not english speaking, then forgive me, i'm sure you meant well.

happily!
yes, if i were a religious sort and I saw this video, I could come away with the feeling that I am being labeled as scared, primitive, or dumb. My reaction would probably be to stick to my guns with even more zest.
I think a better approach would be to focus on what we have in common - that is, a sense of purpose to do good in this world...and go from there.
While fear and the endless search for security are certainly psychological factors contributing to the appeal of organized religion, there are many positives to dwell on instead. You get more flies with honey.
and rather than debate whether there is a god or no god, or the stupidity therein, I think it is about time to start contemplating whether we can even conceive of what "god" is or could be. We seem to be stuck upon the idea that god is a "being", whereas the world and universe around us seems to suggest that we are surrounded by a complex collective planetary intelligence and interdependency that we are barely even skimming the surface of.


Shush. You are a pseudo intellectual.

>> ^A10anis:

>> ^criticalthud:
@A10anis
uhh...this is kind of like a story that needs to be told again and again until it is within the very fabric of our society, as religion is. but it isn't right now. this is still almost a fringe viewpoint.
I would add though that in this battle between rationality and superstition lies common ground - the simple understanding that a most religious people, deep down, find religion partly because of some sense of purpose. and that should be honored. We self-called "rational" beings often come off as condescending...and in our young and petty consciousness, our own understanding of the universe and the cosmos is hardly advanced. we are hardly "higher intelligence". and if we want other people to get over themselves, we should probably do the same.

Meaning no disrespect, but could you possibly articulate your points in a way thet people who speak english would understand. If you are not english speaking, then forgive me, i'm sure you meant well.


happily!
yes, if i were a religious sort and I saw this video, I could come away with the feeling that I am being labeled as scared, primitive, or dumb. My reaction would probably be to stick to my guns with even more zest.
I think a better approach would be to focus on what we have in common - that is, a sense of purpose to do good in this world...and go from there.
While fear and the endless search for security are certainly psychological factors contributing to the appeal of organized religion, there are many positives to dwell on instead. You get more flies with honey.

and rather than debate whether there is a god or no god, or the stupidity therein, I think it is about time to start contemplating whether we can even conceive of what "god" is or could be. We seem to be stuck upon the idea that god is a "being", whereas the world and universe around us seems to suggest that we are surrounded by a complex collective planetary intelligence and interdependency that we are barely even skimming the surface of.

>> ^criticalthud:

@A10anis
uhh...this is kind of like a story that needs to be told again and again until it is within the very fabric of our society, as religion is. but it isn't right now. this is still almost a fringe viewpoint.
I would add though that in this battle between rationality and superstition lies common ground - the simple understanding that a most religious people, deep down, find religion partly because of some sense of purpose. and that should be honored. We self-called "rational" beings often come off as condescending...and in our young and petty consciousness, our own understanding of the universe and the cosmos is hardly advanced. we are hardly "higher intelligence". and if we want other people to get over themselves, we should probably do the same.


Meaning no disrespect, but could you possibly articulate your points in a way thet people who speak english would understand. If you are not english speaking, then forgive me, i'm sure you meant well.

>> ^bmacs27:

Wait... but you never told us whether or not English people make fun of us for using them incorrectly.
That was the whole reason I watched.

I can't speak for the English... But I'm Welsh and it really gets my back up being called English...

>> ^FlowersInHisHair:

>> ^bmacs27:
Wait... but you never told us whether or not English people make fun of us for using them incorrectly.
That was the whole reason I watched.

Yes, we do.
Ah, well that settles it.


We begin bombing in five minutes.

>> ^dannym3141:

It's not completely accurate in places.
What places? You can't just say it's not accurate in places and then not say where. Show your workings.


>> ^bmacs27:

Wait... but you never told us whether or not English people make fun of us for using them incorrectly.
That was the whole reason I watched.

Yes, we do.

Wait... but you never told us whether or not English people make fun of us for using them incorrectly.

That was the whole reason I watched.