K D Posted October 17 Posted October 17 3 minutes ago, GMB 8888 said: such dreamy eyes, treat my bussy like a la-z-boy! Would you consider JD a handsome man? What do you think of his detractors making fun of his guy liner? Haters gonna hate!
GMB 8888 Posted October 17 Posted October 17 1 minute ago, K D said: Would you consider JD a handsome man? What do you think of his detractors making fun of his guy liner? Haters gonna hate! very handsome! Is that even a question? if he makes it more acceptable for men to not be toxic and embrace femininity I’m all for it. 1
BillsFanNC Posted October 18 Posted October 18 How dare anyone put illegal alien gang members at risk!
Roundybout Posted October 18 Posted October 18 5 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said: How dare anyone put illegal alien gang members at risk! They weren’t “illegal gangs” you absolute muppet. Stuff like this makes me absolutely thrilled to vote Harris. I can’t wait until she’s in office. 1 2
B-Man Posted October 24 Posted October 24 Of course we did. DHS approved Tren de Aragua gang members as refugees by Stephen Dinan Homeland Security greenlighted refugee applications for Venezuelan gang members after immigration officers failed to spot their gang tattoos, The Washington Times has learned. Kevin Grigsby, head of refugee operations at U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, said “several” members of the vicious Tren de Aragua gang were approved and made it to the U.S. border before a different agency spotted the tattoos and blocked them from entering. Experts said tattoos are a common indicator of gang membership and expressed shock that USCIS was missing those red flags https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2024/oct/23/dhs-approved-tren-de-aragua-gang-members-refugees/ 1
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted October 24 Posted October 24 On 10/18/2024 at 9:27 AM, Roundybout said: They weren’t “illegal gangs” you absolute muppet. Stuff like this makes me absolutely thrilled to vote Harris. I can’t wait until she’s in office. I think everyone agrees the only illegal gangs are The Warriors, The Baseball Furies, and The Dementors. All else are mainstream social clubs for the most part. Reason #127 why believing in government stacked storage living units may not be in your best interest. 1
ScotSHO Posted October 24 Posted October 24 12 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: I think everyone agrees the only illegal gangs are The Warriors, The Baseball Furies, and The Dementors. All else are mainstream social clubs for the most part. Reason #127 why believing in government stacked storage living units may not be in your best interest. What about The Sharks & The Jets? Those guys were tough but could dance and sing too. 1 1
BillsFanNC Posted October 24 Posted October 24 Illegal aliens who also happen to be in a gang = illegal alien gang members. Sorry Roundy, being a useful idiot doesn't exempt you from being a mouth breathing fuk.c stick. 1
Roundybout Posted October 24 Posted October 24 Just now, BillsFanNC said: Illegal aliens who also happen to be in a gang = illegal alien gang members. Sorry Roundy, being a useful idiot doesn't exempt you from being a mouth breathing fuk.c stick. I’d rather live next to 1000 Haitian immigrants than one MAGA. Hands down. 1 2
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted October 24 Posted October 24 1 minute ago, ScotSHO said: What about The Sharks & The Jets? Those guys were tough but could dance and sing too. I think Roundy has them filed under “Legal: Entertainment”. Though, that’s another reason to avoid communal jenga housing—all that singing and dancing at night has gotta be very disruptive to the sleep schedule.
Roundybout Posted October 24 Posted October 24 1 minute ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: I think Roundy has them filed under “Legal: Entertainment”. Though, that’s another reason to avoid communal jenga housing—all that singing and dancing at night has gotta be very disruptive to the sleep schedule. “Communal jenga housing” you mean like the kind of development the US had primarily through the 1940s?
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted October 24 Posted October 24 2 minutes ago, Roundybout said: “Communal jenga housing” you mean like the kind of development the US had primarily through the 1940s? Is that what you mean???? Yowza. That explains a lot.
Roundybout Posted October 24 Posted October 24 4 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: Is that what you mean???? Yowza. That explains a lot. Ahhh! New York Brownstones! So scary!
wnyguy Posted October 24 Posted October 24 39 minutes ago, Roundybout said: I’d rather live next to 1000 Haitian immigrants than one MAGA. Hands down. If you do please hide your cats.
Roundybout Posted October 24 Posted October 24 17 minutes ago, wnyguy said: If you do please hide your cats. It’s really telling how you still believe this
wnyguy Posted October 24 Posted October 24 2 minutes ago, Roundybout said: It’s really telling how you still believe this I'm just joking, ya big lug.
Beast Posted October 24 Author Posted October 24 1 hour ago, Roundybout said: I’d rather live next to 1000 Haitian immigrants than one MAGA. Hands down. I wish you did as well. 1 1
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted October 24 Posted October 24 2 hours ago, Roundybout said: Ahhh! New York Brownstones! So scary! Brownstones are very cool, though expensive to maintain, energy inefficient and the average life expectancy in the 1940s was about 62. I think they’re pretty pricey, too, in the $2m range for not much space. That said, the average size of a typical Brownstone is 19x40, and the average sf occupied by a resident in NYC is around 500. http://urbancalc.com/post/NYC-Residential-Density/#:~:text=New York City has about,the city as a whole. Let’s cut that in half and say the in the Roundy’s On Broadway Lego Huts, you market hard on the notion that a family of 4 is living in paradise on 250sf. Current population of NYC is 8.2m, +|- and of course people already live somewhere. Obviously, those places are likely energy inefficient too, not up to current building codes, and there has to be a plan to address. Then, of course to make this all work you’ll want to increase population exponentially. Are you imaging a row of Roundy Brownstones 1,789 stories high? Or maybe two stories spread out over several square miles? No doubt you’ll want to expand e/w/n/s and take some private property via eminent domain, but eventually you hit NJ and Ct. Oh—are you bringing asbestos back?
BillsFanNC Posted October 24 Posted October 24 Something I'm inclined to believe as likely true: Some Haitian illegals just might be eating cats, dogs and geese in the USA, just like some do in Haiti. Something I'm going to laugh, point and mock you for ever believing for even a nanosecond, let alone years: The Great Orange Menace was peed upon by Russian hookers in a Moscow hotel room.
Roundybout Posted October 25 Posted October 25 19 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: Brownstones are very cool, though expensive to maintain, energy inefficient and the average life expectancy in the 1940s was about 62. I think they’re pretty pricey, too, in the $2m range for not much space. That said, the average size of a typical Brownstone is 19x40, and the average sf occupied by a resident in NYC is around 500. http://urbancalc.com/post/NYC-Residential-Density/#:~:text=New York City has about,the city as a whole. Let’s cut that in half and say the in the Roundy’s On Broadway Lego Huts, you market hard on the notion that a family of 4 is living in paradise on 250sf. Current population of NYC is 8.2m, +|- and of course people already live somewhere. Obviously, those places are likely energy inefficient too, not up to current building codes, and there has to be a plan to address. Then, of course to make this all work you’ll want to increase population exponentially. Are you imaging a row of Roundy Brownstones 1,789 stories high? Or maybe two stories spread out over several square miles? No doubt you’ll want to expand e/w/n/s and take some private property via eminent domain, but eventually you hit NJ and Ct. Oh—are you bringing asbestos back? What on earth are you talking about? I don’t want the Kowloon Walled City, I just want our zoning policies to be relaxed to allow for the gentle density type development that was predominant in the USA prior to suburbanization.
Recommended Posts