|
^^^^
They may as well be rolled in dollar bills. To date I've saved $4500 since I quit smoking. |
|
that's not how you are supossed to interperate it...
|
I think there are two ways of looking at it. One is that cigs are expensive, the other has to do with the Obama logo with "Taxes" written under it.
|
Originally Posted by Shearhead_3:16
(Post 861383)
I think there are two ways of looking at it. One is that cigs are expensive, the other has to do with the Obama logo with "Taxes" written under it.
i guess it depends how far you scroll down your window... |
...
|
BWAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAH
Bristol Palin is now the spokesperson for the "no sex before marriage" campaigners. BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAH |
John Stuart Mill proclaimed that bad examples are necessary for all of us to learn from.
|
Dude. Bristol ------- Palin. Doing a PSA against premarital sex.
And the ad, oh god.... |
I don't see the problem.
|
Originally Posted by Braineack
(Post 862021)
I don't see the problem.
|
no.
is it because it's bristol palin, or because it's a girl who "could" of had her life ruined by having a baby when she was 16 or whatever? |
Originally Posted by Braineack
(Post 862024)
no.
is it because it's bristol palin, or because it's a girl who "could" of had her life ruined by having a baby when she was 16 or whatever? |
Did you watch the video, Brainy? It's on the level of epic trolling that....
is on. |
Originally Posted by Shearhead_3:16
(Post 862025)
Exactly.
do you also post weight watcher commericals where fat celebrities advertise the product? or where paula deen, who has diabetes, is the spokesperson for a diebetes drug? |
Originally Posted by Braineack
(Post 862037)
do you also post weight watcher commericals where fat celebrities advertise the product?
or where paula deen, who has diabetes, is the spokesperson for a diebetes drug? |
Originally Posted by blaen99
(Post 862026)
is on. lol at the end, whoever wrote text in blue needs to think about one thing: 87,897,000 Americans are not in the labor force - 19.1% real unemployment. |
Originally Posted by Shearhead_3:16
(Post 862039)
I was agreeing w/ you.
:brain::brain::brain: |
Originally Posted by Braineack
(Post 862040)
ive seen it. dude is old and is a spy for the vietkong. hell, i can't even remember my own name at times.
lol at the end, whoever wrote text in blue needs to think about one thing: 87,897,000 Americans are not in the labor force - 19.1% real unemployment. You are trying to use one number for the rest, and another for Obama if you want to argue that. Seriously, to try to argue that we should use different unemployment numbers under Obama then we have for every president since Bush Sr/Clinton is disingenuous at best. P.S. The U6 number in 2001 was over 20%. U6 doesn't mean much in this context. |
it doesn't matter about them. all that matters is the current rate is bonkers and not good.
but your facts are wrong: 7.3 7.4 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.9 7.8 8.1 8.7 9.3 9.4 9.6 u6 rate jan - dec 2001. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Unemployment Rate - U6 - 1994 - 2012 http://chart.apis.google.com/chart?c...12|14|16|18|20 |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:14 AM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands