Though maybe...if they're "handle" were clever enough, and their self-description sufficiently charming and witty, then perhaps I might deign to give them the time of day...
I'm a libertarian right now. Really, what choices are there for meaningful choice (that are actually sane)? Now it's about choosing between Tweedledum and Tweedledee. How is Obama any different from Bush (for instance)?
That's where I met my current love. It really has to do with how much you trust your own judgment. There's no necessary safety in meeting someone in a public place. If there that accomplished at deception - to the point where they've fooled you for weeks or months online - they'll past that public test and end up at your or their place in any case.
I'm just thinking that if one is trying to lure women that perhaps advertising one's assets as "li'l some" is probably not the most advisable strategy.
As a general rule of thumb, I think, the better-looking you are (or consider yourself to be), the easier it is - and the more likely it is - that you'll post accurate, current photos of yourself. And people who consider themselves attractive will generally post near the maximum number of allowable photos.
In a way, it's kind of sad, though. If only he'd simply been a gentlemen and sent you a nice flower and/or an email, you could be such a lovely couple right about now...
The main problem with this parody - I assume that's what it is - is that it badly misses the mark. That is, it's guaranteed to be misunderstood by pretty much everyone. Also, it commits the sin (for a parody) of not being particularly clever or sufficiently pointed in its humor.
"Spelled" is correct (as is "spelt," but the former is more often used in the U.S.). I didn't see any misspellings, but I did see loads of punctuation errors!
Well, A, I think the last paragraph is a likely guess here. I can't see even the USG turning away hospital planes without good reason. The public relations fallout would be critical for anyone caught doing that.
Ambrose2007 Forum Posts (8,881)
RE: No pics on profile?
I'm not sure about "we," but I certainly am.