Posted on 03/08/2005 11:21:51 AM PST by dead
Mea Culpa...
"beeber" is one of those typos that took on a life of its own. It was intended to be a reference to a "beeper-like device", the properties of which "stuned" (stunned) the poster.
Typos are great. Personally I laughed my head off about the "DC Snipper", but that one fell out of use soon after arrests were made.
Ok, I finally have to ask. The rest of them have been pretty obvious, but what was the original person TRYING to say when they said "beeber?"
Here is the original thread that will answer your questions:
As the first person to ever make fun of the stuned beeber, I can honestly say that it wasn’t already old hat when I did it.
It's pretty hard to take your criticism seriously if you can't get the author right.
L
You know, you have too much time or your hand, or else an expensive highend 35" LCD display to detect "hairy arm pitage"
Either way, I AM impressed :)
Nope. What is a beeber?
Well, they looked OK when I typed them...
Clever!
Poor Prince Charles. First Camilla, now this.
 |
Sweet Loretta Martin thought she was a woman But she was another man All the girls around her say she’s got it coming But she gets it while she can Get back, get back Get back to where you once belonged Get back, get back Get back to where you once belonged Get back loretta Your mother’s waiting for you In her high-heel shoes And her low-neck sweater Get on home loretta Get back, get back Get back to where you once belonged |
Classic post.
"Runaway from the 60s hippies movement."
>>Interesting. I thought Rand wrote "For We The Living".<<
Maybe she did. I was talking about "For US The Living."
And I have it right in front of me.
It did remind me of Rand, but even more comic-book like in it's depth of it's characters. As an author of preachy books, she is a piker compared to him.
I enjoyed Atlas Shrugged pretty much right up to the point where John Gault gives his speech after his rescue. Meanwhile, in Heinleins book, he devoted almost a quarter inch of the thickness of the book to "prove" his goofy economic model. Such tripe would never get the light of day today. Come to think of it, I am usually dissapointed in his work. The last one I read was "The Roads Must Roll." That was in 1975 and I thought I would never read another of his tomes. 'Course, I only read this one because I committed to for a friend.
Remember this article???
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1354693/posts
I think this woman (girl?) was topless to protest against the fact that ... " Topless Aboriginal dancers welcomed Britain's Prince Charles in Australia's outback on Wednesday...", while the laws against topless displays are enforced against white women.
Crap. That's actually a real picture.
Now, come on, that's pretty hard to do in the mirror. At least she's got pretty good penmanship for writing all that upside down...
It's not like the Prince has great taste. I mean, he apparently enjoys Camilla Parker Bowles's breasts, and those pictured on this thread have got to be better looking than hers.
Well, I can't say with 100% certainty that is arm pit hair. I'd give it about an 80% chance. Based on her obvious political leanings, however, I'd bump that up to 95%
....she's has a dirty navel!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.