Chad's love for Brooks!!!

500guy wrote:

it's about time for Chad to get over it . Larry was great until he hired James then suddenly Chad thinks he sucks. Chad should fire...

it's about time for Chad to get over it .

Larry was great until he hired James then suddenly Chad thinks he sucks.

Chad should fire his manager and be mad at him.

Billy Jack wrote:

At times, there is a perfunctory effort in the lives of men and women. You, I, Chad Reed, and no less, Larry Brooks are no exception...

At times, there is a perfunctory effort in the lives of men and women. You, I, Chad Reed, and no less, Larry Brooks are no exception to this minimization of the human struggle for acceptance in our lives. When our efforts come hitherto short, perhaps because our goals exceeded the channels by which we stride for end results, or, maybe we discovered in our selves the lack of a greater will to render our lives something which though attainable, isn't as men go, a failure.



The great discouragement comes to us not in the form of a tweet or a second place finish, rather it comes by way of words that store up in a man's heart, atramentous spots that blacken our souls. Spewing forth, "Chad needs to get over it." is in the most notable of schemes, no exception since it it a codec for your own intentions. There is in your words an opaqueness which disqualifies you from an honest answer and opens the door to hypocrisy. To that end, tempted as I am to say to you, 500guy, "Get over Chad Reed not getting over Larry Brooks." I will refrain from the hasty, impotent inoculations and instead simply and politely ask you to think before you type as we know that stored upon the neural masses in that grey matter that touch and at times attains greatness, like electro-connections sparking poetry, you can do better.

DavidR wrote:

Chad know's Larry better than 99.9% of anyone on this board so I think it's fair to say he's entitled to his opinion and it's based...

Chad know's Larry better than 99.9% of anyone on this board so I think it's fair to say he's entitled to his opinion and it's based off an actual experience of working for him.
Which CR do you like best: CR with L&M or CR post L&M?
Which JS do you like best: JS pre L&M or JS with L&M?

500guy wrote:

That's fucking ridiculous.

if anything James is probably wrecking Larry's attitude.

Zycki11 wrote:

Everyone knows you have a hard on for Larry, try not to let personal shit get in the way of posting.

BobbyM wrote:

500 guy is not brooks biggest fan but certainly respects his talent on and off the track

BobbyM wrote:

500 guy is not brooks biggest fan but certainly respects his talent on and off the track

GuyB wrote:

Whoa...Jay has a spokesman now?

yosmithy wrote:

I like Vaginas

peelout719 wrote:

See, there's three kinds of people: dicks, pussies, and assholes. Pussies think everyone can get along, and dicks just want to fuck all the time without...

See, there's three kinds of people: dicks, pussies, and assholes. Pussies think everyone can get along, and dicks just want to fuck all the time without thinking it through. But then you got your assholes, Chuck. And all the assholes want us to shit all over everything! So, pussies may get mad at dicks once in a while, because pussies get fucked by dicks. But dicks also fuck assholes, Chuck. And if they didn't fuck the assholes, you know what you'd get? You'd get your dick and your pussy all covered in shit!

DanDunes818 wrote:

Billy Jack. This is the kind of poetry that vital posters comprehend..

Outsider wrote:

So Chad's a big liar now? I don't think so. Seems to be one of the few to actually speak his mind.

disbanded wrote:

Words, words, words, words - and I couldn't get thru the first sentence.

I made it to 'perfunctory' and then I was out.

mjskier wrote:

Looks like an automatic text generator to me. Something along the lines of this, [url=http://ttp://www.logopoeia.com/transport/]ttp://www.logopoeia.com/transport/[/url] but a bit smarter. Whatever he is using must allow you...

Looks like an automatic text generator to me. Something along the lines of this, ttp://www.logopoeia.com/transport/ but a bit smarter.
Whatever he is using must allow you to type a few keywords that get incorporated into the text. Useful if you are trying to impress the girls I suppose. But obviously it won't get you any points on vital.

FreshTopEnd wrote:

Someone encouraged this guy by saying his stuff was poetry.

It's more like a submission to a bad-Bowyer-writing contest .

500guy wrote:

it's about time for Chad to get over it . Larry was great until he hired James then suddenly Chad thinks he sucks. Chad should fire...

it's about time for Chad to get over it .

Larry was great until he hired James then suddenly Chad thinks he sucks.

Chad should fire his manager and be mad at him.

Billy Jack wrote:

At times, there is a perfunctory effort in the lives of men and women. You, I, Chad Reed, and no less, Larry Brooks are no exception...

At times, there is a perfunctory effort in the lives of men and women. You, I, Chad Reed, and no less, Larry Brooks are no exception to this minimization of the human struggle for acceptance in our lives. When our efforts come hitherto short, perhaps because our goals exceeded the channels by which we stride for end results, or, maybe we discovered in our selves the lack of a greater will to render our lives something which though attainable, isn't as men go, a failure.



The great discouragement comes to us not in the form of a tweet or a second place finish, rather it comes by way of words that store up in a man's heart, atramentous spots that blacken our souls. Spewing forth, "Chad needs to get over it." is in the most notable of schemes, no exception since it it a codec for your own intentions. There is in your words an opaqueness which disqualifies you from an honest answer and opens the door to hypocrisy. To that end, tempted as I am to say to you, 500guy, "Get over Chad Reed not getting over Larry Brooks." I will refrain from the hasty, impotent inoculations and instead simply and politely ask you to think before you type as we know that stored upon the neural masses in that grey matter that touch and at times attains greatness, like electro-connections sparking poetry, you can do better.

Mr. G wrote:

Just out of curiosity what does atramentous mean? I could not find it in the dictionary.

Grendel wrote:

Oh my. I'm going to have fun with you.

Billy Jack wrote:

My apologies since my roses are not red and my violets are not blue; I don't write poetry, and I don't pretend to write poetry. I...

My apologies since my roses are not red and my violets are not blue; I don't write poetry, and I don't pretend to write poetry. I write words that precede forth from my deepest intentions, and having grown fond of the value of human expressions, and the value of our words and that which they bring forth in the human spirit, I open myself to criticisms of no less valuable intellect, but rather a valuable intellect of a different kind such as yours. It is therefore here that I precede with my reply.



To attack me with "Bowyer" type criticisms does not offer to me the kind of dissemble that concerns me since I neither know what a "bad-Bowyer-writing" contest is, or care. In the most politest of terms, I could say that you are not even wrong, since being wrong implies some proximity to being right. If the readers of this fine message board wish me to be direct, then I would simply say that you "are not even in the ballpark" -- I do not post here for a word contest, or to write poetry. I don't use a "automatic text generator" since the sequences of my sentences are far too complex for the renderings of Turing type computer tests for human personality and mind.



I have come here to talk about motocross, not be offended by the vacuous words of you or anyone else. I like four strokes better than two, I like Ryan Dungey better than Pourcel, I like Stefan Everts better than James Stewart. I love riding in sand and am pretty good at it since I grew up riding in sand. Above all, I like them all: Pourcel and Stewart, two strokes and four, just a preference for one or the other since "liking better than" implies only that, and not a dislike for the other.



But the mere appearance of likes or dislikes encourages in each of us the blind wrath of man's inner hatred for disagreement. We trod around life on appearances and never engage honest respect for one another. In such cases, man tends to think he is superior over another -- even as absurd as it comes to message boards. Good day, sir.

yosmithy wrote:

remember, you only win if Billy Jack actually dies

Outsider wrote:

So Chad's a big liar now? I don't think so. Seems to be one of the few to actually speak his mind.

500guy wrote:

Nobody said Chad was a Liar.

I just said it's time for Chad to get over it.

mjskier wrote:

Looks like an automatic text generator to me. Something along the lines of this, [url=http://ttp://www.logopoeia.com/transport/]ttp://www.logopoeia.com/transport/[/url] but a bit smarter. Whatever he is using must allow you...

Looks like an automatic text generator to me. Something along the lines of this, ttp://www.logopoeia.com/transport/ but a bit smarter.
Whatever he is using must allow you to type a few keywords that get incorporated into the text. Useful if you are trying to impress the girls I suppose. But obviously it won't get you any points on vital.

FreshTopEnd wrote:

Someone encouraged this guy by saying his stuff was poetry.

It's more like a submission to a bad-Bowyer-writing contest .

Billy Jack wrote:

My apologies since my roses are not red and my violets are not blue; I don't write poetry, and I don't pretend to write poetry. I...

My apologies since my roses are not red and my violets are not blue; I don't write poetry, and I don't pretend to write poetry. I write words that precede forth from my deepest intentions, and having grown fond of the value of human expressions, and the value of our words and that which they bring forth in the human spirit, I open myself to criticisms of no less valuable intellect, but rather a valuable intellect of a different kind such as yours. It is therefore here that I precede with my reply.



To attack me with "Bowyer" type criticisms does not offer to me the kind of dissemble that concerns me since I neither know what a "bad-Bowyer-writing" contest is, or care. In the most politest of terms, I could say that you are not even wrong, since being wrong implies some proximity to being right. If the readers of this fine message board wish me to be direct, then I would simply say that you "are not even in the ballpark" -- I do not post here for a word contest, or to write poetry. I don't use a "automatic text generator" since the sequences of my sentences are far too complex for the renderings of Turing type computer tests for human personality and mind.



I have come here to talk about motocross, not be offended by the vacuous words of you or anyone else. I like four strokes better than two, I like Ryan Dungey better than Pourcel, I like Stefan Everts better than James Stewart. I love riding in sand and am pretty good at it since I grew up riding in sand. Above all, I like them all: Pourcel and Stewart, two strokes and four, just a preference for one or the other since "liking better than" implies only that, and not a dislike for the other.



But the mere appearance of likes or dislikes encourages in each of us the blind wrath of man's inner hatred for disagreement. We trod around life on appearances and never engage honest respect for one another. In such cases, man tends to think he is superior over another -- even as absurd as it comes to message boards. Good day, sir.

Outsider wrote:

So Chad's a big liar now? I don't think so. Seems to be one of the few to actually speak his mind.

500guy wrote:

Nobody said Chad was a Liar.

I just said it's time for Chad to get over it.

knowitalloveragainnovice wrote:

Chad don't lie.

He just made a few too many excuses after getting 2nd.

Grendel wrote:

Oh my. I'm going to have fun with you.

mjskier wrote:

Looks like an automatic text generator to me. Something along the lines of this, [url=http://ttp://www.logopoeia.com/transport/]ttp://www.logopoeia.com/transport/[/url] but a bit smarter. Whatever he is using must allow you...

Looks like an automatic text generator to me. Something along the lines of this, ttp://www.logopoeia.com/transport/ but a bit smarter.
Whatever he is using must allow you to type a few keywords that get incorporated into the text. Useful if you are trying to impress the girls I suppose. But obviously it won't get you any points on vital.

FreshTopEnd wrote:

Someone encouraged this guy by saying his stuff was poetry.

It's more like a submission to a bad-Bowyer-writing contest .

Billy Jack wrote:

My apologies since my roses are not red and my violets are not blue; I don't write poetry, and I don't pretend to write poetry. I...

My apologies since my roses are not red and my violets are not blue; I don't write poetry, and I don't pretend to write poetry. I write words that precede forth from my deepest intentions, and having grown fond of the value of human expressions, and the value of our words and that which they bring forth in the human spirit, I open myself to criticisms of no less valuable intellect, but rather a valuable intellect of a different kind such as yours. It is therefore here that I precede with my reply.



To attack me with "Bowyer" type criticisms does not offer to me the kind of dissemble that concerns me since I neither know what a "bad-Bowyer-writing" contest is, or care. In the most politest of terms, I could say that you are not even wrong, since being wrong implies some proximity to being right. If the readers of this fine message board wish me to be direct, then I would simply say that you "are not even in the ballpark" -- I do not post here for a word contest, or to write poetry. I don't use a "automatic text generator" since the sequences of my sentences are far too complex for the renderings of Turing type computer tests for human personality and mind.



I have come here to talk about motocross, not be offended by the vacuous words of you or anyone else. I like four strokes better than two, I like Ryan Dungey better than Pourcel, I like Stefan Everts better than James Stewart. I love riding in sand and am pretty good at it since I grew up riding in sand. Above all, I like them all: Pourcel and Stewart, two strokes and four, just a preference for one or the other since "liking better than" implies only that, and not a dislike for the other.



But the mere appearance of likes or dislikes encourages in each of us the blind wrath of man's inner hatred for disagreement. We trod around life on appearances and never engage honest respect for one another. In such cases, man tends to think he is superior over another -- even as absurd as it comes to message boards. Good day, sir.