joi, 23 martie 2017

previziuni pentru saptamana viitoare privind rezultatele de la simulare.

pentru cei care doresc sa stie niste previziuni, am sa va spun raspicat ca eu as dori niste pruni.

  • pentru cei care doresc previziuni pentru saptamana viitoare, aflati ca va iesi din nou sorin ovidiu vantu pe culoar, deoarece incepe pregatirea pentru bacul olimpicilor internationali. 
  • pentru cei care doresc previziuni pentru cursele prezidentiale, aflati ca da, la cursele prezidentiale conteaza incepand de anul acesta rezultatul de la simularea dintr-a doua. 
  • pentru cei care doresc pur si simplu sa manance unt cu paine aflati ca eu nu am decat paine. 
  • pentru ce care doresc sa stie daca saptamana viitoare va avea loc un eveniment excitant legat de rezultatele de la simulare, aflati ca mie nu imi place sa imi fac la coafor parul permanent, dar daca vreti, puteti sa incercati, pe mine nu ma intereseaza daca voi va antrenati asa pentru a avea rabdare. 
  • in incheiere, va transmit o felicitare pentru ca ati reusit cu un efort urias sa ma scuzati. 

luni, 20 martie 2017

felicitare aniversara

       Cu ocazia aniversarii zilei de naștere, le doresc lui Radu si lui Eduard un an fericit, cu sanatate, cu belsug, dragoste, impliniri si o populatie mai putin inculta,  mai putin paparuda, mai putin menumoruta si mai mult glada si in loc de o mesada le ofer o pufoaica si doua perechi de strumfi pentru vremi cu oboseala și cu chef de toropeală cum am eu cand merg la sala.

La mulți ani!
cu drag, Spera.

mai jos aveti doua felicitari virtuale
lui Radu i-o dau pe cea nuda si lui Eduard pe cea cruda.

duminică, 19 martie 2017

scoala lui Parmenide

The School of Parmenides 

”The philosophical scene is very different when we turn to Parmenides, who was born in the closing years of the sixth century. Though probably a pupil of Xenophanes, Parmenides spent most of his life not in Ionia but in Italy, in a town called Elea, seventy miles or so south of Naples. He is said to have drawn up an excellent set of laws for his city; but we know nothing of his politics or political philosophy. He is the first philosopher whose writing has come down to us in any quantity: he wrote a philosophical poem in clumsy verse, of which we possess about a hundred and twenty lines. In his writing he devoted himself not to cosmology, like the early Milesians, nor to theology, like Xenophanes, but to a new and universal study which embraced and transcended both: the discipline which later philosophers called ‘ontology’. Ontology gets its name from a Greek word which in the singular is ‘on’ and in the plural ‘onta’: it is this word – the present participle of the Greek verb ‘to be’ – which defines Parmenides’ subject matter. His remarkable poem can claim to be the founding charter of ontology. To explain what ontology is, and what Parmenides’ poem is about, it is necessary to go into detail about points of grammar and translation. The reader’s patience with this pedantry will be rewarded, for between Parmenides and the present-day, ontology was to have a vast and luxuriant growth, and only a sure grasp of what Parmenides meant, and what he failed to mean, enables one to see one’s way clear over the centuries through the ontological jungle. Parmenides’ subject is ‘to on’, which translated literally means ‘the being’. Before explaining the verb, we need to say something about the article. In English we sometimes use an adjective, preceded by the definite article, to refer to a class of people or things; as when we say ‘the rich’ to mean people who are rich, and ‘the poor’ to mean those who are poor. The corresponding idiom was muchmore frequent in Greek than in English: Greeks could use the expression ‘the hot’ to mean things that are hot, and ‘the cold’ to mean things that are cold. Thus, for instance, Anaximenes said that air was made visible by the hot and the cold and the moist and the moving. Instead of an adjective after ‘the’ we may use aparticiple: as when we speak, for instance, of a hospice for the dying, or a playgroup for the rising fours. Once again, the corresponding construction was possible, and frequent, in Greek; and it is this idiom which occurs in ‘the being’. ‘The being’ is that which is be-ing, in the same way as ‘the dying’ are those who are dying. A verbal form like ‘dying’ has, in English, two uses: it may be a participle, as in ‘the dying should not be neglected’, or it may be a verbal noun, as in ‘dying can be a long-drawn-out business’. ‘Seeing is believing’ is equivalent to ‘To see is to believe’. When philosophers write treatises about being, they are commonly using the word as a verbal noun: they are offering to explain what it is for something to be. That is not, or not mainly, what Parmenides is about: he is concerned with the being, that is to say, with whatever is, as it were, doing the be-ing. To distinguish
philosophy in its infancy
this sense of ‘being’ from its use as a verbal noun, and to avoid the strangeness of the literal ‘the being’ in English, it has been traditional to dignify Parmenides’ topic with a capital ‘B’. We will follow this convention, whereby ‘Being’ means whatever is engaged in being, and ‘being’ is the verbal noun equivalent to the infinitive ‘to be’. Very well; but if that is what Being is, in order to make out what Parmenides is talking about we must also know what being is, that is to say, what it is for something to be. We can understand what it is for something to be blue, or to be a puppy: but what is it for something to just be, period? One possibility which suggests itself is this: being is existing, or, in other words, to be is to exist. If so, then Being is all that exists. In English ‘to be’ can certainly mean ‘to exist’. When Hamlet asks the question ‘to be or not to be?’ he is debating whether or not to put an end to his existence. In the Bible we read that Rachel wept for her children ‘and would not be comforted because they are not’. This usage in English is poetic and archaic, and it is not natural to say such things as ‘The Tower of London is, and the Crystal Palace is not’, when we mean that the former building is still in existence while the latteris no longer there. But the corresponding statement would be quite natural inancient Greek; and this sense of ‘be’ is certainly involved in Parmenides’ talk of Being. If this were all that was involved, then we could say simply that Being is all that exists, or if you like, all that there is, or again, everything that is in being. That is a broad enough topic, in all conscience. One could not reproach Parmenides, as Hamlet reproached Horatio, by saying:
There are more things in heaven and earth Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
For whatever there is in heaven and earth will fall under the heading of Being. Unfortunately for us, however, matters are more complicated than this. Existence is not all that Parmenides has in mind when he talks of Being. He is interested in the verb ‘to be’ not only as it occurs in sentences such as ‘Troy is no more’ but as it occurs in any kind of sentence whatever – whether ‘Penelope is a woman’ or ‘Achilles is a hero’ or ‘Menelaus is gold-haired’ or ‘Telemachus is six-feet high’. So understood, Being is not just that which exists, but that of which any sentence containing ‘is’ is true. Equally, being is not just existing(being, period) but being anything whatever: being red or being blue, being hot or being cold, and so on ad nauseam. Taken in this sense, Being is a much more difficult realm to comprehend. After this long preamble, we are in a position to look at some of the lines of Parmenides’ mysterious poem.
What you can call and think must Being be For Being can, and nothing cannot, be.
philosophy in its infancy
The first line stresses the vast extension of Being: if you can call Argos a dog, or if you can think of the moon, then Argos and the moon must be, must count as part of Being. But why does the second line tell us that nothing cannot be? Well, anything that can be at all, must be something or other; it cannot be just nothing. Parmenides introduces, to correspond with Being, the notion of Unbeing.
Never shall this prevail, that Unbeing is; Rein in your mind from any thought like this.
If Being is that of which something or other, no matter what, is true, then Unbeing is that of which nothing at all is true. That, surely, is nonsense. Not only can it not exist, it cannot even be thought of.
Unbeing you won’t grasp – it can’t be done – Nor utter; being thought and being are one.
Given his definition of ‘being’ and ‘Unbeing’ Parmenides is surely right here. If I tell you that I am thinking of something, and you ask me what kind of thing I’m thinking of, you will be puzzled if I say that it isn’t any kind of thing. If you then ask me what it is like, and I say that it isn’t like anything at all, you will be quite baffled. ‘Can you then tell me anything at all about it?’ you may ask. If I say no, then you may justly conclude that I am not really thinking of anything or indeed thinking at all. In that sense, it is true that to be thought of and to be are one and the same. We can agree with Parmenides thus far; but we may note that there is an important difference between saying
Unbeing cannot be thought of
and saying
What does not exist cannot be thought of.
The first sentence is, in the sense explained, true; the second is false. If it were true, we could prove that things exist simply by thinking of them; but whereas lions and unicorns can both be thought of, lions exist and unicorns don’t. Given the convolutions of his language, it is hard to be sure whether Parmenidesthought that the two statements were equivalent. Some of his successors have accused him of that confusion; others have seemed to share it themselves. We have agreed with Parmenides in rejecting Unbeing. But it is harder to follow Parmenides in some of the conclusions he draws from the inconceivability of Unbeing and the universality of Being. This is how he proceeds.
philosophy in its infancy
One road there is, signposted in this wise: Being was never born and never dies; Foursquare, unmoved, no end it will allow It never was, nor will be; all is now, One and continuous. How could it be born Or whence could it be grown? Unbeing? No – That mayn’t be said or thought; we cannot go So far ev’n to deny it is. What need, Early or late, could Being from Unbeing seed? Thus it must altogether be or not. Nor to Unbeing will belief allot An offspring other than itself. . .
‘Nothing can come from nothing’ is a principle which has been accepted by many thinkers far less intrepid than Parmenides. But not many have drawn the conclusion that Being has no beginning and no end, and is not subject to temporal change. To see why Parmenides drew this conclusion, we have to assume that he thought that ‘being water’ or ‘being air’ was related to ‘being’ in the same way as ‘running fast’ and ‘running slowly’ is related to ‘running’. Someone who first runs fast and then runs slowly, all the time goes on running; similarly, for Parmenides, stuff which is first water and then is air goes on being. When a kettle of water boils away, this may be, in Heraclitus’ words, the death of water and the birth of air; but, for Parmenides, it is not the death or birth of Being. Whatever changes may take place, they are not changes from being to non-being; they are all changes within Being, not changes of Being. Being must be everlasting; because it could not have come from Unbeing, and it could never turn into Unbeing, because there is no such thing. If Being could – per impossibile – come from nothing, what could make it do so at one time rather than another? Indeed, what is it that differentiates past from present and future? If it is no kind of being, then time is unreal; if it is some kind of being, then it is all part of Being, and past, present and future are all one Being. By similar arguments Parmenides seeks to show that Being is undivided and unlimited. What would divide Being from Being? Unbeing? In that case the division is unreal. Being? In that case there is no division, but continuous Being. What could set limits to Being? Unbeing cannot do anything to anything; and if we imagine that Being is limited by Being, then Being has not yet reached its limits.
To think a thing’s to think it is, no less. Apart from Being, whate’er we may express, Thought does not reach. Naught is or will be Beyond Being’s bounds, since Destiny’s decree Fetters it whole and still. All things are names Which the credulity of mortals frames –
philosophy in its infancy
Birth and destruction, being all or none, Changes of place, and colours come and gone. Parmenides’ poem is in two parts: the Way of Truth and the Way of Seeming. The Way of Truth contains the doctrine of Being, which we have been examining; the Way of Seeming deals with the world of the senses, the world of change and colour, the world of empty names. We need not spend time on the Way of Seeming, since what Parmenides tells us about this is not very different from the cosmological speculations of the Ionian thinkers. It was his Way of Truth which set an agenda for many ages of subsequent philosophy. The problem facing future philosophers was this. Common sense suggests that the world contains things which endure, such as rocky mountains, and things which constantly change, such as rushing streams. On the one hand, Heraclitus had pronounced that at a fundamental level, even the most solid things were in perpetual flux; on the other hand, Parmenides had argued that even what is most apparently fleeting is, at a fundamental level, static and unchanging. Can the doctrines of either Heraclitus or Parmenides be refuted? Is there any way in which they can be reconciled? For Plato, and his successors, this was a major task for philosophy to address. Parmenides’ pupil Melissus (fl. 441) put into plain prose the ideas which Parmenides had expounded in opaque verse. From these ideas he drew out two
Figure 2 Parmenides and Heraclitus as portrayed by Raphael in the School of Athens (detail). (Vatican, Stanza della Segnatura; photo: Bridgeman Art Library)
philosophy in its infancy
particular shocking consequences. One was that pain was unreal, because itimplied a deficiency of being. The other was that there was no such thing as an empty space or vacuum: it would have to be a piece of Unbeing. Hence, motion was impossible, because the bodies which occupy space have no room to move into. Zeno, a friend of Parmenides some twenty-five years his junior, developed an ingenious series of paradoxes designed to show beyond doubt that movement was inconceivable. The best known of these purports to prove that a fast mover can never overtake a slow mover. Let us suppose that Achilles, a fast runner, runs a hundred-yard race with a tortoise which can only run a quarter as fast, giving the tortoise a forty-yard start. By the time Achilles has reached the forty-yard mark, the tortoise is still ahead, by ten yards. By the time Achilles has run those ten yards, the tortoise is ahead by two-and-a-half yards. Each time Achilles makes up the gap, the tortoise opens up a new, shorter, gap ahead of him; so it seems that he can never overtake him. Another, simpler, argument sought to prove that no one could ever run from one end of a stadium to another, because to reach the far end you must first reach the half-way point, to reach the half-way point you must first reach the point half way to that, and so ad infinitum. These and other arguments of Zeno assume that distances are infinitely divisible. This assumption was challenged by some later thinkers, and accepted by others. Aristotle, who preserved the puzzles for us, was able to disentangle some of the ambiguities. However, it was not for many centuries that the paradoxes were given solutions that satisfied both philosophers and mathematicians. Plato tells us that Parmenides, when he was a grey-haired sixty-five-year-old, travelled with Zeno from Elea to a festival in Athens, and there met the young Socrates. This would have been about 450 bc. Some scholars think the story a dramatic invention; but the meeting, if it took place, was a splendid inauguration of the golden age of Greek philosophy in Athens. We shall turn to Athenian philosophy shortly; but in the meantime there remain to be considered another Italian thinker, Empedocles of Acragas, and two more Ionian physicists, Leucippus and Democritus.” 

Școala lui  Parmenide

          Pe scena filosofică se joacă o piesă diferită atunci când personajul principal este Parmenide, născut în anii de sfârșit ai secolului al VI-lea. Fiind probabil un elev al lui Xenofan, Parmenide și - a petrecut cea mai mare a vieții nu în Ionia, ci în Italia,  într-un oraș numit Elea, aflat la 70 mile spre sud fața de Napoli.
Se spune despre el că a elaborat un excelent set de legi pentru orașul său; dar nu știm nimic despre politica sau despre filosofia sa politică. Este filosoful a cărui primă scriere a ajuns în zilele noastre aproape întreagă: un poem în versuri stîngace, din care o avem aproximativ o sută douăzeci de linii. În scris, s-a dedicat nu domeniului cosmologiei, cum au făcut primii milesieni, nici teologiei, precum Xenofan, ci unui domeniu nou, al cărui obiect era tot lumea, pe care a  încercat să o înțeleagă, însă depășind-o: un domeniu pe care mai târziu filosofii l- au numit "ontologie".
”Ontologie” provine de la un cuvânt grecesc, la singular este "on" , "onta" la plural; acest cuvânt  este participiul prezent al verbului grecesc "a fi" – care înseamna obiectul, existentul, existența. Prin acest poem, Parmenide poate fi considerat fondatorul ontologiei. Pentru a explica ce este ontologia și de ce poemul lui Parmenide este astfel, este necesar să intrăm în detalii cu privire la ce înseamnă gramatica și traducerea unui text. Cititorul care se va deprinde cu acesta pedanterie va fi răsplătit, pentru că între ontologia lui Parmenide și cea actuală se află o bogăție uriașă de idei, pe care nu le poți descâlci cu usurință. Gândirea lui Parmenide este prima rază aruncată asupra filosofiei de-a lungul secolelor, mai ales asupra celei moderne.
Subiectul filosofiei lui Parmenide este ‘to on’, ceea ce se traduce în engleză prin ”the being” , care înseamnă literal "ființa". Înainte de a explica verbul ”a fi” trebuie să spunem ceva despre articol. În limba engleză, uneori folosim un adjectiv, precedat de articolul definit, pentru a ne referi la o clasă de oameni sau lucruri, ca atunci când spunem "cei bogați", pentru a desemna oameni care sunt bogați, și "săraci" pentru a desemna pe cei care sunt săraci. Idiomul corespunzător a fost mult  mai frecvent folosit în greacă decât în ​​limba engleză: grecii ar putea folosi expresia "fierbinte" pentru a înțelege lucruri care sunt fierbinți, și ”rece” pentru a înțelege lucrurile care sunt reci. Astfel, de exemplu, Anaximene a spus ca aerul devine vizibil atunci când este fierbinte, sau rece și umed atunci când este mișcat. În loc să folosim un adjectiv după substantiv, putem să folosim un participiu: de exemplu, atunci când spunem: of a hospice for the dying, sau  a playgroup for the rising fours. Acest gen de constructie lingvistică era frecventă în greacă. Grecii puteau spune ființa și prin acesta să înțeleagă locurile care sunt locuite de ființă, care ființează, așa cum, de exemplu, un azil este locul în care stau bătrânii.
O formă verbală cum ar fi "moarte" are, în limba engleză, două utilizări: poate fi un participiu, ca în cazul "muribunzii nu trebuie neglijați", sau poate fi un substantiv verbal, la fel ca în "cu moartea nu trebuie să faci afaceri”. "A vedea, înseamnă a crede" este echivalentă cu "Pentru a vedea, trebuie să crezi".
Acest sentiment al lui "a fi"  a trecut în limbă de la verb la substantiv verbal, și pentru a evita stranietatea unei traduceri literale a cuvântului "ființă" în limba engleză, a fost folosita o forma tradiționala de genul Parmenide spune ceva despre subiectul...... Vom urmări această convenție, prin care "A fi" înseamnă orice fiintare care este antrenata in propria sa fiinta, iar ”fiind” deoarece este substantiv verbal, este echivalent in definitiv tot cu  "a fi". 

(interpretare:  ceva de genul: Parmenide este cel care a scris primul o filosofie in care a folosit cuvantul fiinta. si Parmenide este o fiintare, adica este si el ceva acolo, printre alte fiintari. Parmenide este, Parmenide este un este care scrie despre este.....nn  )

 ......continuarea dupa ce termin cu corectarea la LAC....

strategie manageriala cu wiki

am avut acum cateva minute o discutie cu o prietena personala. eu am incercat sa o deschid din prima, dar ea tot se inchidea, si abia dupa ce am deschis-o a cincea oara a pornit spre aceasta discutie personala.
i-am zis, ce esti draga asa greu de urnit?
ea mi-a zis, nu vezi ca sunt 35 % terminat. eu i/am zis, lasa nu fii stresat, urmeaza 69% terminat , apoi 96% terminat si dupa ce ajungi la 100% te trezesti ca iar vrei restart.
hai sa vorbim despre o chestie care ma preocupa neaparat.
as vrea sa verifici un text la care am lucrat.
eu am sa scriu intai textul sub forma de citat, iar apoi traducerea mea.
pana atunci iti spun ceva la care am meditat.
am meditat la de unde vine ideea de strategie manageriala si mi-am dat seama ca nu e de la noi din tara.
ia gandeste-te ca ai fi de la tara si ai vedea pentru prima data un bou incaltat, nu e asa ca l-ai confunda cu un magar adevarat si i-ai pune in spinare o povara?
ia gandeste-te ca ai fi de la oras si nu ai vazut niciodata un bou incaltat, nu e asa ca l-ai trimite sa umble pe afara poate afla cum se poate intra pe net prima oara?
acum ia gandeste-te ca ai fi prof de istorie si ai fi de la oras, dar ai vrea sa stai la tara, nu e asa ca ti-ai lua un abonament la tren ca sa nu mai dai pe bilete toti banii pentru curmală ?
acum ia gandeste-te ca ai fi de la tara si ai vrea sa fii la oras, nu e asa ca ti-ai lua un apartament langa un imaș, in nadejdea ca orașul se va extinde si apartamentul tau va ajunge in zona A, care este supraspeciala?
ei, si acum dupa aceasta scurta introducere, sa discutam despre o noua conceptie culturala.
stiti site-ul wikipedia, in limba romana se pronunta uichipedia, in limba franceza vikipedia.
acum, sa aplicam acesta informatie pentru a realiza o corectura: in engleza diagramele venn, care se pronunta ven s-ar scrie in franceza wenn, iar in engheza s-ar pronunta venî, dar s-ar scrie wen.
acum sa vorbim putin despre wikingi.  cuvantul wikingi rezuma ideea de strategie manageriala aplicata unui bou incaltat, care a plecat si el oleaca de la oras la tara și in loc sa plimbe pisicile pe imaș, plimba ursul in stil farcaș.
la tara, aceasta strategie manageriala inseamna o chestiune de traducere.
daca esti de la tara si vezi un bou viu, pui pe el niste chingi, daca e mort, nu il atingi.
morala sub forma de rationament deductiv: daca esti de la oras, decat sa verifici zilnic cum e vremea pe afara, fa- ti o strategie manageriala de benoclat la propriul barbat. daca n-ai barbat, ia-ti o pisica de la pet shop. daca esti alergic, ia-ti o libelula si dreseaza-o si vezi, poate pina la urma zboara si in zona fluviala. daca nu iti plac insectele, ia-ti niste postere. daca n-ai lipici, cere de la speranta ca ea are, numai sa ii zici. daca n-are asta e, trebuie sa pleci afara, dar mai intai verifica vremea, ca poate e cald si pana ajungi se prelinge, ca poate e frig si se crapa, ca poate ploua si e mai bine sa iti iei umbrela. asa te-am vazut eu acum o saptamana sambata seara, cu umbrella. am vrut sa te strig si sa alerg dupa tine, dar mi-am dat seama ca nu ma pot tine cu asa o strategie prea mult pe site.  gata, ma apuc de corectat.

vineri, 17 martie 2017

sfaturi pentru cei care doresc senzatii tari saptamana viitoare

dragi cadre didactice si dragi elevi,

acum, ca mi-am deschis calculatorul din dotare, am de gand sa scriu niste sfaturi pentru saptamana viitoare valabile pentru intregul sistem de invatamant care acum, dupa simulare are si el o pauza scurta si ar vrea sa stea oleaca intins pe burta si sa se simta scarpinat la picioare.
saptamana viitoare, am aflat de la stiri, va avea loc un eveniment. el va mobiliza toate cadrele didactice cu mic si mare. el le va mobiliza sa se aseze pe burta in cancelarie si sa se lase scarpinate la degetele de la picioare.
dragi români, nu va lasati indusi in eroare, este o stire falsa, saptamana viitoare niciun profesor nu va veni la scoala fara pantofi noi in picioare. asa incat va fi foarte greu sa ii convingeti sa si-i dea jos si sa se lase scarpinat la picioare.

eu zic sa il lasati asa, incaltat, chiar daca notele de la simulare vor fi unele mai mici, altele modice si altele marisoare, datorita efectului parapedapsihologic numit transfer prin simpatizare.

dragi elevi, voua va dau urmatorul sfat. saptamana viitoare este bine sa va lasati acasa telefonul din dotare, deoarece veti avea tendinta sa il predati la sala de materiale si dupa aia sa urlati ca nu stiu cine a pus mana pe el si uite doamna ce face Burlacu, mi-l strica!
deci, dragi elevi va dau un sfat, daca ati aflat un rezultat care v-a cutremurat, sfatul meu este sa nu va dati jos hainele imediat, nici sa va repeziti la aparatul de fotografiat pe care l-ati uitat dupa romanul ala care poarta un titlu pe care numai daca il rosteti il lasi pe elev surmenat, camile, camile, nu stiu unde capul ti-a stat...sfatul meu este sa va mentineti pozitia initiala care va scoate din toropeala si sa mancati si voi ceva colorat, dar nu in maro neaparat. apoi, plini de energie, mergeti in sufragerie, puneti mana pe telefon, stergeti oleaca obiectivul pe care l-ai uns cu ciocolata de la ultimul corn si faceti o poza  frumoasa despre cum infloreste de bucurie o papadie dupa ce se uita cu toate genele ei alungite si rimelate de sudoare la o vacuta a Domnului care se gâdâlă singura la picioare.
acestea au fost sfaturile mele pentru cadrele didactice si elevii participanti la simulare.
cat despre ceilalti, care au avut o boala, care au preferat sa stea la sala, spor de acum incolo la scoala, sa fie cuminti si politicosi cu profesorii lor atit actuali cat si viitori!

miercuri, 8 martie 2017

felicitare animată cu photo scape

Dragi cadre didactice, 

Cu ocazia zilei femeii va daruiesc un filmulet de desen animat realizat cu ajutorul camerei de la laptopul meu de acasa.
Este foarte frumos si m-am inspirat din paleta mea de culori si din esecurile persoanale legate de oferirea martiosarelor colegilor mei de catedra.
Va doresc tuturor o primavara exact asa cum e, mie mi se pare destul de normala!

cine va avea grija de mine daca scapa vantu din inchisoare?

dragii mei, este aproape 5 si eu abia acum m-am asezat. din acest motiv am chef sa dau un sfat.
sfat pentru cei care cred ca Sorin Ovidiu Vantu va iesi/intra in inchisoare

1. daca sunteti printre cei care cred ca Sorin Ovidiu Vantu va intra/iesi din inchisoare ganditi va ca se poate intampla oricand, chiar saptamana viitoare cand este simulare.
ganditi-va ca daca el va intra/iesi din inchisoare saptamana viitoare este oleaca mai mare decat saptamana aflata in derulare.
de aceea este bine sa ascultati un sfat de la un om civilizat.
daca aveti picioare si oleaca de stare este bine sa va folositi de stare. veniti imbracat, cu pix si cu sosete proaspat luate de la curatat. zambiti frumos si ati scapat.
daca nu aveti picioare si nici stare este bine sa va tineti cu putere de un om asezat.
daca nu aveti picioare, dar aveti nevoie de ele in acelasi timp cu niste servetele, este bine sa va tineti de franjurii de la covoare.
daca nu aveti nevoie de ele, este bine sa va tineti de o culoare.
de ce va spun asta, uitati de ce, daca sorin ovidiu vantu iese/intra in inchisoare saptamana viitoare va urma o expozitie si mai mare pe holul de langa baie. de aceea, va rog insistent, luati de acolo panoul de pluta si puneti-l langa un om eminent.


Related Posts with Thumbnails