An Interesting Theory

[Liability]

But cats can fly.

Perhaps. But can they fly when dead?

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BiFan_8m0dM"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BiFan_8m0dM[/ame]

Ask the right question of the right person and sometimes you get the right answer.

Personally, and people maintain I'm crazy for it, but I still say that someday mankind will send people to walk on the face of the moon!

That's right. I dare to dream the dream.

 

[RadiomanATL]

Perhaps. But can they fly when dead?

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BiFan_8m0dM"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BiFan_8m0dM[/ame]

Ask the right question of the right person and sometimes you get the right answer.

Personally, and people maintain I'm crazy for it, but I still say that someday mankind will send people to walk on the face of the moon!

That's right. I dare to dream the dream.

I have the answers to everything.

 

[California Girl]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BiFan_8m0dM

Ask the right question of the right person and sometimes you get the right answer.

Personally, and people maintain I'm crazy for it, but I still say that someday mankind will send people to walk on the face of the moon!

That's right. I dare to dream the dream.

I have the answers to everything.

You stole those. The authorities are on to you. They have changed all the questions.

 

[RadiomanATL]

Ask the right question of the right person and sometimes you get the right answer.

Personally, and people maintain I'm crazy for it, but I still say that someday mankind will send people to walk on the face of the moon!

That's right. I dare to dream the dream.

I have the answers to everything.

You stole those. The authorities are on to you. They have changed all the questions.

They can try and change them, but "everything" encompasses the new questions as well.

 

[saveliberty]

I have the answers to everything.

Not quite. Just where did you put all those answers? Forgot huh?

 

[California Girl]

The douchiness level of the thread title is directly and inversely proportional to the intellectual value of the post. Which is why it usually gets a quick response. It is low hanging fruit if you want to stomp on it.

An honest thread title with an honest opening post requires a great deal of thought, and if it is measured think piece, a good response may take a long time to think through.

It is supposed to be AN Interesting Theory. It failed gramatically and in practice.

You have to let anyone start a thread. If we confined it to only the intellectually gifted, no liberal thread would ever get started.

Not true. The liberals would start them. The drooling borg of the Obamanation (the lefties) would not.

 

[WillowTree]

It hardly matters.

I have asked a few times for some commentary in support of the Obama Presidency to date. The thread TITLES were inoffensive. But since I dared to pose the questions in a way that expressed my dismissive attitude toward President Obama, the liberals who replied to it at all were pretty much unwilling to address the actual question. They preferred, instead, to focus on the manner in which the question was posed.

I say that's a bullshit evasion technique. What actual difference does it make if you ask a question in a pristine and civil fashion or if you insert some editorial opinion into the way you ask the question? It becomes somehow impossible to ignore the eidtorialization of the questioner and answer the question?

Similarly, if the thread title contains a flaming disparagement of one's opposing political number, that will always be incidental to the question itself. If the question is legitimate (regardless of how it's couched) then the question can be answered.

What I don't get is when a member addresses a question to "Tea Baggers" for instance. Why would I want to tacitly agree with the premise of the idiot asking a stupid "question" like that? I reject that title, so I don't recognize the question as being put to me. That's different than merely inserting a political editorial spin on an otherwise general question.

people ignored you because they dont like you. Not because of the question you posed. They consider you a troll.

Another liberal liar on deck with dreck

 

[California Girl]

It hardly matters.

I have asked a few times for some commentary in support of the Obama Presidency to date. The thread TITLES were inoffensive. But since I dared to pose the questions in a way that expressed my dismissive attitude toward President Obama, the liberals who replied to it at all were pretty much unwilling to address the actual question. They preferred, instead, to focus on the manner in which the question was posed.

I say that's a bullshit evasion technique. What actual difference does it make if you ask a question in a pristine and civil fashion or if you insert some editorial opinion into the way you ask the question? It becomes somehow impossible to ignore the eidtorialization of the questioner and answer the question?

Similarly, if the thread title contains a flaming disparagement of one's opposing political number, that will always be incidental to the question itself. If the question is legitimate (regardless of how it's couched) then the question can be answered.

What I don't get is when a member addresses a question to "Tea Baggers" for instance. Why would I want to tacitly agree with the premise of the idiot asking a stupid "question" like that? I reject that title, so I don't recognize the question as being put to me. That's different than merely inserting a political editorial spin on an otherwise general question.

people ignored you because they dont like you. Not because of the question you posed. They consider you a troll.

When you can provide some evidence that you speak on behalf of the board, someone might take you seriously. Until then, little one, you are just another asshole on the board. You would be lucky to reach the level required for troll - you're not even on the radar of 'intelligent human being'.

 

[Liability]

It hardly matters.

I have asked a few times for some commentary in support of the Obama Presidency to date. The thread TITLES were inoffensive. But since I dared to pose the questions in a way that expressed my dismissive attitude toward President Obama, the liberals who replied to it at all were pretty much unwilling to address the actual question. They preferred, instead, to focus on the manner in which the question was posed.

I say that's a bullshit evasion technique. What actual difference does it make if you ask a question in a pristine and civil fashion or if you insert some editorial opinion into the way you ask the question? It becomes somehow impossible to ignore the eidtorialization of the questioner and answer the question?

Similarly, if the thread title contains a flaming disparagement of one's opposing political number, that will always be incidental to the question itself. If the question is legitimate (regardless of how it's couched) then the question can be answered.

What I don't get is when a member addresses a question to "Tea Baggers" for instance. Why would I want to tacitly agree with the premise of the idiot asking a stupid "question" like that? I reject that title, so I don't recognize the question as being put to me. That's different than merely inserting a political editorial spin on an otherwise general question.

people ignored you because they dont like you. Not because of the question you posed. They consider you a troll.

No. Only cowardly pussies like you who cannot handle an actual discussion.

****. Idiots like you can't even properly define the term "troll" which you carelessly and ignorantly and stupidly toss out there.

Plasmaballless has no ability to engage in anything but deflection and pathetically weak ad hominems.

"Waaah! I consider that mean ol' Liability to be a twoll! Waahhhh! Therefore I couldn't possibly answer a question! Waaaaahhhh!"

Schmucks like Plasmaballless don't even see how stupid and completely petty their posts establish them as being.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

We have some excellent bait fishermen here. Some should probably even start there own shrimp, swordfish, lobster companies.
The quickest way to achieve 10000 views and 0 responses is to use intelligent thought with multi syllable words.

This is true. And the converse is true as well...unintelligent posts with single syllable words achieve 10,000 views and 10,000 responses.

See a Gunny thread which usually says "WANNA DANCE? BRING IT, NOTHERFUCKKERS!"

I hear ya. Some of those threads rack up 15 pages in an hour.

 

[Ravi]

I didn't read the thread.

Has anyone pointed out to EZ that she started her thread with an attack?

Maybe she can answer her own question.

 

[Liability]

I didn't read the thread.

Has anyone pointed out to EZ that she started her thread with an attack?

Maybe she can answer her own question.

Translation service translates Ravi-speak into English:

Translation: "Waaaaahhhhhh!"

 

[amrchaos]

Because "Insulting and Loud" is the American way!!

 

[MarcATL]

Caligirl said;

Accusing a group with the actions of an individual is not the response of an intelligent person.

I said:

Yeah, you may want to get that memo out to about everyone that posts on here, and on every message board in the country.

Libtards, neocons, DemocRATS, nutters, rightwing loons, et al..just look at the titles of all the thread here.

So posters, why do you do it? Does it make you come across as smart? Do you think others will listen to your views when you START OUT a title or a thread already attacking?

Let us hear your reasoning behind it, from BOTH SIDES please.

Well when I used to do it, it was to give as good as we got.

The Right are chuck full of derogatory and demonizing names intended to dehumanize and belittle their perceived opponents. It was fun to respond in kind and watch them squeal in return.

However, there's a time to be childish and a time to be adults. Although there are some who've chosen the highroad of adulthood, there are many stuck in the arrested development of childhood.

I pray that they mature.

 

[California Girl]

people ignored you because they dont like you. Not because of the question you posed. They consider you a troll.

When you can provide some evidence that you speak on behalf of the board, someone might take you seriously. Until then, little one, you are just another asshole on the board. You would be lucky to reach the level required for troll - you're not even on the radar of 'intelligent human being'.

hahaha shut up **** face. i am not overly concerned about your opinion. Thanks for the neg rep btw...

I dont speak for the board, i speak for myself, and i've known Lia longer than you ( far as i know).
i really dont want to reach the level of troll, I heard they are like yeast infections. You know something you are.

1. Your first post (above) claimed you know what 'people' and 'they' think. That's your stupidity. Own it.

1. You don't know how long I've known Liability to I suggest you not make assumptions. That makes you looks stupid, too.

3. Learn to punctuate. Otherwise, your 'insults' don't read very well. That makes you look even more stupid.

4. Making personal remarks about people you have never met is just ******* whining.

Now. Please **** off. Thanks. Have a good day.

 

[California Girl]

Caligirl said;

Accusing a group with the actions of an individual is not the response of an intelligent person.

I said:

Yeah, you may want to get that memo out to about everyone that posts on here, and on every message board in the country.

Libtards, neocons, DemocRATS, nutters, rightwing loons, et al..just look at the titles of all the thread here.

So posters, why do you do it? Does it make you come across as smart? Do you think others will listen to your views when you START OUT a title or a thread already attacking?

Let us hear your reasoning behind it, from BOTH SIDES please.

Well when I used to do it, it was to give as good as we got.

The Right are chuck full of derogatory and demonizing names intended to dehumanize and belittle their perceived opponents. It was fun to respond in kind and watch them squeal in return.

However, there's a time to be childish and a time to be adults. Although there are some who've chosen the highroad of adulthood, there are many stuck in the arrested development of childhood.

I pray that they mature.

Oh, pur-leaze..... You pray that they mature? Aren't you the one who claimed to want an 'honest debate' about an assassination list that does not exist? Are you not the one who calls members of the TEA Party by derogatory names? Do you not call Republicans derogatory names? Have you not falsely accused people of being racists?

Marc, stop the hypocrisy. Thanks.

 

[MarcATL]

Oh, pur-leaze..... You pray that they mature? Aren't you the one who claimed to want an 'honest debate' about an assassination list that does not exist? Are you not the one who calls members of the TEA Party by derogatory names? Do you not call Republicans derogatory names? Have you not falsely accused people of being racists?

Marc, stop the hypocrisy. Thanks.

This is what pisses me off about you. You just never cease with this partisan BS.

Listen, I did that BEFORE I said let's follow Obama's lead and tamp down the violent and derogatory rhetoric.

When was the last time I posted any name-calling?

I DARE you to produce ONE post, since my olive branch, where I've been mean or derogatory.

You may like to play games CG, but don't assume that everyone else does.

If you're going to continue on this schtick as if you believe I don't mean what I say, then it makes no sense for us to continue to communicate, because you will only eventually drag me down into the gutter with you. And that's the LAST thing I want.

Good day.

 

[California Girl]

Oh, pur-leaze..... You pray that they mature? Aren't you the one who claimed to want an 'honest debate' about an assassination list that does not exist? Are you not the one who calls members of the TEA Party by derogatory names? Do you not call Republicans derogatory names? Have you not falsely accused people of being racists?

Marc, stop the hypocrisy. Thanks.

This is what pisses me off about you. You just never cease with this partisan BS.

Listen, I did that BEFORE I said let's follow Obama's lead and tamp down the violent and derogatory rhetoric.

When was the last time I posted any name-calling?

I DARE you to produce ONE post, since my olive branch, where I've been mean or derogatory.

You may like to play games CG, but don't assume that everyone else does.

If you're going to continue on this schtick as if you believe I don't mean what I say, then it makes no sense for us to continue to communicate, because you will only eventually drag me down into the gutter with you. And that's the LAST thing I want.

Good day.

There was nothing partisan about my post. You might want there to be, but there is not. You mentioned the right only.... that's partisan. I balanced your partisanship with examples from you - as an individual. That's fair.

And, no, you haven't posted anything mean or derogatory - but you do thank those that do. If you commend someone for partisan bullshit, you own it too. Basically, what you're trying to do is take the moral highground and 'thank' those who carry on your partisan bullshit.

I'm not in the gutter... if you go there, you go alone.

 

[Liability]

people ignored you because they dont like you. Not because of the question you posed. They consider you a troll.

When you can provide some evidence that you speak on behalf of the board, someone might take you seriously. Until then, little one, you are just another asshole on the board. You would be lucky to reach the level required for troll - you're not even on the radar of 'intelligent human being'.

hahaha shut up **** face. i am not overly concerned about your opinion. Thanks for the neg rep btw...

I dont speak for the board, i speak for myself, and i've known Lia longer than you ( far as i know).
i really dont want to reach the level of troll, I heard they are like yeast infections. You know something you are.

LOL!

*****, you'd have to climb the equivalent of a couple of mountains to get all the way up to mere troll.

You've been doing nothing but trolling all your life here at this board.

You remain a brainless, spineless loser.

True story.

 

[MarcATL]

There was nothing partisan about my post. You might want there to be, but there is not. You mentioned the right only.... that's partisan. I balanced your partisanship with examples from you - as an individual. That's fair.

And, no, you haven't posted anything mean or derogatory - but you do thank those that do. If you commend someone for partisan bullshit, you own it too. Basically, what you're trying to do is take the moral highground and 'thank' those who carry on your partisan bullshit.

I'm not in the gutter... if you go there, you go alone.

To pretend that you're not or you weren't demeaning what I said with your first words "Oh puhleeze!" would be a lie of the highest order.

I vowed to curb my language and improve my communication with those of different political viewpoints. Thus far, I have stuck to that vow. However, I have not observed you doing the same. You judge and attack me for thanking those that may or may not continue on with that rhetoric, although you yourself have continued with the demeaning rhetoric.

This is hypocritical at best.

I thank those with valid points, and I'd like you to point out when you think I'm thanking those who make violent or demeaning rhetoric whenever you observe it so we can deal with it on the spot, as in the end its all your opinion.

When I see you say "Oh puhleez!" to an individual on the Right then you will have room to say its not partisan, until then...save it for someone who'd buy that Nancy story.

Thanks.