Posting Towards Gomorrah

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by bilmore
Didn't work for the global warming crowd, does your logic no favors here.

The GW people decided, as a policy matter, to change the focus of their speech to "now that GW has been completely accepted by every single smart unbribed Real Scientist In The World . . ."

It's laughable.

Now you say "the more obvious it becomes that Bush's policies are a complete failure . . ."

It's laughable. You can't simply announce your unfounded, unsupported conclusion, and then offer to discuss the consequences of the conclusion as if they're foregone.

(Well, I guess, obviously you CAN. I mean, no real person who has a rational mind uses it as his main tactic.)

Compare what Bush & Co. said the invasion of Iraq would accomplish, and the timeframe in which they proposed to achieve those accomplishments, with reality. (You remember reality, don't you?)

Judged by the standard Bush & Co. set, "complete failure" is probably generous on my part. (Note: Bush doesn't get credit for depriving Iraq of WMDs. That was Clinton.)

As for global warming -- good analogy. Some people think that global warming is the product of a vast, world-wide conspiracy of a few thousand climate scientists (along with a Republican governor here, the CEO of the largest investor-owned utility there, etc. etc etc). Other people seem to believe that the only reason anyone thinks Bush, Rumsfeld, etc. are anything short of perfect is a vast, world-wide, liberal media conspiracy tjat fails to report all the good news from Iraq.* These two groups have a lot in common, including your membership.


*oh, I forgot -- this makes them traitors.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by bilmore
In the classic economics sense. The marginal return for the extra $15 is almost umeasurably small. (Now, don't come back with the example of the $160 bottle that was on sale for $40, thus making the extra $15 very worthwhile. I'm speaking of usual price.)

I suspect that if this is your view, the marginal return for the extra $22 over a shot of cheap whiskey is also unmeasurably small.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by bilmore
Excuse?

"(g) Democrats responsible for some aspects of the situation in North Korea,"

followed by

"Bilmore, you can start with the one about North Korea, seeing as how the board is fairly familiar with that issue just now."

You guys still doing the "make up shit as a team, post to each other laughing about the other poor rubes in place of logic or argument" thing?

I love tradition.

Jesus, Bilmore -- you are pathetic. Or senile beyond even your years.

Go see post #3609. It's on page 241 of my screen (is that a constant for everyone? I don't know. I ain't no computer geek). What you said, today, is this:

Insinuate? Suggest? No. I'm stating, explicitly, that some Dems, for the sake of retaking national power, have performed traitorous acts and have supported and encouraged and rewarded terrorism, and, to some extent, are directly responsible for some aspects of the situation in Iraq, Iran, NorKor, Syria, Lebanon, Israel, . . .

So, again: you've smeared Dems as traitors. As supporting terrorism. As encouraging terrorism. As rewarding terrorisms. And as being directly responsible for "some aspects" of the disasters in Iraq, North Korea, etc.

And now you say I'm "making shit up"? Fuck, you are insane. Not just the asshole I remembered, and was reminded of when I saw the above-quoted post. But insane.

At least Bush waited a week or two before claiming that he never said "stay the course. Or meant that. Or meant to say that, or meant anyone to say that he'd said that, or said that he meant to say that he meant that when he said it. Or....

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
Compare what Bush & Co. said the invasion of Iraq would accomplish, and the timeframe in which they proposed to achieve those accomplishments, with reality. (You remember reality, don't you?)

Judged by the standard Bush & Co. set, "complete failure" is probably generous on my part. (Note: Bush doesn't get credit for depriving Iraq of WMDs. That was Clinton.)

As for global warming -- good analogy. Some people think that global warming is the product of a vast, world-wide conspiracy of a few thousand climate scientists (along with a Republican governor here, the CEO of the largest investor-owned utility there, etc. etc etc). Other people seem to believe that the only reason anyone thinks Bush, Rumsfeld, etc. are anything short of perfect is a vast, world-wide, liberal media conspiracy tjat fails to report all the good news from Iraq.* These two groups have a lot in common, including your membership.


*oh, I forgot -- this makes them traitors.

You're raving. It would take more room than there is on the internet to go back to the roots of all of the issues you've conflated and confused here and even start to address your errors. But, I'm sure that you'll now go to Ty and crow that I've conceded all of your arguments. He'll agree. You'll both feel affirmed and loved. So, because each little bit of love makes the world a better place, I think that's what you should do. Me, I'm going to go and buy a high-end scotch and test Burger's views.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
Jesus, Bilmore -- you are pathetic. Or senile beyond even your years.

Go see post #3609. It's on page 241 of my screen (is that a constant for everyone? I don't know. I ain't no computer geek). What you said, today, is this:

Did I say the things that you pasted into your post? Yes.

Was that what I was addressing when I answered ty's specific question? No.

Read Ty's question. It helps. It will sooth you.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
I suspect that if this is your view, the marginal return for the extra $22 over a shot of cheap whiskey is also unmeasurably small.

Nope. Different markets and supplies. Right now, because of the grape supply and the financial needs of the winemakers, I think the $25 bottle and the $40 bottle are damn similar. Doesn't hold true for real drink.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by bilmore
Did I say the things that you pasted into your post? Yes.

Was that what I was addressing when I answered ty's specific question? No.

Read Ty's question. It helps. It will sooth you.

In other words, various Democrats are responsible for the fact that North Korea built and tested nuclear weapons, but they are not traitors for having done so. Got it.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
In other words, various Democrats are responsible for the fact that North Korea built and tested nuclear weapons, but they are not traitors for having done so. Got it.

Pretty much, yes. Isn't that exactly what you asked me in question g?

[SlaveNoMore]

bilmore
It's only been recently that he's actually seemed to show that he sort of disapproves of the leaks. And, when I see an actual prosecution, I'll go back to thinking differently. But, to me, he's just been a gadwawful wuss about this.

...and he apparently lost that pen I sent him.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
...and he apparently lost that pen I sent him.

No shit. I'm cringing as I think of the Pelosi-Bush Immigration Act of 2007. ("Fences? We doan need no stinken fences . . . ")

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by bilmore
Pretty much, yes. Isn't that exactly what you asked me in question g?

I was trying to translate the lunacy into plain English.

The thought is that Democrats' criticism of Bush left Kim Jong Il terrified that he would need a nuclear deterrent in case John Kerry ever seized power here?

[SlaveNoMore]

Penske_Account
If only Hillary was as forthcoming......

She just retracted the Edmund Hillary connection. Give it a few years....

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by bilmore
You're raving. It would take more room than there is on the internet to go back to the roots of all of the issues you've conflated and confused here and even start to address your errors. But, I'm sure that you'll now go to Ty and crow that I've conceded all of your arguments. He'll agree. You'll both feel affirmed and loved. So, because each little bit of love makes the world a better place, I think that's what you should do. Me, I'm going to go and buy a high-end scotch and test Burger's views.

Bilmore, tactic 1: Smear all Dems as traitors and liars. When confronted, pretend I didn't say that until someone rubs my face in it. Not once, but three times - I'm old enough to claim natural forgetfulness. Then, say that I really did say that, but when I denied it I was talking about something else that I said in response to something someone else said, and besides Democrats are all traitors and liars anyway.

Bilmore, tactic 2: Say a lot of really stupid stuff. Ideally, bring up global warming, even though no one has mentioned it in days if not weeks. When someone responds, noting that Bilmore's "global warming is really just a product of another vast, world-wide conspiracy of people who hate industry, Republicans, and God (in that order)" is... well, pretty much vintage Bilmore ... complain that their response incorporates too many concepts for Bilmore to respond.

Next up: Bilmore, tactic 3: tell us that we really are all "murder marchers" and want Saddam back in power.



eta: Needed to fix a typo. As Bilmore knows, the idea of Saddam back in power just gets me all hot and sweaty. (Though, quite honestly, I'd trade that for what we've lost in taking him out, starting with nearly 3000 young American lives.)

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
...and he apparently lost that pen I sent him.

If Congress doesn't exercise oversight over the Executive Branch, it gets to spend as it sees fit. Isn't that the deal? Isn't that what you were hoping for from GOP control of both branches?

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by bilmore
There's really no utility in spending $40 instead of $25 on wine, unless you actually do eat the label and savor the letters thereon.

they spend $10. i was giving them $15 to upgrade to $25. Maybe you've misread Ty's posts and he's right too?