| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
My first...
....political disappointment of 2015:
On Sunday, Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) released a statement announcing his intention to challenge Rep. John Boehner (R-Ohio) for the speaker's gavel. The five-term congressman from northeastern Texas says he was "urged" by colleagues and friends, who were fed up with the insufficiently conservative leadership of Boehner, to seek the position. Sadly for those of us who like Gohmert’s combination of stupidity, ignorance, and insanity, he lost his bid for Speaker of the House, earning just three votes. |
My first...
On Tue, 06 Jan 2015 19:11:47 -0500, Geezer Snoöze
wrote: Yet another political troll. |
My first...
On 1/6/15 7:45 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Tue, 06 Jan 2015 19:11:47 -0500, Geezer Snoöze wrote: Yet another political troll. Why is it a troll? I doubt anyone here is a fan of Gohmert. He's just a laughable pol, like Michele Bachmann. Oh, and unlike you, my posts don't insult or make insinuating remarks about other posters *here*. What you and several others here are doing with those sorts of posts is *real* trolling. Here's a suggestion. If you don't like a post, just ignore it. That's what I do with posts from the insulters. Have nice night. |
My first...
On Tue, 06 Jan 2015 19:11:47 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote: ...political disappointment of 2015: On Sunday, Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) released a statement announcing his intention to challenge Rep. John Boehner (R-Ohio) for the speaker's gavel. The five-term congressman from northeastern Texas says he was "urged" by colleagues and friends, who were fed up with the insufficiently conservative leadership of Boehner, to seek the position. Sadly for those of us who like Gohmert’s combination of stupidity, ignorance, and insanity, he lost his bid for Speaker of the House, earning just three votes. Behavior? |
My first...
On 1/6/15 9:05 PM, Poquito Loco wrote:
On Tue, 06 Jan 2015 19:11:47 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: ...political disappointment of 2015: On Sunday, Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) released a statement announcing his intention to challenge Rep. John Boehner (R-Ohio) for the speaker's gavel. The five-term congressman from northeastern Texas says he was "urged" by colleagues and friends, who were fed up with the insufficiently conservative leadership of Boehner, to seek the position. Sadly for those of us who like Gohmert’s combination of stupidity, ignorance, and insanity, he lost his bid for Speaker of the House, earning just three votes. Behavior? Indeed...Gohmert's behavior is something else. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=10kO...spfrel oad=10 |
My first...
On 1/6/2015 9:05 PM, Poquito Loco wrote:
On Tue, 06 Jan 2015 19:11:47 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: ...political disappointment of 2015: On Sunday, Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) released a statement announcing his intention to challenge Rep. John Boehner (R-Ohio) for the speaker's gavel. The five-term congressman from northeastern Texas says he was "urged" by colleagues and friends, who were fed up with the insufficiently conservative leadership of Boehner, to seek the position. Sadly for those of us who like Gohmert’s combination of stupidity, ignorance, and insanity, he lost his bid for Speaker of the House, earning just three votes. Behavior? Whose behavior? Krause's? -- I don't need anger management. I just need people to stop ****ing me off! Respectfully submitted by Justan |
My first...
On 1/6/2015 9:34 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 1/6/15 9:05 PM, Poquito Loco wrote: On Tue, 06 Jan 2015 19:11:47 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: ...political disappointment of 2015: On Sunday, Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) released a statement announcing his intention to challenge Rep. John Boehner (R-Ohio) for the speaker's gavel. The five-term congressman from northeastern Texas says he was "urged" by colleagues and friends, who were fed up with the insufficiently conservative leadership of Boehner, to seek the position. Sadly for those of us who like Gohmert’s combination of stupidity, ignorance, and insanity, he lost his bid for Speaker of the House, earning just three votes. Behavior? Indeed...Gohmert's behavior is something else. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=10kO...spfrel oad=10 Why should we care about him? Our attention should be on the political scumbags in Washington who are systematically ruining this country. -- I don't need anger management. I just need people to stop ****ing me off! Respectfully submitted by Justan |
My first...
On 1/6/2015 7:11 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
...political disappointment of 2015: On Sunday, Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) released a statement announcing his intention to challenge Rep. John Boehner (R-Ohio) for the speaker's gavel. The five-term congressman from northeastern Texas says he was "urged" by colleagues and friends, who were fed up with the insufficiently conservative leadership of Boehner, to seek the position. Sadly for those of us who like Gohmert’s combination of stupidity, ignorance, and insanity, he lost his bid for Speaker of the House, earning just three votes. So what? |
My first...
On 1/6/2015 9:05 PM, Poquito Loco wrote:
On Tue, 06 Jan 2015 19:11:47 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: ...political disappointment of 2015: On Sunday, Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) released a statement announcing his intention to challenge Rep. John Boehner (R-Ohio) for the speaker's gavel. The five-term congressman from northeastern Texas says he was "urged" by colleagues and friends, who were fed up with the insufficiently conservative leadership of Boehner, to seek the position. Sadly for those of us who like Gohmert’s combination of stupidity, ignorance, and insanity, he lost his bid for Speaker of the House, earning just three votes. Behavior? He's dancing around again... nothing has changed. For whatever reason he is playing but a ten year history tells us as soon as he is done with whatever game he's playing he will be right back to his old tricks... |
My first...
|
My first...
On 1/6/2015 10:58 PM, KC wrote:
On 1/6/2015 9:05 PM, Poquito Loco wrote: On Tue, 06 Jan 2015 19:11:47 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: ...political disappointment of 2015: On Sunday, Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) released a statement announcing his intention to challenge Rep. John Boehner (R-Ohio) for the speaker's gavel. The five-term congressman from northeastern Texas says he was "urged" by colleagues and friends, who were fed up with the insufficiently conservative leadership of Boehner, to seek the position. Sadly for those of us who like Gohmert’s combination of stupidity, ignorance, and insanity, he lost his bid for Speaker of the House, earning just three votes. Behavior? He's dancing around again... nothing has changed. For whatever reason he is playing but a ten year history tells us as soon as he is done with whatever game he's playing he will be right back to his old tricks... His modified behaviour will soon give way to his nasty old ways. His little experiment in his ability to set the newsgroup "tone" has been a roaring success. It is clear now that he alone is responsible for the nastiness of rec.boats postings. -- I don't need anger management. I just need people to stop ****ing me off! Respectfully submitted by Justan |
My first...
On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 05:58:40 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote: Once again, you are wrong. A lunatic like Gohmert would have been a lot of fun as speaker. === Have you ever, once, thought about what would be good for the country? You should try it. |
My first...
On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 07:43:46 -0500, Justan Olphart
wrote: It is clear now that he alone is responsible for the nastiness of rec.boats postings. === I think we knew that. |
My first...
On 1/7/15 4:26 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 05:58:40 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: Once again, you are wrong. A lunatic like Gohmert would have been a lot of fun as speaker. === Have you ever, once, thought about what would be good for the country? You should try it. 1. Yes. 2. I have. You and several of your buds seem determined to set a negative tone here and to see if you can "bait." Have fun with that. |
My first...
On 1/7/2015 4:48 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 1/7/15 4:26 PM, Wayne.B wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 05:58:40 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: Once again, you are wrong. A lunatic like Gohmert would have been a lot of fun as speaker. === Have you ever, once, thought about what would be good for the country? You should try it. 1. Yes. 2. I have. You and several of your buds seem determined to set a negative tone here and to see if you can "bait." Have fun with that. Well, with all due respect it would be nice to hear from you why you acted like you did for so many years, and why now all the change all of a sudden? |
My first...
On 1/7/15 4:56 PM, KC wrote:
On 1/7/2015 4:48 PM, Keyser Söze wrote: On 1/7/15 4:26 PM, Wayne.B wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 05:58:40 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: Once again, you are wrong. A lunatic like Gohmert would have been a lot of fun as speaker. === Have you ever, once, thought about what would be good for the country? You should try it. 1. Yes. 2. I have. You and several of your buds seem determined to set a negative tone here and to see if you can "bait." Have fun with that. Well, with all due respect it would be nice to hear from you why you acted like you did for so many years, and why now all the change all of a sudden? I'll be glad to at least partially respond. I mentioned a couple of times here my college minor was sociology, which, briefly, can involve the study of group behavior. I'm still a student of sociology. Over the years, *I* have been accused of being responsible for the "snarliness" in this newsgroup. I thought the reality was that there were many posters here who acted snarly. So, as part of an experiment, I decided to stop making snarly posts about other posters here. I implemented that decision what, three weeks to a month ago? I forgot. Another part of the experiment was to see if I could predict which posters here would remain snarly in the absence of snarliness from me. I predicted five or six would continue to make snarly remarks about other posters. So far, my prediction has come true. I've stated many times that posters here are solely responsible for what they post and that they cannot blame others for their behavior. That was my hypothesis. That the snarliness here continues in the absence of such behavior from me seems to prove my hypothesis was correct. |
My first...
On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 17:26:22 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote: On 1/7/15 4:56 PM, KC wrote: On 1/7/2015 4:48 PM, Keyser Söze wrote: On 1/7/15 4:26 PM, Wayne.B wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 05:58:40 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: Once again, you are wrong. A lunatic like Gohmert would have been a lot of fun as speaker. === Have you ever, once, thought about what would be good for the country? You should try it. 1. Yes. 2. I have. You and several of your buds seem determined to set a negative tone here and to see if you can "bait." Have fun with that. Well, with all due respect it would be nice to hear from you why you acted like you did for so many years, and why now all the change all of a sudden? I'll be glad to at least partially respond. I mentioned a couple of times here my college minor was sociology, which, briefly, can involve the study of group behavior. I'm still a student of sociology. Over the years, *I* have been accused of being responsible for the "snarliness" in this newsgroup. I thought the reality was that there were many posters here who acted snarly. So, as part of an experiment, I decided to stop making snarly posts about other posters here. I implemented that decision what, three weeks to a month ago? I forgot. Another part of the experiment was to see if I could predict which posters here would remain snarly in the absence of snarliness from me. I predicted five or six would continue to make snarly remarks about other posters. So far, my prediction has come true. I've stated many times that posters here are solely responsible for what they post and that they cannot blame others for their behavior. That was my hypothesis. That the snarliness here continues in the absence of such behavior from me seems to prove my hypothesis was correct. And I'll bet your buddies will eat that right up! Talk about cunning linguists! |
My first...
On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 16:26:39 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 05:58:40 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: Once again, you are wrong. A lunatic like Gohmert would have been a lot of fun as speaker. === Have you ever, once, thought about what would be good for the country? You should try it. === PS, I don't consider that post to be even the slightest bit snarly. In light of your stated desire to have a lunatic as speaker just because you'd consider it funny, I think it's a perfectly legitimate question. Back up from your keyboard and read your own posts. |
My first...
On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 18:13:54 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 16:26:39 -0500, Wayne.B wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 05:58:40 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: Once again, you are wrong. A lunatic like Gohmert would have been a lot of fun as speaker. === Have you ever, once, thought about what would be good for the country? You should try it. === PS, I don't consider that post to be even the slightest bit snarly. In light of your stated desire to have a lunatic as speaker just because you'd consider it funny, I think it's a perfectly legitimate question. Back up from your keyboard and read your own posts. He, et al, consider his anti-religion crap to be 'normal, sociable' behavior. |
My first...
On 1/7/2015 6:08 PM, Poquito Loco wrote:
On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 17:26:22 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: On 1/7/15 4:56 PM, KC wrote: On 1/7/2015 4:48 PM, Keyser Söze wrote: On 1/7/15 4:26 PM, Wayne.B wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 05:58:40 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: Once again, you are wrong. A lunatic like Gohmert would have been a lot of fun as speaker. === Have you ever, once, thought about what would be good for the country? You should try it. 1. Yes. 2. I have. You and several of your buds seem determined to set a negative tone here and to see if you can "bait." Have fun with that. Well, with all due respect it would be nice to hear from you why you acted like you did for so many years, and why now all the change all of a sudden? I'll be glad to at least partially respond. I mentioned a couple of times here my college minor was sociology, which, briefly, can involve the study of group behavior. I'm still a student of sociology. Over the years, *I* have been accused of being responsible for the "snarliness" in this newsgroup. I thought the reality was that there were many posters here who acted snarly. So, as part of an experiment, I decided to stop making snarly posts about other posters here. I implemented that decision what, three weeks to a month ago? I forgot. Another part of the experiment was to see if I could predict which posters here would remain snarly in the absence of snarliness from me. I predicted five or six would continue to make snarly remarks about other posters. So far, my prediction has come true. I've stated many times that posters here are solely responsible for what they post and that they cannot blame others for their behavior. That was my hypothesis. That the snarliness here continues in the absence of such behavior from me seems to prove my hypothesis was correct. And I'll bet your buddies will eat that right up! Talk about cunning linguists! Why? You know how excitable Harry is. -- I don't need anger management. I just need people to stop ****ing me off! Respectfully submitted by Justan |
My first...
On 1/7/2015 5:26 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 1/7/15 4:56 PM, KC wrote: On 1/7/2015 4:48 PM, Keyser Söze wrote: On 1/7/15 4:26 PM, Wayne.B wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 05:58:40 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: Once again, you are wrong. A lunatic like Gohmert would have been a lot of fun as speaker. === Have you ever, once, thought about what would be good for the country? You should try it. 1. Yes. 2. I have. You and several of your buds seem determined to set a negative tone here and to see if you can "bait." Have fun with that. Well, with all due respect it would be nice to hear from you why you acted like you did for so many years, and why now all the change all of a sudden? I'll be glad to at least partially respond. I mentioned a couple of times here my college minor was sociology, which, briefly, can involve the study of group behavior. I'm still a student of sociology. Over the years, *I* have been accused of being responsible for the "snarliness" in this newsgroup. I thought the reality was that there were many posters here who acted snarly. So, as part of an experiment, I decided to stop making snarly posts about other posters here. I implemented that decision what, three weeks to a month ago? I forgot. Another part of the experiment was to see if I could predict which posters here would remain snarly in the absence of snarliness from me. I predicted five or six would continue to make snarly remarks about other posters. So far, my prediction has come true. I've stated many times that posters here are solely responsible for what they post and that they cannot blame others for their behavior. That was my hypothesis. That the snarliness here continues in the absence of such behavior from me seems to prove my hypothesis was correct. Well, if you are really doing science you have to take into consideration that those 6 probably hate you becasue you have acted like such an asshole for so long, stalked, threatened, and blackmailed posters here for over a decade? Did you take all of that into consideration? |
My first...
On 1/7/2015 7:11 PM, KC wrote:
On 1/7/2015 5:26 PM, Keyser Söze wrote: On 1/7/15 4:56 PM, KC wrote: On 1/7/2015 4:48 PM, Keyser Söze wrote: On 1/7/15 4:26 PM, Wayne.B wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 05:58:40 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: Once again, you are wrong. A lunatic like Gohmert would have been a lot of fun as speaker. === Have you ever, once, thought about what would be good for the country? You should try it. 1. Yes. 2. I have. You and several of your buds seem determined to set a negative tone here and to see if you can "bait." Have fun with that. Well, with all due respect it would be nice to hear from you why you acted like you did for so many years, and why now all the change all of a sudden? I'll be glad to at least partially respond. I mentioned a couple of times here my college minor was sociology, which, briefly, can involve the study of group behavior. I'm still a student of sociology. Over the years, *I* have been accused of being responsible for the "snarliness" in this newsgroup. I thought the reality was that there were many posters here who acted snarly. So, as part of an experiment, I decided to stop making snarly posts about other posters here. I implemented that decision what, three weeks to a month ago? I forgot. Another part of the experiment was to see if I could predict which posters here would remain snarly in the absence of snarliness from me. I predicted five or six would continue to make snarly remarks about other posters. So far, my prediction has come true. I've stated many times that posters here are solely responsible for what they post and that they cannot blame others for their behavior. That was my hypothesis. That the snarliness here continues in the absence of such behavior from me seems to prove my hypothesis was correct. Well, if you are really doing science you have to take into consideration that those 6 probably hate you becasue you have acted like such an asshole for so long, stalked, threatened, and blackmailed posters here for over a decade? Did you take all of that into consideration? Hate is much to strong a word. I have very little emotion of any sort to spare for him. I can understand if you hate him though. He's been exceptionally cruel, condescending, and hurtful to you. -- I don't need anger management. I just need people to stop ****ing me off! Respectfully submitted by Justan |
My first...
On 1/7/2015 7:30 PM, Justan Olphart wrote:
On 1/7/2015 7:11 PM, KC wrote: On 1/7/2015 5:26 PM, Keyser Söze wrote: On 1/7/15 4:56 PM, KC wrote: On 1/7/2015 4:48 PM, Keyser Söze wrote: On 1/7/15 4:26 PM, Wayne.B wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 05:58:40 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: Once again, you are wrong. A lunatic like Gohmert would have been a lot of fun as speaker. === Have you ever, once, thought about what would be good for the country? You should try it. 1. Yes. 2. I have. You and several of your buds seem determined to set a negative tone here and to see if you can "bait." Have fun with that. Well, with all due respect it would be nice to hear from you why you acted like you did for so many years, and why now all the change all of a sudden? I'll be glad to at least partially respond. I mentioned a couple of times here my college minor was sociology, which, briefly, can involve the study of group behavior. I'm still a student of sociology. Over the years, *I* have been accused of being responsible for the "snarliness" in this newsgroup. I thought the reality was that there were many posters here who acted snarly. So, as part of an experiment, I decided to stop making snarly posts about other posters here. I implemented that decision what, three weeks to a month ago? I forgot. Another part of the experiment was to see if I could predict which posters here would remain snarly in the absence of snarliness from me. I predicted five or six would continue to make snarly remarks about other posters. So far, my prediction has come true. I've stated many times that posters here are solely responsible for what they post and that they cannot blame others for their behavior. That was my hypothesis. That the snarliness here continues in the absence of such behavior from me seems to prove my hypothesis was correct. Well, if you are really doing science you have to take into consideration that those 6 probably hate you becasue you have acted like such an asshole for so long, stalked, threatened, and blackmailed posters here for over a decade? Did you take all of that into consideration? Hate is much to strong a word. I have very little emotion of any sort to spare for him. I can understand if you hate him though. He's been exceptionally cruel, condescending, and hurtful to you. Well, in the interest of science.... yup.... |
My first...
On 1/7/15 6:08 PM, Poquito Loco wrote:
On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 17:26:22 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: On 1/7/15 4:56 PM, KC wrote: On 1/7/2015 4:48 PM, Keyser Söze wrote: On 1/7/15 4:26 PM, Wayne.B wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 05:58:40 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: Once again, you are wrong. A lunatic like Gohmert would have been a lot of fun as speaker. === Have you ever, once, thought about what would be good for the country? You should try it. 1. Yes. 2. I have. You and several of your buds seem determined to set a negative tone here and to see if you can "bait." Have fun with that. Well, with all due respect it would be nice to hear from you why you acted like you did for so many years, and why now all the change all of a sudden? I'll be glad to at least partially respond. I mentioned a couple of times here my college minor was sociology, which, briefly, can involve the study of group behavior. I'm still a student of sociology. Over the years, *I* have been accused of being responsible for the "snarliness" in this newsgroup. I thought the reality was that there were many posters here who acted snarly. So, as part of an experiment, I decided to stop making snarly posts about other posters here. I implemented that decision what, three weeks to a month ago? I forgot. Another part of the experiment was to see if I could predict which posters here would remain snarly in the absence of snarliness from me. I predicted five or six would continue to make snarly remarks about other posters. So far, my prediction has come true. I've stated many times that posters here are solely responsible for what they post and that they cannot blame others for their behavior. That was my hypothesis. That the snarliness here continues in the absence of such behavior from me seems to prove my hypothesis was correct. And I'll bet your buddies will eat that right up! Talk about cunning linguists! A good cunning linguist is in much demand among the ladies. |
My first...
On 1/7/15 6:13 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 16:26:39 -0500, Wayne.B wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 05:58:40 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: Once again, you are wrong. A lunatic like Gohmert would have been a lot of fun as speaker. === Have you ever, once, thought about what would be good for the country? You should try it. === PS, I don't consider that post to be even the slightest bit snarly. In light of your stated desire to have a lunatic as speaker just because you'd consider it funny, I think it's a perfectly legitimate question. Back up from your keyboard and read your own posts. The real Gohmert doesn't post here and therefore is not part of my decision to not directly insult other posters here. It's not that subtle. |
My first...
On 1/7/15 6:24 PM, Poquito Loco wrote:
On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 18:13:54 -0500, Wayne.B wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 16:26:39 -0500, Wayne.B wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 05:58:40 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: Once again, you are wrong. A lunatic like Gohmert would have been a lot of fun as speaker. === Have you ever, once, thought about what would be good for the country? You should try it. === PS, I don't consider that post to be even the slightest bit snarly. In light of your stated desire to have a lunatic as speaker just because you'd consider it funny, I think it's a perfectly legitimate question. Back up from your keyboard and read your own posts. He, et al, consider his anti-religion crap to be 'normal, sociable' behavior. My positions on religion are not aimed at individuals here. I don't, for example, claim you are a flaming asshole for being an adherent of the Wiccan religion, for example. :) |
My first...
On 1/7/15 7:11 PM, KC wrote:
On 1/7/2015 5:26 PM, Keyser Söze wrote: On 1/7/15 4:56 PM, KC wrote: On 1/7/2015 4:48 PM, Keyser Söze wrote: On 1/7/15 4:26 PM, Wayne.B wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 05:58:40 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: Once again, you are wrong. A lunatic like Gohmert would have been a lot of fun as speaker. === Have you ever, once, thought about what would be good for the country? You should try it. 1. Yes. 2. I have. You and several of your buds seem determined to set a negative tone here and to see if you can "bait." Have fun with that. Well, with all due respect it would be nice to hear from you why you acted like you did for so many years, and why now all the change all of a sudden? I'll be glad to at least partially respond. I mentioned a couple of times here my college minor was sociology, which, briefly, can involve the study of group behavior. I'm still a student of sociology. Over the years, *I* have been accused of being responsible for the "snarliness" in this newsgroup. I thought the reality was that there were many posters here who acted snarly. So, as part of an experiment, I decided to stop making snarly posts about other posters here. I implemented that decision what, three weeks to a month ago? I forgot. Another part of the experiment was to see if I could predict which posters here would remain snarly in the absence of snarliness from me. I predicted five or six would continue to make snarly remarks about other posters. So far, my prediction has come true. I've stated many times that posters here are solely responsible for what they post and that they cannot blame others for their behavior. That was my hypothesis. That the snarliness here continues in the absence of such behavior from me seems to prove my hypothesis was correct. Well, if you are really doing science you have to take into consideration that those 6 probably hate you becasue you have acted like such an asshole for so long, stalked, threatened, and blackmailed posters here for over a decade? Did you take all of that into consideration? It's not science...it's just a little experiment. And, once again, how posters behave here is not up to me...it is up to them. |
My first...
On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 18:24:28 -0500, Poquito Loco
wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 18:13:54 -0500, Wayne.B wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 16:26:39 -0500, Wayne.B wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 05:58:40 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: Once again, you are wrong. A lunatic like Gohmert would have been a lot of fun as speaker. === Have you ever, once, thought about what would be good for the country? You should try it. === PS, I don't consider that post to be even the slightest bit snarly. In light of your stated desire to have a lunatic as speaker just because you'd consider it funny, I think it's a perfectly legitimate question. Back up from your keyboard and read your own posts. He, et al, consider his anti-religion crap to be 'normal, sociable' behavior. === I find that less abhorent than his stated desire to have an incompetent idealogue in a high public office. |
My first...
On 1/7/15 7:54 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 18:24:28 -0500, Poquito Loco wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 18:13:54 -0500, Wayne.B wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 16:26:39 -0500, Wayne.B wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 05:58:40 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: Once again, you are wrong. A lunatic like Gohmert would have been a lot of fun as speaker. === Have you ever, once, thought about what would be good for the country? You should try it. === PS, I don't consider that post to be even the slightest bit snarly. In light of your stated desire to have a lunatic as speaker just because you'd consider it funny, I think it's a perfectly legitimate question. Back up from your keyboard and read your own posts. He, et al, consider his anti-religion crap to be 'normal, sociable' behavior. === I find that less abhorent than his stated desire to have an incompetent idealogue in a high public office. If you are referring to Louis Gohmert and my comment about him, he already is in high public office. It is an interesting phenomenon that so many Republican officeholders and wannabes at all levels are like Gohmert in so many ways. I am not saying there are no bat**** crazy Dems, but not nearly as many as in the GOP. |
My first...
On 1/7/2015 7:43 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 1/7/15 6:13 PM, Wayne.B wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 16:26:39 -0500, Wayne.B wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 05:58:40 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: Once again, you are wrong. A lunatic like Gohmert would have been a lot of fun as speaker. === Have you ever, once, thought about what would be good for the country? You should try it. === PS, I don't consider that post to be even the slightest bit snarly. In light of your stated desire to have a lunatic as speaker just because you'd consider it funny, I think it's a perfectly legitimate question. Back up from your keyboard and read your own posts. The real Gohmert doesn't post here and therefore is not part of my decision to not directly insult other posters here. It's not that subtle. So, you want to make the rules again... seriously, **** off... |
My first...
KC wrote:
On 1/7/2015 7:43 PM, Keyser Söze wrote: On 1/7/15 6:13 PM, Wayne.B wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 16:26:39 -0500, Wayne.B wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 05:58:40 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: Once again, you are wrong. A lunatic like Gohmert would have been a lot of fun as speaker. === Have you ever, once, thought about what would be good for the country? You should try it. === PS, I don't consider that post to be even the slightest bit snarly. In light of your stated desire to have a lunatic as speaker just because you'd consider it funny, I think it's a perfectly legitimate question. Back up from your keyboard and read your own posts. The real Gohmert doesn't post here and therefore is not part of my decision to not directly insult other posters here. It's not that subtle. So, you want to make the rules again... seriously, **** off... As there are no rules here, each of us makes our own. It is fine with me if you want to defend the "honor" of Louis Gohmert. -- Sent from my iPhone 6+ |
My first...
On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 19:44:45 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote: On 1/7/15 6:24 PM, Poquito Loco wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 18:13:54 -0500, Wayne.B wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 16:26:39 -0500, Wayne.B wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 05:58:40 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: Once again, you are wrong. A lunatic like Gohmert would have been a lot of fun as speaker. === Have you ever, once, thought about what would be good for the country? You should try it. === PS, I don't consider that post to be even the slightest bit snarly. In light of your stated desire to have a lunatic as speaker just because you'd consider it funny, I think it's a perfectly legitimate question. Back up from your keyboard and read your own posts. He, et al, consider his anti-religion crap to be 'normal, sociable' behavior. My positions on religion are not aimed at individuals here. I don't, for example, claim you are a flaming asshole for being an adherent of the Wiccan religion, for example. :) If that is the case, why post them here? You lay your own traps for yourself. |
My first...
On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 20:05:27 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote: On 1/7/15 7:54 PM, Wayne.B wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 18:24:28 -0500, Poquito Loco wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 18:13:54 -0500, Wayne.B wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 16:26:39 -0500, Wayne.B wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 05:58:40 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: Once again, you are wrong. A lunatic like Gohmert would have been a lot of fun as speaker. === Have you ever, once, thought about what would be good for the country? You should try it. === PS, I don't consider that post to be even the slightest bit snarly. In light of your stated desire to have a lunatic as speaker just because you'd consider it funny, I think it's a perfectly legitimate question. Back up from your keyboard and read your own posts. He, et al, consider his anti-religion crap to be 'normal, sociable' behavior. === I find that less abhorent than his stated desire to have an incompetent idealogue in a high public office. If you are referring to Louis Gohmert and my comment about him, he already is in high public office. It is an interesting phenomenon that so many Republican officeholders and wannabes at all levels are like Gohmert in so many ways. I am not saying there are no bat**** crazy Dems, but not nearly as many as in the GOP. Given the ratio of pro-liberal to pro-conservative media, you would expect to hear about 8 times as many anti-Republican stories as anti-Democrat stories. |
My first...
On Thu, 08 Jan 2015 10:11:56 -0500, Poquito Loco
wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 19:44:45 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: On 1/7/15 6:24 PM, Poquito Loco wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 18:13:54 -0500, Wayne.B wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 16:26:39 -0500, Wayne.B wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 05:58:40 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: Once again, you are wrong. A lunatic like Gohmert would have been a lot of fun as speaker. === Have you ever, once, thought about what would be good for the country? You should try it. === PS, I don't consider that post to be even the slightest bit snarly. In light of your stated desire to have a lunatic as speaker just because you'd consider it funny, I think it's a perfectly legitimate question. Back up from your keyboard and read your own posts. He, et al, consider his anti-religion crap to be 'normal, sociable' behavior. My positions on religion are not aimed at individuals here. I don't, for example, claim you are a flaming asshole for being an adherent of the Wiccan religion, for example. :) If that is the case, why post them here? You lay your own traps for yourself. ~~Crickets~~ -- Guns don't cause problems. The behavior of certain gun owners causes problems. |
My first...
On 1/8/15 6:54 PM, Poquito Loco wrote:
On Thu, 08 Jan 2015 10:11:56 -0500, Poquito Loco wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 19:44:45 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: On 1/7/15 6:24 PM, Poquito Loco wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 18:13:54 -0500, Wayne.B wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 16:26:39 -0500, Wayne.B wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 05:58:40 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: Once again, you are wrong. A lunatic like Gohmert would have been a lot of fun as speaker. === Have you ever, once, thought about what would be good for the country? You should try it. === PS, I don't consider that post to be even the slightest bit snarly. In light of your stated desire to have a lunatic as speaker just because you'd consider it funny, I think it's a perfectly legitimate question. Back up from your keyboard and read your own posts. He, et al, consider his anti-religion crap to be 'normal, sociable' behavior. My positions on religion are not aimed at individuals here. I don't, for example, claim you are a flaming asshole for being an adherent of the Wiccan religion, for example. :) If that is the case, why post them here? You lay your own traps for yourself. ~~Crickets~~ Why do you think that when you ask a question of someone, you are *entitled* to an answer? I don't know why you are coming to the defense of religion. And no, I'm not asking. |
My first...
On Wednesday, January 7, 2015 at 4:56:54 PM UTC-5, KC wrote:
Well, with all due respect it would be nice to hear from you why you acted like you did for so many years, and why now all the change all of a sudden? Hopefully, he's dying. |
My first...
On Thu, 08 Jan 2015 19:03:07 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote: On 1/8/15 6:54 PM, Poquito Loco wrote: On Thu, 08 Jan 2015 10:11:56 -0500, Poquito Loco wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 19:44:45 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: On 1/7/15 6:24 PM, Poquito Loco wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 18:13:54 -0500, Wayne.B wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 16:26:39 -0500, Wayne.B wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 05:58:40 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: Once again, you are wrong. A lunatic like Gohmert would have been a lot of fun as speaker. === Have you ever, once, thought about what would be good for the country? You should try it. === PS, I don't consider that post to be even the slightest bit snarly. In light of your stated desire to have a lunatic as speaker just because you'd consider it funny, I think it's a perfectly legitimate question. Back up from your keyboard and read your own posts. He, et al, consider his anti-religion crap to be 'normal, sociable' behavior. My positions on religion are not aimed at individuals here. I don't, for example, claim you are a flaming asshole for being an adherent of the Wiccan religion, for example. :) If that is the case, why post them here? You lay your own traps for yourself. ~~Crickets~~ Why do you think that when you ask a question of someone, you are *entitled* to an answer? I don't know why you are coming to the defense of religion. And no, I'm not asking. No defense of anything. Nice try at an old dodge. If your anti-religious posts are not aimed at anyone here, why post them here? It's all about behavior. -- Guns don't cause problems. The behavior of certain gun owners causes problems. |
My first...
Poquito Loco wrote:
On Thu, 08 Jan 2015 19:03:07 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: On 1/8/15 6:54 PM, Poquito Loco wrote: On Thu, 08 Jan 2015 10:11:56 -0500, Poquito Loco wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 19:44:45 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: On 1/7/15 6:24 PM, Poquito Loco wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 18:13:54 -0500, Wayne.B wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 16:26:39 -0500, Wayne.B wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 05:58:40 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: Once again, you are wrong. A lunatic like Gohmert would have been a lot of fun as speaker. === Have you ever, once, thought about what would be good for the country? You should try it. === PS, I don't consider that post to be even the slightest bit snarly. In light of your stated desire to have a lunatic as speaker just because you'd consider it funny, I think it's a perfectly legitimate question. Back up from your keyboard and read your own posts. He, et al, consider his anti-religion crap to be 'normal, sociable' behavior. My positions on religion are not aimed at individuals here. I don't, for example, claim you are a flaming asshole for being an adherent of the Wiccan religion, for example. :) If that is the case, why post them here? You lay your own traps for yourself. ~~Crickets~~ Why do you think that when you ask a question of someone, you are *entitled* to an answer? I don't know why you are coming to the defense of religion. And no, I'm not asking. No defense of anything. Nice try at an old dodge. If your anti-religious posts are not aimed at anyone here, why post them here? It's all about behavior. I suggest you take care of your own behavior, and stop trying to moderate what others post. I am not insulting anyone personally and that is the end of it. I don't answer to you. Got it? Hope so. Have a nice night. -- Sent from my iPhone 6+ |
My first...
On 9 Jan 2015 03:10:53 GMT, Keyser Söze wrote:
Poquito Loco wrote: On Thu, 08 Jan 2015 19:03:07 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: On 1/8/15 6:54 PM, Poquito Loco wrote: On Thu, 08 Jan 2015 10:11:56 -0500, Poquito Loco wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 19:44:45 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: On 1/7/15 6:24 PM, Poquito Loco wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 18:13:54 -0500, Wayne.B wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 16:26:39 -0500, Wayne.B wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 05:58:40 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: Once again, you are wrong. A lunatic like Gohmert would have been a lot of fun as speaker. === Have you ever, once, thought about what would be good for the country? You should try it. === PS, I don't consider that post to be even the slightest bit snarly. In light of your stated desire to have a lunatic as speaker just because you'd consider it funny, I think it's a perfectly legitimate question. Back up from your keyboard and read your own posts. He, et al, consider his anti-religion crap to be 'normal, sociable' behavior. My positions on religion are not aimed at individuals here. I don't, for example, claim you are a flaming asshole for being an adherent of the Wiccan religion, for example. :) If that is the case, why post them here? You lay your own traps for yourself. ~~Crickets~~ Why do you think that when you ask a question of someone, you are *entitled* to an answer? I don't know why you are coming to the defense of religion. And no, I'm not asking. No defense of anything. Nice try at an old dodge. If your anti-religious posts are not aimed at anyone here, why post them here? It's all about behavior. I suggest you take care of your own behavior, and stop trying to moderate what others post. I am not insulting anyone personally and that is the end of it. I don't answer to you. Got it? Hope so. Have a nice night. Why, when you are asked a question about your motives for anti-religious posts, are you too afraid to answer the question? -- Guns don't cause problems. The behavior of certain gun owners causes problems. |
My first...
On 1/9/2015 8:22 AM, Poquito Loco wrote:
On 9 Jan 2015 03:10:53 GMT, Keyser Söze wrote: Poquito Loco wrote: On Thu, 08 Jan 2015 19:03:07 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: On 1/8/15 6:54 PM, Poquito Loco wrote: On Thu, 08 Jan 2015 10:11:56 -0500, Poquito Loco wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 19:44:45 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: On 1/7/15 6:24 PM, Poquito Loco wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 18:13:54 -0500, Wayne.B wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 16:26:39 -0500, Wayne.B wrote: On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 05:58:40 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: Once again, you are wrong. A lunatic like Gohmert would have been a lot of fun as speaker. === Have you ever, once, thought about what would be good for the country? You should try it. === PS, I don't consider that post to be even the slightest bit snarly. In light of your stated desire to have a lunatic as speaker just because you'd consider it funny, I think it's a perfectly legitimate question. Back up from your keyboard and read your own posts. He, et al, consider his anti-religion crap to be 'normal, sociable' behavior. My positions on religion are not aimed at individuals here. I don't, for example, claim you are a flaming asshole for being an adherent of the Wiccan religion, for example. :) If that is the case, why post them here? You lay your own traps for yourself. ~~Crickets~~ Why do you think that when you ask a question of someone, you are *entitled* to an answer? I don't know why you are coming to the defense of religion. And no, I'm not asking. No defense of anything. Nice try at an old dodge. If your anti-religious posts are not aimed at anyone here, why post them here? It's all about behavior. I suggest you take care of your own behavior, and stop trying to moderate what others post. I am not insulting anyone personally and that is the end of it. I don't answer to you. Got it? Hope so. Have a nice night. Why, when you are asked a question about your motives for anti-religious posts, are you too afraid to answer the question? Or asked to explain why he was such a useless piece of **** here for over ten years... |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:17 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com