"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
You stepped in it big time and were not man enough to laugh it off. This
whining of yours is getting old.

I hope it annoys the hell out of you.

I am sure you do....but it doesn't. Why should it?

Gould,
Sort of like this?


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Gould 0738 wrote:
Gould,
When I was having discussions with you, you suddenly started posting
messages criticizing and belittling me, just because I had a contrasting

right wingers apparently don't do nuance.

You and I have a discussion. I think you're full of crap and I tell you
so. "to
your face" if you will.

You and I have a discussion. You think I'm full of crap so you start a
side
conversation with LOL JimH or somebody else to kick that fact back and
forth
between you.


Imagine being forced to have a meaningful discussion with Hertvik,
Fritz, or any of the other numnutzes on the low-brain-output right.

--
Today George W. Bush made a very compelling and thoughtful argument
for why he should not be reelected. In his own words, he told the
American people that "...a political candidate who jumps to conclusions
without knowing the facts is not a person you want as your
Commander-in-Chief."

Gould,
Sort of like this?

Please do go back and read my original suppostion- I acknowledged an exception.

Sort of like the side conversation you and Harry are always doing.

Sorry, Smith. You're full of crap on this and I tell you so directly. A
conversation goes two ways. If Harry posts a comment about a third party, I
have no control over that. If I agree, or add on to the comment, or bring in
yet another person for critcism in absentia- that's a "conversation".

I hope it annoys the hell out of you.

I am sure you do....but it doesn't. Why should it?



I would have no idea, but somebody forging your handle was bitching about my
posting style a little earlier in this thread. You guys have to stop faking
each others' names, it gets confusing.

Really support our troops. Join "Soldiers for The Truth". http://www.sftt.org/

Why are you conversing with a dirtbag like Smythe?

I'm a liberal, Harry. There are no dirtbags.Feeling self righteous or superior
to others isn't what liberalism is about. IMO. While there are no dirtbags,
there are some less enlightened folks with a few personal quirks, but then
again we all bear some sort of burden, right?

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Gould 0738 wrote:
Why are you conversing with a dirtbag like Smythe?

I'm a liberal, Harry. There are no dirtbags.Feeling self righteous or
superior
to others isn't what liberalism is about. IMO. While there are no
dirtbags,
there are some less enlightened folks with a few personal quirks, but
then
again we all bear some sort of burden, right?

Indeed, but that doesn't mean we have to bear "any" burden...

Where's my dollar, Krause?

Gould,

I have inserted your name into a new thread, because it was a very similar
topic or similar argument to what you and I had discussed. It is very
similar to when you inserted "LOL JimH" into this discussion.

From my memory I made the observation that you and Bass are guilty of using
the exact same tactics, that upsets you when it is directed at you. I also
made the observation, that you are forgiving of any mud thrown by Kerry, but
really become upset when mud is thrown by Bush.

By the way, I am supporting Bush in any manner, and he won't get my vote
next week, so no one can state I am a partisan goose stepping borg. I
consider myself an independent, who has voted for candidates from either
party.

I was making the observation that those who live in glass houses should not
throw stones.


"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Gould,
When I was having discussions with you, you suddenly started posting
messages criticizing and belittling me, just because I had a contrasting

right wingers apparently don't do nuance.

You and I have a discussion. I think you're full of crap and I tell you
so. "to
your face" if you will.

You and I have a discussion. You think I'm full of crap so you start a
side
conversation with LOL JimH or somebody else to kick that fact back and
forth
between you.

You see no difference?

That's the trend I was observing.

I have to disagree, I am not full of crap. ; )

I do have trouble understanding why think it is ok for me to highlight your
hypocrisy in a thread you started or responded to, but it is not ok when I
see someone else using your exact same tactics and I point out the
similarities.

But then again, even though I have disagreed with you on many points, and
find your debate skills weak, I have never said you are full of crap. In my
eyes that is a greater sin, than what you are accusing me of doing, but then
again, you and I disagree on many issues.



"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Sort of like the side conversation you and Harry are always doing.

Sorry, Smith. You're full of crap on this and I tell you so directly. A
conversation goes two ways. If Harry posts a comment about a third party,
I
have no control over that. If I agree, or add on to the comment, or bring
in
yet another person for critcism in absentia- that's a "conversation".

I was making the observation that those who live in glass houses should not
throw stones.

People who resort to posting under another NG'ers handle to try and embarrass
that person have some issues that are so serious no reasonable person gives a
rip about their opinion.

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
I was making the observation that those who live in glass houses should
not
throw stones.

People who resort to posting under another NG'ers handle to try and
embarrass
that person have some issues that are so serious no reasonable person
gives a
rip about their opinion.

Exactly what is it that Jon posted that is not true Chuck?

Exactly what is it that Jon posted that is not true Chuck?

Shall we start with claiming to be Harry Krause?

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Exactly what is it that Jon posted that is not true Chuck?

Shall we start with claiming to be Harry Krause?

Perhaps I should have been more specific.

Exactly what is it that Jon posted in the following that is not true?

-------------------------
Gould,

I have inserted your name into a new thread, because it was a very similar
topic or similar argument to what you and I had discussed. It is very
similar to when you inserted "LOL JimH" into this discussion.

From my memory I made the observation that you and Bass are guilty of using
the exact same tactics, that upsets you when it is directed at you. I also
made the observation, that you are forgiving of any mud thrown by Kerry, but
really become upset when mud is thrown by Bush.

By the way, I am supporting Bush in any manner, and he won't get my vote
next week, so no one can state I am a partisan goose stepping borg. I
consider myself an independent, who has voted for candidates from either
party.

I was making the observation that those who live in glass houses should not
throw stones.
-----------------------

Perhaps I should have been more specific.

Exactly what is it that Jon posted in the following that is not true?

Here you go:

From my memory I made the observation that you and Bass are guilty of using
the exact same tactics, that upsets you when it is directed at you.

Some perspective. I observed that certain people tend to start conversations
about third parties and then create a series of posts trying to top one
another's insults of that person.

I seldom respond to Basskisser's posts at all. For Tonto to say that the Lone
Ranger was accurate in claiming that Bass and I, or Harry and I, trade posts
amplifying one anothers' insults is absurd. The charge is patently false.

Funny thing: I didn't name any names when I made my observation, but there are
a couple of folks here 'bouts who are suddenly *very* defensive. Why would that
be?

I did not "spoof" anyone's ID, and it was obvious to everyone that my posts
were not from Harry. They were satire of the way Harry fills this group
with BS cut and paste, and many people found them humorous, even though they
knew it was not Harry. If someone was fooled by the first satire posts cut
and pasted from The Onion, they quickly realized it was satire and not from
the "Real Harry" when they saw the email address listed in each posts as
). Anyone who posts in this NG knows this is not Harry's
return email. Harry was not embarrassed, nor does anyone who reads
rec.boats think any more or any less of Harry by anything I posted.

Now, when you find you can not debate the issue or do not have the skills to
win a debate with an individual, you resort to name calling and change the
topic being discussed to another topic you feel you can win. Very weak
debate skills, I thought you could have done better.


"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
I was making the observation that those who live in glass houses should
not
throw stones.

People who resort to posting under another NG'ers handle to try and
embarrass
that person have some issues that are so serious no reasonable person
gives a
rip about their opinion.

Gould,
Do you believe I made any attempt to fool anyone into believing my posts
were from the real Harry? Do you believe the normal person when responding
to my post would notice the first line of their response reads "Harry
Krause" ? If you do, I underestimated the average
intelligence in rec.boats, but I still found my posts to be humorous and
very legitimate satire. When you read The Onion do you believe they are
lying to the public and trying to fool them into believe their humorist
satire?

Do you believe anyone was fooled by my posts? Or are you grasping at the
last straw trying to win a discussion you know you can not win?


"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Exactly what is it that Jon posted that is not true Chuck?

Shall we start with claiming to be Harry Krause?

Gould,
Do you believe I made any attempt to fool anyone into believing my posts

I am positive that my question:

"Can the right wing say the same?"

Has unleashed a torrent of denials, accusations, etc etc etc from a couple of
guys who were never named in the original "observation".

Odd. Why do you suppose that would happen?

Methinks thou dost protest too much.

Do you believe anyone was fooled by my posts? Or are you grasping at the
last straw trying to win a discussion you know you can not win?


I think that only a fool would make such a post. "Win" would indicate some sort
of contest. Swatting a mosquito is hardly a contest between the swatter and the
mosquito.

You burned up a lot of credibility with your
bogus posts, Taco John. You ought to consider trying to recover gracefully, not
fanning the flames with additional excuses and justifications.

You debate skills need some refining if you ever think you will gracefully
extricate yourself from this thread. :)

To begin with, you acknowledge that the conversations in rec.boats
(especially the OT political threads) are nothing more than swatting
mosquito, yet in the next sentence you discuss my need to "gracefully
recover". from my lack of creditability. You take the crap in rec.boats and
yourself way too seriously. This is Usenet, the important thing about
Usenet is your should not sweat the small stuff, and it is all small stuff.

Next, let's suppose your criteria to determine whose opinion is worthy of
consideration is actually valid (i.e. not resorting to name calling, not
reviewing discussions from other threads in a new thread, not using satire
in rec.boats etc.). Everyone who post any OT remarks in rec.boats will be
guilty of many of those same issues, including yourself. Since everyone in
rec.boats have lost their creditability (using your definition of
creditability) why are you bothering to respond to any OT discussion? The
answer is simple, you feel that you are able to win a debate with some
people, but if you feel you are losing the debate, you come up with an issue
not being discussion to suddenly declare a moral victory.

Gould, I thought you were a worthy debate opponent, but I guess I was wrong.



"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Gould,
Do you believe I made any attempt to fool anyone into believing my posts

I am positive that my question:

"Can the right wing say the same?"

Has unleashed a torrent of denials, accusations, etc etc etc from a couple
of
guys who were never named in the original "observation".

Odd. Why do you suppose that would happen?

Methinks thou dost protest too much.

Do you believe anyone was fooled by my posts? Or are you grasping at the
last straw trying to win a discussion you know you can not win?


I think that only a fool would make such a post. "Win" would indicate some
sort
of contest. Swatting a mosquito is hardly a contest between the swatter
and the
mosquito.

You burned up a lot of credibility with your
bogus posts, Taco John. You ought to consider trying to recover
gracefully, not
fanning the flames with additional excuses and justifications.

Gould, I thought you were a worthy debate opponent, but I guess I was wrong.

Excellent. Will you then stop wasting your time with your snide and goofy
little pot shots and high fives?

If you mean, will I not make any comments when you make a completely
illogical statement, then the answer is no. If you don't want anyone to
make a negative comment about paranoid illogical statements you are in the
wrong forum. While I never make snide and goofy comments, I normally do not
high five others, but it might happen. If you find that offensive, again
you are in the wrong forum.


"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Gould, I thought you were a worthy debate opponent, but I guess I was
wrong.

Excellent. Will you then stop wasting your time with your snide and goofy
little pot shots and high fives?

"Jon Smithe" wrote in message news:JTsgd.328697$MQ5.155510@attbi_s52...
Gould,

I have inserted your name into a new thread, because it was a very similar
topic or similar argument to what you and I had discussed. It is very
similar to when you inserted "LOL JimH" into this discussion.

The doctor is IN........BWAAAHAAAAAA!!!!!!

Bass,
Are you suggesting I do not have a MD and PHD?



"basskisser" wrote in message
om...
"Jon Smithe" wrote in message
news:JTsgd.328697$MQ5.155510@attbi_s52...
Gould,

I have inserted your name into a new thread, because it was a very
similar
topic or similar argument to what you and I had discussed. It is very
similar to when you inserted "LOL JimH" into this discussion.

The doctor is IN........BWAAAHAAAAAA!!!!!!

"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 15:57:12 GMT, "Jon Smithe" wrote:

It added some humor to what is otherwise a most boring bunch of
political bull**** or name-calling posts (on *both* sides).

John H

I agree, I mean how many times can someone say "you are stupid" or "you man
is stupid" without getting bored. I am sure Gould was smart enough not to
think was not Harry Krause, but if he did he should be
ashamed.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Gould 0738 wrote:
Why are you conversing with a dirtbag like Smythe?

I'm a liberal, Harry. There are no dirtbags.Feeling self righteous or
superior
to others isn't what liberalism is about. IMO. While there are no
dirtbags,
there are some less enlightened folks with a few personal quirks, but
then
again we all bear some sort of burden, right?

Indeed, but that doesn't mean we have to bear "any" burden...

Where's my dollar, Krause?

Where's your mailing address?

Donate it to the RNC. That's where I'd send it once it got to me.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Gould 0738 wrote:
Why are you conversing with a dirtbag like Smythe?

I'm a liberal, Harry. There are no dirtbags.Feeling self righteous or
superior
to others isn't what liberalism is about. IMO. While there are no
dirtbags,
there are some less enlightened folks with a few personal quirks, but
then
again we all bear some sort of burden, right?

Indeed, but that doesn't mean we have to bear "any" burden...

Where's my dollar, Krause?

Where's your mailing address?

Donate it to the RNC. That's where I'd send it once it got to me.



That's your job. I said I'd pay you if you won that little bet. I said
nothing about a surrogate.


Relax. I wouldn't ask you to do something so painful.

Gould,
When did Harry start using the email address ?
You take Usenet way to serious.

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Exactly what is it that Jon posted that is not true Chuck?

Shall we start with claiming to be Harry Krause?

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
I think that only a fool would make such a post. "Win" would indicate some
sort
of contest. Swatting a mosquito is hardly a contest between the swatter
and the
mosquito.

One who calls another a "fool" should never complain about other's"personal
comments", it shows that one fails to grasp his own words which would
diminish ones creditability in any discussion.