"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.