BoatBanter.com - OT--Bush has the higher IQ

BoatBanter.com (https://www.boatbanter.com/)

- General (https://www.boatbanter.com/general/)

- - OT--Bush has the higher IQ (https://www.boatbanter.com/general/24439-ot-bush-has-higher-iq.html)

"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

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?