Al Franken...is this for real?

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Originally Posted by tw

Oh. You are from hell. Say hi to Adolf.

BTW, he makes a great meat tenderizer - obviously.

To improve on tw's accuracy in the manner to which I am accustomed, see Adolph's.

I am of course hell on idiots and those I catch being fatuous. I claim this as a right, and believe it a necessity. Otherwise, they just keep fucking up -- and where's any good in that?

[richlevy]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

Bruce and Rich, when will you learn such remarks cannot be respected by people of depth? Are you really so determined to remind me you're rather too thick to become conservatives, or something?

I knew that sooner or later he'd drop the depth charge. Unfortunately, it's a little late to rig for silent running.

Every time I try to jump in and find the depth in any of UG's arguments, it's like trying to dive into a wet handkerchief.

[ZenGum]

Originally Posted by richlevy

Every time I try to jump in and find the depth in any of UG's arguments, it's like trying to dive into a wet handkerchief.

[tw]

Originally Posted by richlevy

Every time I try to jump in and find the depth in any of UG's arguments, it's like trying to dive into a wet handkerchief.

Which is why the crowd keeps yelling, "Don't jump!"

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Originally Posted by richlevy

I knew that sooner or later he'd drop the depth charge. Unfortunately, it's a little late to rig for silent running.

Every time I try to jump in and find the depth in any of UG's arguments, it's like trying to dive into a wet handkerchief.

Rich, you just pretend to yourself that I have no depth all you like, and of course I'll get to laugh at both your pretenses and the incontinent manner in which you screw yourself out of understanding or enlightenment.

I perhaps shouldn't laugh, but what can I do when you're being so ridiculously thick? I'd like you to impress me, but I'm still waiting. Believe me, your philosophy of life, of how things should be, doesn't impress me much. It wouldn't impress anyone who thinks, not so far.

My thinking is a reproach to yours. You've never had an idea I'd've wanted to adopt, AFAIK, or the ability to defend it. Have you ever said anything to me except to disparage and disagree with my thinking -- without once displaying a sound philosophical underpinning for your objections? I hear you objecting, but nary a genuine reason why you would. Just falsities, excuses, or fatuity.

Not being attached to these things, I'm just not as far leftleaning as yourself. The Left's stupidity and its tropism to fatuous totalitarian-sympathizing made its impression on me starting at nine years old, and the Left has never stopped being stupid since. I don't think it's me, Rich. I just think there are a lot of synapses out there that don't close.

It is a sad and horrible thing to see a man so bound and determined to lie to himself every frigging time he meets up with me. Gives me a most regrettable impression of what his mind must be like.

[sugarpop]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

Bruce and Rich, when will you learn such remarks cannot be respected by people of depth? Are you really so determined to remind me you're rather too thick to become conservatives, or something?

HA! That's rich. And funny too.

[sugarpop]

Actually, Redux seems to the voice of reason, not partisan at all. UG on the other hand, is very partisan.

thanks, sugar...but my partisan leanings do have a way of showing through.

[sugarpop]

Well, maybe it's just because I agree with you then. At least you always back up what you say. Maybe that's what I meant.

[classicman]

Originally Posted by sugarpop

Actually, Redux seems to the voice of reason.

Originally Posted by sugarpop

maybe it's just because I agree with (him).

Hmm........... ya think?

[TheMercenary]

Sort of stating the obvious there.

Smugness and BS?
Look in the mirror, dude.

Filtering out idiot stuff?
You sure didnt filter out this one in our discussion about illegal or unethical acts of the Bush DoJ v the Clinton DoJ while in office:

One of your links about Reno.
Quote:
...Thompson also quotes John Gigliotti (from Pat Robertson's security detail) who says Michael Eppinger, an alleged organized crime figure in Miami supposedly has a video of Reno at a sex orgy...
http://www.laborers.org/NorCal_Reno.html
So person A quotes person B who alleges that person C is an organized crime figure who supposedly has a video of Reno at a sexy orgy....among other allegations.

Or this one....Janet Reno Uses Call Girls

Now thats really getting at the truth!

Idiot stuff, dude.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Hey, so no proof will ever suffice for you? That tells everyone just how honest Redux is or will be. Clinton got your vote at least once? What a shame. He never got mine. The Democrats just haven't been good enough.

That's okay, though. I'll just keep on finding the Dem perfidy recorded on the net, and for months. Plenty of material there. And of course there are the paper sources too: you know, inflammatory tabloids such as National Review, American Spectator, and The Weekly Standard.

Do you know anybody who's fucked Janet Reno long enough or often enough to say for sure she's heterosexual? Any-sexual? I can't think of anyone who could tell me, either. How can you be so sure Persons A, B, and C didn't have something there? Seems more like your prejudices are speaking than your thought.

Two kinds of Democrats really impress me these days, the present rector of my church excepted. Those Democrats in uniform is one. The other one is Joe Lieberman. The rest of the national Democratic Party leadership just makes me shake my head. That ain't how you get votes or campaign contributions.

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

Hey, so no proof will ever suffice for you? That tells everyone just how honest Redux is or will be. Clinton got your vote at least once? What a shame. He never got mine. The Democrats just haven't been good enough.

I give you 4-5 internal DoJ memos that found illegal acts or acts in violation of agency policy by Bush DoJ officials...the latest being the DoJ Office of Professional Responsibility report (to be made public in the next few weeks) that reportedly says the DoJ attorneys who wrote the torture memos may have deliberately slanted their legal advice to provide the White House with the conclusions it wanted....and if so, could be subject to disbarment.

And you give me sites about Reno and dancing girls....and absolutely no proof or even allegation of any illegal acts or wrongdoing by Reno (or any DoJ staff) while in office.

Instead, you want to focus on allegations of Reno's sexuality...wtf?

Proof? I expect better from a smart guy like you. The fact that you would even defend those links of yours says it all.

[TGRR]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

Hey, so no proof will ever suffice for you? That tells everyone just how honest Redux is or will be. Clinton got your vote at least once? What a shame. He never got mine. The Democrats just haven't been good enough.

That's okay, though. I'll just keep on finding the Dem perfidy recorded on the net, and for months. Plenty of material there. And of course there are the paper sources too: you know, inflammatory tabloids such as National Review, American Spectator, and The Weekly Standard.

Do you know anybody who's fucked Janet Reno long enough or often enough to say for sure she's heterosexual? Any-sexual? I can't think of anyone who could tell me, either. How can you be so sure Persons A, B, and C didn't have something there? Seems more like your prejudices are speaking than your thought.

Two kinds of Democrats really impress me these days, the present rector of my church excepted. Those Democrats in uniform is one. The other one is Joe Lieberman. The rest of the national Democratic Party leadership just makes me shake my head. That ain't how you get votes or campaign contributions.

1. Who gives a shit about Janet Reno? Unless you are able to show that she's finally being arrested for Waco, nobody cares.

2. Nice "concern troll". The votes and the campaign contributions seem to be doing just fine for the dems. Why should they take advice from losers?