PDA

View Full Version : Hey Sack?



Gayle in MD
01-12-2010, 07:30 AM
Just wondering, don't you think it's a bit ridiculous for all of these Republicans to be out there claiming a double standard, by comparing Reid's statements about Obama's pluses as a presidential contender, to the calls for Trent Lott to resign?

Trent Lott, was, after all, a proven racist, as was Thurmond, was he not?

Lott, given a F. by the NAACP, and Reid an A, on their respective voting records for minorities....

Isn't this just exactly what Republicans always do, twist the truth, and yelp to high heaven over non issues, which they twist beyond recognition, false comparisons, feigned outrage, using their usual Bs about the Liberal Press, being unfair. LMAO!

Since you brought attention to this recent Republican tactic, I was just wondering if you could see the hypocracy in the Republicans who are out there demanding that Reid, resign, with such a ridiculous comparison, to Lott, a man who praised a racist, and mused over what a better place this country would have been if a segregationist had been president!

Just wondering, if you could see the hypocracy in this, or maybe the hypocracy in their chosen dark faces for the media, while their voting records are consistantly ranked so low by the NAACP.

Or the hypocracy involved in having so many closeted gays in their party, and on their staffs, while they consistantly vote against gay rights?

Or their presentation of themselves as the God Party, when so many of them are liars, unfaithful to their wives, locked up for stealing, or taking bribes, Demanding resignations left and right, while refusing demands for resignations when their own are caught with their panties down?

Or their use of the word, "conservative" after decades of consistant big spender, big government, historical proof, otherwise?

Just wondering...

G.

eg8r
01-12-2010, 08:08 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Just wondering, don't you think it's a bit ridiculous for all of these Republicans to be out there claiming a double standard, by comparing Reid's statements about Obama's pluses as a presidential contender, to the calls for Trent Lott to resign?

Trent Lott, was, after all, a proven racist, as was Thurmond, was he not?
</div></div>So you have no intent on just looking at what was said? Aren't the actual words spoken more important than a man's past? Thurmond renounced his racist past. You never even renounced your slander against Obama as a drug abuser. Should we now not believe a single word you say about Obama because in the past you called him a drug addict and said you would never vote for him?

eg8r

Gayle in MD
01-12-2010, 08:56 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Just wondering, don't you think it's a bit ridiculous for all of these Republicans to be out there claiming a double standard, by comparing Reid's statements about Obama's pluses as a presidential contender, to the calls for Trent Lott to resign?

Trent Lott, was, after all, a proven racist, as was Thurmond, was he not?
</div></div>So you have no intent on just looking at what was said? Aren't the actual words spoken more important than a man's past?
<span style="color: #000066">No, not at all. Actions speak far louder than words. however, I have looked at what both Lott and Reid have said, and there is no comparison, as the right would like to make. That is, I'm sure, more than you have done. </span>
Thurmond renounced his racist past.

<span style="color: #000066">My post was about Lott's stated approval of, and opinions about, Thurmond's racist past.

Here, again, you are unable to follow the gist of a post, while accusing me, and others of being old and feeble. Perhaps, you should rethink that accusation, and take a look at your own non stop twisting of or lack of ability to follow, what I write here. </span>


You never even renounced your slander against Obama as a drug abuser.

<span style="color: #000066">That is a lie, one of many lies which you write about me.... </span>


Should we now not believe a single word you say about Obama

<span style="color: #000066">WE? Who is "We" Ed. You presume that you speak for everyone here? I really don't care what you believe, as I don't find you to be an intelligent, reasonable or honorable person. </span>

because in the past you called him a drug addict and said you would never vote for him?

eg8r </div></div>

Ed,

I am making an effort once again to ignore you. As you know, I have done so many times, for long periods, yet your attacks have continued over the years. No one here could deny, that you cannot control your attacks. They are attacks, because they are filled with lies about what I have written, personal slander, and this time, lies about what I have denounced.

Your accusation is wrong. I made a post here renouncing my original thoughts about Obama, and specifically about his drug use, after my daughter informed me that I had mis-judged him.

I wrote about the fact that she purchased his books, and that I read them both, was greatly impressed, and admitted that I had misjudged him.

There is no question that I thought, and think, that Hillary Clinton had more experience, had paid far more, hard bought dues in advance of her entering the race, and had spent far more time in support of her fellow Democratics, and was, more deserving of their support, in return.

It is also no secret that I thought, and think, that the worst thing that could have happend to our country, was McCain, in the White House, with palin, as VP, or any of the other Republican candidates.

Also, no question that I, and many other women in this country, would have been thrilled to see a woman in the oval office. Most importantly this women who was so brilliant, well qualified, hard working, and well informed about our foreign threats, and how to handle them. To see her become president, during my lifetime, would have been fabulous, and I felt some anger about the way she was treated so unfairly, some of it directed toward Obama.

Also, there is no question that when I learned that President Obama, managed to rise to meet the many issues he faced as a bi-racial youth, and reach the levels of respect, and acheivement, which he managed, the rightfully brought him an edge which he, and his campaign, and the Democratics who supported him, were understandably determined to highlight.

I don't suppose you've ever mis-judged a single person, ever, in your vast experience of life. I find myself not as perfect, in that regard, but more than willing to admit to it when I fail.

Since you alluded to your belief that you think it's your right to refuse to "Allow" me to post my opinions on this site, without adding your non stop insults, I suggest that you end this on-going accusation that I seek to remove the rights to free speech of others, liberty and the pursuit of personal happiness.

I have never taken a single action in my life, to interfere with the rights of others to make their own personal, private decisions.

Regardless of how I know you will twist this post of mine, as you do all the rest, I don't think you can deny that you are the relentless attacker, not me.

I realize that you have no desire to look inside yourself to discover the deeper issues behind your behavior, however, the post you made in Sack's thread about the forum, was incredibly inaccurate given your bahavior, and removed from you posting history here.

I am asking once again, publically, and for the sake of some harmony on this site, that you just refrain from posting to me. Most of your posts to and about me, are filled with accusations which are not true, are truly, relentlessly mean and nasty, inaccurate, slanderous, and do not add anything of value to the forum.

Here again, you are twisting what I have written. My statement has nothing to do with Thurman, it has everything to do with Lott, his support of Thurman's former racist ideals back in his days of cescession and his support of discrimination, and segregation, all of which Lott stated he approved, and for which Lott was asked to resign, and the flase Republican comparison to tow totally difference events, by two totally different men, Reid, and Lott, and their personal actions and statements.

While I realize that you are not well read, your usual behavior is to jump up with inaccurate accusations over a subject about which you have no apparent knoweldge. That fact that you do so while also misrepresenting me, twisting the very post to which you are responding, as you go, is typical of your posting style.

I really do not care what you believe, about me, or think about me, but I would think, that if your stated desire for a more harmonious forum, was genuine, you could see that this post of yours, and many others, which I could paste, is not only wrong and inaccurate on every level, but argumentative, and without merit. It does not show any desire for a more harmonious flavor on this site, which you claimed was your goal.

Do us all a favor, and stop with your relentless lies and attacks. I have already addressed the statements I made about President Obama, long ago, and told the entire story of how deeply his books affected me.

He was never an addict, nor a terrorist, nor friends with terrorists, and the fact that you ignore all such lies and slander from others here, about these subjects, which are posted here by people from the right, on this forum, and focus on me, says rhelms about your partisanship, and your nature. I find it interesting that you ignore all of that, while feeling this great resposibility to refuse to "allow" me, to post freely, without your incessant slander and attacks, lies and mis-statements, and your rude and irrational, nasty behavior.

With all your presumptuous references to, "We" and your idea that you speak for everyone here,...I can assure you, there are many people here who feel as I do, about your posts.

G.

eg8r
01-12-2010, 10:53 AM
The "we" refers to those on this board. Since I post here and so do others that concludes the "we". I am not speaking for them, I am just asking if you think we should believe you based on your past actions. You admitted to mis-judging Obama and my bet is that you mis-judge most people. Your response to JohnnyD and then apology is proof and it has happened many times. Based on your posting style, I believe you have mis-judged Lott.

EDIT: That should have been Chilled, not JohhnyD.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Since you alluded to your belief that you think it's your right to refuse to "Allow" me to post my opinions on this site, without adding your non stop insults, I suggest that you end this on-going accusation that I seek to remove the rights to free speech of others, liberty and the pursuit of personal happiness.

I have never taken a single action in my life, to interfere with the rights of others to make their own personal, private decisions.
</div></div>You asking me to quit responding to your posts certainly is an action from you trying to limit my freedom of speech.

I will continue to respond to your posts of which I feel are inaccurate, intentionally or not.

eg8r

sack316
01-12-2010, 01:29 PM
I said a bit of what I thought in the other thread, but did not go into great detail in my later remarks as I perhaps should have. So here goes:

No, it's not the same thing. Taken in the context of what was said, they are two entirely different statements. Reid's was a poor choice of words within the context of a complimentary statement. Lott's was a poor choice of words in a stupid statement to begin with. Clearly the intent is the discerning difference between the two.

Another difference in the end results is/will be own party support. Lott, while he would have surely suffered damage, could have survived had his own party backed him much like the Democrats are supporting Reid presently. To Reid's credit, the instant this was 'out there' he got in front of it and apologized.

If you ask me, it would have been the wiser strategy for republicans to take the high road in this instance and not say a word. Barring something major happening, Reid is out this year anyway (was already polling double digits behind most of his possible opposition). Asking for his resignation is... simply put... stupid. It's actually good for republicans for Reid to be there right now!

As far as hypocrisy, while I see your point in most of those instances, this particular one may not apples to apples be one of those examples. Republicans didn't exactly stand behind Lott. They threw him under the bus! But then again, as I said earlier, the statements themselves are not apples to apples... but the allegations behind what some claim the statement to represent in this case, would actually be pretty consistent (although misleading and inaccurate).

The other hypocrisy you mention, while unrelated, I will try to address now.

Gays: Yes, can be perceived as hypocrisy. But I've never passed judgment on the lifestyle be a person left or right. Not my place. And I can see how one's personal lifestyle may not represent voting records (nor should it). I am not extremely knowledgeable on this particular topic in regards to voting... but let's say for example I am in Congress, and I am gay (closeted or not) and represent a state where the majority of people do not support gay marriage. It would be wrong for me to ignore my represented state's wishes and vote along with my own personal belief. I'm not there to push my personal agenda, I'm there to represent my people. Just my thought on how the system is supposed to work, though I do definitely understand that is not usually the case, and may well not be in this instance either.

Conservatism: Hypocritical for anyone in Washington over the last few decades to claim any portion of being conservative. In fact, I'm tired of that term still, even loosely, being associated with Republicans. The party has become as progressive as anyone else, and has grown government as much as anyone else, and spent just a recklessly as anyone else. IMO, you are quite correct that it is an entirely false premise for the party to label themselves as being conservative.

God's party: I can't remember the exact quote, but something like "if you ever want to look like a fool, just pretend you know what it is God has planned for you". I think it is wrong for politicians to use God in bids for election or agenda pushing. Expressing your beliefs and your own personal thoughts in your spirituality is just fine IMO (gives insight into who you are)... but proclaiming to have been sent by God, or that God wants this, etc. is way too far... because fact is nobody knows. I won't go into detail on my thoughts right now, but in a nutshell I think this type of behavior is as damaging to God/religion in this country as what anti-religious groups could ever do. IMHO, if God sent someone to (insert whatever here), then they need not proclaim it. To do so, is exploitation.

Think that about covers it, if I missed anything let me know.

Sack

hondo
01-13-2010, 07:34 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Just wondering, don't you think it's a bit ridiculous for all of these Republicans to be out there claiming a double standard, by comparing Reid's statements about Obama's pluses as a presidential contender, to the calls for Trent Lott to resign?

Trent Lott, was, after all, a proven racist, as was Thurmond, was he not?
</div></div>So you have no intent on just looking at what was said? Aren't the actual words spoken more important than a man's past? Thurmond renounced his racist past. You never even renounced your slander against Obama as a drug abuser. Should we now not believe a single word you say about Obama because in the past you called him a drug addict and said you would never vote for him?

eg8r </div></div>

Here we agree. LWW has attacked me and my state for years because we support Byrd and he was in the Klan briefly 70 years ago and has apologized repeatedly for it.

hondo
01-13-2010, 07:36 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Just wondering, don't you think it's a bit ridiculous for all of these Republicans to be out there claiming a double standard, by comparing Reid's statements about Obama's pluses as a presidential contender, to the calls for Trent Lott to resign?

Trent Lott, was, after all, a proven racist, as was Thurmond, was he not?
</div></div>So you have no intent on just looking at what was said? Aren't the actual words spoken more important than a man's past? Thurmond renounced his racist past. You never even renounced your slander against Obama as a drug abuser. Should we now not believe a single word you say about Obama because in the past you called him a drug addict and said you would never vote for him?

eg8r </div></div>


Hey, LWW. Isn't this where you come in and say once a racist, always a racist?
OOPSY? I forgot, Dub. It's just Bryd that can't change.

Gayle in MD
01-13-2010, 08:57 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The "we" refers to those on this board. Since I post here and so do others that concludes the "we". I am not speaking for them, I am just asking if you think we should believe you based on your past actions.

<span style="color: #000066">Ed, you have spoken as THE spokesman for the forum, against me, many times. My actions here have always been to speak the truth, as I see it, from my perspective. </span>



You admitted to mis-judging Obama and my bet is that you mis-judge most people.

<span style="color: #000066">Unlike you, who never misjudges anyone?

When I think I have mis-judge someone, I admit it, and apologize. You are still on here bashing Valarie Plame, and refusing to admit that she was a covert secret agent, a proven documented fact, for heaven's sake. That isn't a case of you being hypocritical in even attempting accuse anyone else of mis-judging others, and hence trying to assert that their posts are no longer believable?

</span>


Your response to JohnnyD and then apology is proof and it has happened many times. Based on your posting style, I believe you have mis-judged Lott.

Lott, praised a racist, and said that this country wouldn't be dealing with all the problems, is this racist had been running the country from his views, which were in favor of segregation. Based on your posting style, I'd suspect that you don't even know anything about any of it, nor have you even bothered at all to research it.

EDIT: That should have been Chilled, not JohhnyD.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Since you alluded to your belief that you think it's your right to refuse to "Allow" me to post my opinions on this site, without adding your non stop insults, I suggest that you end this on-going accusation that I seek to remove the rights to free speech of others, liberty and the pursuit of personal happiness.

I have never taken a single action in my life, to interfere with the rights of others to make their own personal, private decisions.
</div></div>You asking me to quit responding to your posts certainly is an action from you trying to limit my freedom of speech.

<span style="color: #000066">Didn't you just write a response to Sack's other thread, pretending to be above contributing to the lack of respectful behavior around here?

You seem unable to understand that thoughts and emotions, are only just that. Requests for cooperation from you in the interest of a more reasoned intercourse between posters on here, and in the interest of a more peaceful, less antagonistic atmosphere here, are not the same thing as trying to limit freedom os speech, I am trying to lessen the ridiculous personal attacks, and think all of us should make some effort to do so, as a group. </span>

I will continue to respond to your posts of which I feel are inaccurate, intentionally or not.

eg8r </div></div>

I will continue to hope that you can learn to respond to differences of opinion, like an adult, and without all of your usual acidious insults. Do you ever take any responsbility for your actual behavior?

G.

Gayle in MD
01-13-2010, 09:22 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I said a bit of what I thought in the other thread, but did not go into great detail in my later remarks as I perhaps should have. So here goes:

No, it's not the same thing. Taken in the context of what was said, they are two entirely different statements. Reid's was a poor choice of words within the context of a complimentary statement.

<span style="color: #000066">True, yet Republicans are demanding his resignation, eventhough IMO, they are trying to insert racism, where it didn't actually exist. </span>


Lott's was a poor choice of words in a stupid statement to begin with. Clearly the intent is the discerning difference between the two.

<span style="color: #000066">Except that Lott's statement clearly indicated that he was in praise of the segregationist ideology upon which thrumond has campaigned. That is a huge difference, particularly when one reads Lott's actual statements, which were made at Thurmond's birthday party. </span>

Another difference in the end results is/will be own party support. Lott, while he would have surely suffered damage, could have survived had his own party backed him much like the Democrats are supporting Reid presently.

<span style="color: #000066">Lott's statement was racist, Reid's wasn't. To me, that is the difference. Lott's voting record, leaned toward racism, which is why the NAAP gives him an F. for his votes, and gives Reid and A. </span>


To Reid's credit, the instant this was 'out there' he got in front of it and apologized.

If you ask me, it would have been the wiser strategy for republicans to take the high road in this instance and not say a word. Barring something major happening, Reid is out this year anyway (was already polling double digits behind most of his possible opposition). Asking for his resignation is... simply put... stupid. It's actually good for republicans for Reid to be there right now!

<span style="color: #000066">Well, that's all speculation, but Republicans usually go after strength, not the weak, who are no threat. Reid has done a great job, which is why Republicans hate him so much, some thing with Pelosi. That's my opinion, of course. </span>

As far as hypocrisy, while I see your point in most of those instances, this particular one may not apples to apples be one of those examples. Republicans didn't exactly stand behind Lott. They threw him under the bus! But then again, as I said earlier, the statements themselves are not apples to apples... but the allegations behind what some claim the statement to represent in this case, would actually be pretty consistent (although misleading and inaccurate).

<span style="color: #000066">I'm afraid you lost me there, friend. what attracts me to this whole uproar over Republicans calling for Reid to resign, is that they are trying to suggest that this racist remark, supposedly by Reid, id being treated differently by the press, than if a Republican had done the same thing, and using Lott as an example of that.
No that to me, is sheer trickery. First of all, Reid's statements were not racist statements, and Lott's, clearly were, as he suggested that this country would be better off had it followed thurmond's racist attitudes, and approval of segregation. These are obviously tow entirely different kinds of statements. The whole proclaimation, "If a Republican made a racist statement"...blah blah blah...when we've heard about this thing non stop for days, is absurd, and Reid's statement was worlds away fro what Lott was saying...he was basically approving of segregation....thurmond, was clearly a segregationist. </span>

The other hypocrisy you mention, while unrelated, I will try to address now.

Gays: Yes, can be perceived as hypocrisy. But I've never passed judgment on the lifestyle be a person left or right. Not my place. And I can see how one's personal lifestyle may not represent voting records (nor should it). I am not extremely knowledgeable on this particular topic in regards to voting... but let's say for example I am in Congress, and I am gay (closeted or not) and represent a state where the majority of people do not support gay marriage. It would be wrong for me to ignore my represented state's wishes and vote along with my own personal belief. I'm not there to push my personal agenda, I'm there to represent my people.

<span style="color: #000066">Well, I can't agree with that, Sack, because our representatives take an oath to preserve and protect the Constitution of the United States Of America, a document which clearly was designed to protect, and provide equal rights for all Americans, and the right to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness, and if one is gay, there is no oppotunity for happiness when societly imposes their religious beliefs into one's personal sex life, and decides to limit, or outlaw a person, for simply being who he is. So, times such as that, a Representative of any state in our country, must represent first, The Constitution, which is what he has sworn to do, he does not swear to represent the wishes of his constituents....but to preserve, protect and defend, the Constitution Of The United States of America, and ALL of it's people, not just the ones he likes...and not just the ones who belong to his same religious ideology. </span>

Just my thought on how the system is supposed to work, though I do definitely understand that is not usually the case, and may well not be in this instance either.

Conservatism: Hypocritical for anyone in Washington over the last few decades to claim any portion of being conservative. In fact, I'm tired of that term still, even loosely, being associated with Republicans. The party has become as progressive as anyone else, and has grown government as much as anyone else, and spent just a recklessly as anyone else. IMO, you are quite correct that it is an entirely false premise for the party to label themselves as being conservative.

God's party: I can't remember the exact quote, but something like "if you ever want to look like a fool, just pretend you know what it is God has planned for you". I think it is wrong for politicians to use God in bids for election or agenda pushing. Expressing your beliefs and your own personal thoughts in your spirituality is just fine IMO (gives insight into who you are)... but proclaiming to have been sent by God, or that God wants this, etc. is way too far... because fact is nobody knows. I won't go into detail on my thoughts right now, but in a nutshell I think this type of behavior is as damaging to God/religion in this country as what anti-religious groups could ever do. IMHO, if God sent someone to (insert whatever here), then they need not proclaim it. To do so, is exploitation.

Think that about covers it, if I missed anything let me know.

Sack </div></div>

<span style="color: #000066">We actually agree on nearly everything you write here, except, I do not think that the media favors Democratics over REpublicans at all, as Republicans are trying to claim, and in that effort, they have chosen to paint Reid's statement, as being the same case of racism as Lott's statement was, and that, to me, is a huge lie, and they know it...

However, It's been a real pleasure debating the issues with you, and I really mean that.

Thanks,
Gayle </span>

Gayle in MD
01-13-2010, 09:42 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Just wondering, don't you think it's a bit ridiculous for all of these Republicans to be out there claiming a double standard, by comparing Reid's statements about Obama's pluses as a presidential contender, to the calls for Trent Lott to resign?

Trent Lott, was, after all, a proven racist, as was Thurmond, was he not?
</div></div>So you have no intent on just looking at what was said? Aren't the actual words spoken more important than a man's past? Thurmond renounced his racist past. You never even renounced your slander against Obama as a drug abuser. Should we now not believe a single word you say about Obama because in the past you called him a drug addict and said you would never vote for him?

eg8r </div></div>


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Sack you are right and I admit I have played my part also. In fact like yourself I have mentioned personal things and they to were used as an attempt to insult by the very same "mouth in md". I tried a couple times to tone it down but the few (not counting qtip he is innocent) just keep egging it on and driving me down to their level. As always I strive to do better.

eg8r &lt;~~~doesn't do New Years resolutions </div></div>


<span style="color: #000066">Eg,
Tell me, how the hell could you write this BS, and then turn around and accuse anybody else on here of being beyond any crediblity?

As always you will strive to do better? Better at what, refusing to admit to the facts, attacking people for their opinions? Calling others senile? Insisting they have no value in life, as you write your nasty version of what their marriages are about? How their husband thinks and feels? Incredible!

Where do you get off, you of all people on this forum, writing these laughable lies...</span>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In fact like yourself I have mentioned personal things and they to were used as an attempt to insult by the very same "mouth in md". I tried a couple times to tone it down but the few (not counting qtip he is innocent) just keep egging it on and driving me down to their level. As always I strive to do better.
</div></div>
<span style="color: #000066">
and then accusing other people of hypocracy???? You think it's nice of you to call Q., Q-tip. You think that that's funny? I don't...

You think you can sign onto this forum, insult people left and right, and it's all good, right, because it's funny to you. Well, it isn't funny to me. In fact, it's sad, mean, and small.

You are so far from "As always, I will strive to do better" that making such a statement is within the rhelm of the twilight zone.

Unbelievable. The two most vicious attackers, whining over how I treat them, LMAO! Out of touch! You guys can dish it out, non stop, then when I give you back some of your own nasty medicine, Wha wha wha, Oh Mr. Moderator...she's attacking me, /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif</span> /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif

eg8r
01-13-2010, 10:22 AM
Please let me know when I have gone to the moderator about you? Talk about out of touch? You are losing it.

eg8r

eg8r
01-13-2010, 10:29 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You are still on here bashing Valarie Plame, and refusing to admit that she was a covert secret agent, a proven documented fact, for heaven's sake.</div></div>I get a serious laugh every time you mention this. You really have gone nuts. I don't know about when you were younger but at this point in your life you must be the most gullible person I have ever met in my life. The secretary was a nobody. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I will continue to hope that you can learn to respond to differences of opinion, like an adult, and without all of your usual acidious insults. Do you ever take any responsbility for your actual behavior?

</div></div>Oh I understand opinion just fine. Every time you open your mouth and state something is "a fact" I know for a positive it is just your opinion.

As far as me taking responsibility for my behavior, didn't you bother to read the quote of mine that you are using. I was sorry I allow you to keep dragging me down to your level and as always I strive to be better. When will you take responsibility for yours?

eg8r

Gayle in MD
01-13-2010, 10:45 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You are still on here bashing Valarie Plame, and refusing to admit that she was a covert secret agent, a proven documented fact, for heaven's sake.</div></div>I get a serious laugh every time you mention this. You really have gone nuts. I don't know about when you were younger but at this point in your life you must be the most gullible person I have ever met in my life. The secretary was a nobody. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I will continue to hope that you can learn to respond to differences of opinion, like an adult, and without all of your usual acidious insults. Do you ever take any responsbility for your actual behavior?

</div></div>Oh I understand opinion just fine. Every time you open your mouth and state something is "a fact" I know for a positive it is just your opinion.

As far as me taking responsibility for my behavior, didn't you bother to read the quote of mine that you are using. I was sorry I allow you to keep dragging me down to your level and as always I strive to be better. When will you take responsibility for yours?

eg8r </div></div>

Fine, Eg, I'll leave you, as usual, wallowing in the mud, where you love to remain..You really are a sicko.

Back to ignoring your sicko posts...

G.