On 3/19/2012 12:33 PM, George Plimpton wrote:

There sure are. See right below, starting "but you insisted..."


but you insisted it was correct for over a dozen
posts. You ****ed up, then you insisted your ****-up was right,
when it
wasn't.

No way did I insist it was correct for a dozen posts.

You did.

Show them.



What I said was it didn't matter if it was listed under Elizabeth
Dole's
name or Bob's.

It does matter. At the very least, it shows that *as usual*, you're
sloppy and get details wrong.

The only person it matters to is you. So that tells you how important it
is. Only one person gives a ****. A petty little person at that.


You can characterize it any way you want to.

I characterize it as your characteristic slovenliness and carelessness
with fact, proving you don't have the sharp mind you claim.

That's fine with me. I reject your namby pamby, persnicketyness. Only a
**** would act like that. You're like the Saturday Night Live "Church
Lady". Trivial pursuit is all you can do.


Was Bob Dole in the senate for decades?

Yep.


Yes. Did he make millions *while* in the senate? Yes.

No. No, you have no evidence that the did, and in fact he didn't.

Yes, there is evidence of that.

You can't cite any, of course. Your "book" is ****. All it says is that
Dole made money. It doesn't say when.

Yes it does. It says he made a lot of money before the book was written
and that was in 1995. So you ****ed up again, moron. The book calling
him a senator for sale was about what he was doing while he was in the
senate. So we do know when.

You would really know when if you read the book. It's not my book
either. One of his long time aides wrote it years ago. It's all about
his cashing in on his position, WHILE AS A SITTING SENATOR!!! So face
it, you are the one who blew it on a big issue and not on whether you
said him or her. I make trivial, meaningless mistakes and you get major
things completely wrong. And you have the balls to call me a **** up?
Check the mirror.


I haven't read the book.

I know that.


Is he a rich senator? Yes.

No. He's a rich *ex*-senator, you ****ing clown.

The title of senator is held for life.

He's an ex-senator.

He'll always be "senator" Dole.


If you ever see him on TV he will be addressed as "Senator Dole".

He's an ex-senator.

That will always be "senator" Dole.


To the best of your knowledge, he earned his "wealth" after he left the
Senate.

My information is that he was making a lot of money from his position in
the senate for decades. He may have made even more afterwords but I
don't care about that. Once he's out of the senate he's free to do
whatever he likes. When he makes himself rich from his connections and
advantages as a senator that's what is unethical, and wrong. There is
plenty of evidence that shows he did plenty to get financial advantages
as a senator. After all there's even a whole book telling about it. So
how many other senators can say that?


You ****ed up - *again*. This is just one more in a long string of
them.
You have a well-deserved reputation as a ****-up.

Do not. Your making up lies doesn't make it true either.

Only if you count irrelevant, immaterial, and trivial things.

No. You have a general and well-deserved reputation for slovenliness and
utter disregard for accuracy.

Total hogwash, which, as usual, you have no way of proving.

Only if you make a big deal out of the smallest things you can find.

I make a big deal of your usual slovenliness and inattention to detail.

No you don't.

Yes, I sure do.

Acting like an overscrupulous, nit picking, Church Lady, is what you do.
What you do not do is come up with any rational arguments backed up with
facts and citations to show my positions on any issue are wrong. So keep
up the childish nitpicking all you want. Let me know when you are ready
to try to make a real argument about some issue. As soon as you learn
enough about politics maybe you can start there. But with your level of
ignorance on all things political it will be a long time before you're
ready for something like that.

Hawke