On 3/20/2012 3:02 PM, Hawke wrote:
On 3/20/2012 12:37 PM, George Plimpton wrote:

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

You did.

Show them.

...says the slovenly fainéant who can never be bothered to post a
citation for anything.

So then our resident pimp does the same thing he accuses me of.

You did it in a dozen posts.


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.

Just like you do.

Nope.


Like when you said I ****ed up a dozen posts.

You've ****ed up in *dozens* of post. The figure "a dozen" was just the
reasonable estimate for the number of times you ****ed up and said Bob
Dole was in the Senate in 2008.



The only person it matters to is you.

It matters to most people. I don't speak "for" anyone else, but I know
I'm saying the same thing that others have said.

Dumb ****, you just wrote it matters to most people.

Right.


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.

Good.

You're full of opinions.

Facts.


Only a **** would act like that.

Your elderly infirm mother must be so proud of you.

You have no idea.

Did she teach you that kind of language?


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.

How the **** would you know? You didn't read it, ****stain.

I perused it.

You didn't read it.


It says he made a lot of money before the book was written
and that was in 1995.

No, it doesn't. You wouldn't know - you didn't read it.

The accusations about Dole were during his time in the senate so that is
the time he is alleged to have cashed in.

The accusations were made by a disgruntled malcontent whom Dole fired
more than 15 years before the book was written.


There is no suggestion in it that Dole personally benefited.


You would really know when if you read the book.

*You* try reading it, ****wit.

The problem is you're so damn dumb you think I'm like you and that the
only thing I know about Bob Dole is from one book I've only looked at
very casually. The truth is

The truth is, the only thing you know supporting your notion that Dole
"cashed in" as a senator is the title of a book. That's it; no more.


I know all kinds of things about Bob Dole
from when he was in the senate.

No, you don't.


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.

He's an ex-senator. Calling him "Senator" is a term of respect. He isn't
a senator, and hasn't been for over a 15 years.

Now we're getting into your domain, trivial and insignificant. He's a
senator for as long as he lives.

Nope. He is referred to by the honorific "Senator", but he is not *a*
senator. Look up honorific. I know you don't know what it means.



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

He's an ex-senator.

That will

He's an ex-senator.

But he's still senator Dole

He's not a senator.


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.

You don't have one ****ing shred of "information".

Yes I do.

No, you don't. Zero.



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.

You do.

Don't.


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,

You have a reputation for that, too.


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

"Overscrupulous"? First, it's not a word. Second, it figures that a
thoroughly unscrupulous political dilettante like you would denigrate
the idea of scruples.


Not a word, huh?

Nope - not a word.



I wouldn't denigrate the word scruples

You don't have any. You denigrate the word if you use it.