|
Knee Jerk
On Sep 22, 6:25*pm, Tom Watson wrote:
On Tue, 22 Sep 2009 16:52:04 -0500, Tim Daneliuk wrote: Hey Buttercup, go read the first paragraph of his response to me and get back to me on just who was mean here first. I have decided to fight fire with fire. *This means you and the rest of pottymouths better hunker down - I have a way more interesting vocabulary than you do. *Oh ... while it is never intended, a person of reason is always "talking down" to people that express themselves irrationally... If you listen closely, you can hear the soft clicking of the steel balls as he rolls them over and over again in his hand... Regards, Tom Watsonhttp://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/ I need to watch that movie again. There might be some tips. |
Knee Jerk
On Sep 22, 7:02*pm, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
a lot of weak ****. That's it? A 'mirror' line is fighting fire with fire? But I do hear "click, click" |
Knee Jerk
Tim Daneliuk
Reminds me of the advice my mother gave me a long time ago: "Son, if you are going to mess with chicken ****, you are bound to get some on you." Even with a kill file, it's tough to keep clean. Lew |
Knee Jerk
Robatoy wrote:
On Sep 22, 11:54 am, Tim Daneliuk wrote: [snipped more of Tim's demonic soul-less banter] Discussing ANYthing with you impossible as you have no ability to see anything through anyone else's eyes. Translation: Robocop is too dumb to debate the issues with Tim. Tim's view is the only view. Period. Tims view is Tims view. I guess you expect him to suffer your view? You are a very disturbed creature, Tim. Translation: You are too dumb to argue or shut up, so you might as well mount a meaningless attack. You can bend, twist, and flap in any direction you want, tossing up straw-men by the truckload, but for you to accuse anybody of misdirection is the best laugh I had all day. Last I heard Tim was too ridged in his beliefs. You fools can't seem to keep your act straight. Your arguments cannot follow a straight line. Agree with him or not, he is undeniably consistent in his line of thought. You may be dumb as dirt, but surely not so dumb as all that. You have to keep taking detours to your stock-piles of hurtful vitriol in order to feel like you are making a case for yourself. Blah, blah blah. Your venomous words are way more disgusting than a simple '**** you' would ever be. You get all offended by people using language THEIR way... Wrong as usual. He doesn't seem to get offended by brainless posts devoid of any meaningful arguments other than personal attacks and meaningless depreciatory remarks. yet you continue to skewer people with YOUR vile disgusting language. Do you honestly think you have advantage by not using curse words? Well he certainly has a much better handle on the English language than you, or Upscale have demonstrated. Is that all you can hide behind?.."oh nooooo Rob cussed at meeeeeee...MOMMYYYYYYYYYYYYYY" You're babbling yet again... Grow the **** up, asshole. Yeah, that should straighten his ass out... And stop trying to baffle people with your bull****, straw-men and out-right lies. Lies? Lies? I love when lies are exposed. What lies specifically are you speaking, or were you just practicing your typical meaningless, empty attacks? There... that is English...now go whine somewhere else, Hypocrite is the word jumps into my head here.... A whole ****ing page of whiny attacks and then you accuse him of whining? No, hypocrite is too nice, ballsy might work... No, asshole, yeah, that fits quite nicely. Now apologize to Upscale or I'll ride your ass like a new bride. That should scare the hell out of him... Ride cowboy Ride! -- Jack Using FREE News Server: http://www.eternal-september.org/ http://jbstein.com |
Knee Jerk
Robatoy wrote:
On Sep 22, 11:15 am, Jack Stein wrote: You seem to see what you want to see! THIS is why I keep coming back for more. The purest of hilarities. You are funny, Jack. WAY funnier than you know. I wasn't talking to you, you misguided douche-nozzle! And not very bright. Obviously, else I wouldn't be so amused by your ineptness! -- Jack Using FREE News Server: http://www.eternal-september.org/ http://jbstein.com |
Knee Jerk
On Sep 23, 12:05*am, Jack Stein wrote:
Robatoy wrote: On Sep 22, 11:15 am, Jack Stein wrote: You seem to see what you want to see! THIS is why I keep coming back for more. The purest of hilarities. You are funny, Jack. WAY funnier than you know. I wasn't talking to you, you misguided douche-nozzle! And not very bright. Obviously, else I wouldn't be so amused by your ineptness! -- Jack Using FREE News Server:http://www.eternal-september.org/http://jbstein.com That label 'douche nozzle' is really bothering you isn't? |
Knee Jerk
"Robatoy" wrote in message I suspect that most of them are actively living out their lives as our current crop of politicians. One Americanadian (Ignatieff) is trying to become PM. I'm no Harper fan, but IggyPop is no alternative. I agree. I've never be remotely interest in the Conservatives, but the 'leaders' of the Liberals for the past several years have been lacking in everything I'd consider necessary to be a leader of our country. |
Knee Jerk
"Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message No, they are first responders entrenched in the system for decades. Riiiggghhht!!!! Notice when it comes to you giving examples in your life of how you contribute, you always come up with extreme examples of what your relatives are or do. When called about being negative about blacks, you claim to not only have a black relative, but one that was blacker than most. When questioned on charity, you claimed to make many charitable contributions ~ anonymously, the epitome of giving. When it's suggested that your relatives are union trouble makers in the medical industry, you respond with the thought that they're first responders ~ emergency responders. Do you see how all that sounds? It tells us that you're full of bull**** because you continually counter with the best in humanity (your relatives) while you contribute nothing and exist solely to whine and complain all day without giving a shred of consideration to anybody. Daneliuk, you are full of ****. I know it, everybody else knows it. I suspect (although I could be wrong) even Doug Miller knows it, but he supports you just to hassle me. You feel free to question my integrity by calling me evil and a thief solely based on the fact that I benefit from country wide universal health care. I know it's all you have. And, if that's the best form of attack you can muster with your screwed up logic, then you stick with that. But, we both know what's really true. I don't have to conjure up extreme examples of contributions by relatives to defend myself. Compared to me, there's nothing you can offer to bolster yourself. |
Knee Jerk
"Jack Stein" wrote in message Yes, that is the only way to go. Most ARE woodworkers though, but here is a short list to get him started: Only problem is that most everybody gets drawn into some completely off topic political or gun or medical or other non woodworking topic. Yet, it only seems to be you with your extremely limited intelligence that suggests filtering everybody. I wonder why that is? |
Knee Jerk
"Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message Hey Buttercup, go read the first paragraph of his response to me and get back to me on just who was mean here first. In actuality, it's always you who has made the first derogatory comments ~ in every discussion whatever the nature. Right from the first time we were discussing universal health care some years before anything 'mean' was said, you decided to come out with the fact that I was evil and a thief for accepting universal health care. This is the internet. It's all online, even what was said years before. Tell me I'm wrong Tim. Show me where you were attacked first. Tell me you're not a hypocrite of the highest degree. Castigate me as much as you want, but despite the difficulties I have physically, my memory is excellent. |
Knee Jerk
"Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message No. To disagree by throwing personal shots is irrational ... and a sign that there is no real discussion is possible. Bull****! You throw personal insults all the time and try to hide them under the protection of a 'no profanity' cloud. As time goes on you sink deeper and deeper into a lying, deceptive shroud in a feeble attempt to hide your deficiencies. |
Knee Jerk
Upscale wrote:
This is the internet. It's all online, even what was said years before. Tell me I'm wrong Tim. Show me where you were attacked first. Tell me you're not a hypocrite of the highest degree. Castigate me as much as you want, but despite the difficulties I have physically, my memory is excellent. Two observations: 1. Hypocrisy is not intrinsically bad; 95% of the nation's gynecologists are men. 2. You can't really criticize a progressive for profanity - it's what they do. A recent study of mainstream blogs found that the comments section of liberal blogs contained eighteen times the number of naughty words compared to conservative sites. For example, "Lucianne.com" has virtually zero profanity whereas "dailykos.com" contains a high percentage of "the seven forbidden words." I suspect, but can't prove, the latter is because liberals argue from an emotional, child-like, ego state rather than a dispassionate, adult position. An emotional argument often involves an anecdotal example whereas an adult discourse usually involves aggregates of a population ("one child becomes Autistic due to measles vaccine" vs. "thousands don't die because they don't contract the disease"). |
Knee Jerk
"HeyBub" wrote in message 1. Hypocrisy is not intrinsically bad; 95% of the nation's gynecologists are men. I've seen that statement before, but for the life of me, I don't see how it relates to being a hypocrite. With some things, I'm extraordinarily dumb. Guess this is one of them. |
Knee Jerk
Upscale wrote:
Daneliuk, you are full of ****. I know it, everybody else knows it. I suspect (although I could be wrong) even Doug Miller knows it, but he supports you just to hassle me. I'm not a liberal *or* a conservative, and I'm not taking anyone's "side" here, but I take offense to anyone who presumes to speak for "everybody else". My guess is that the majority of participants in this group are silent unless the discussion is on-topic. To hear you (and others) loudly assume that "everyone" shares your view when they in fact haven't said a word, well frankly it just ****es me off. -- "Our beer goes through thousands of quality Czechs every day." (From a Shiner Bock billboard I saw in Austin some years ago) To reply, eat the taco. http://www.flickr.com/photos/bbqboyee/ |
Knee Jerk
On Sep 23, 8:04*am, "HeyBub" wrote:
[snipped stuff] I'd rather take a verbal "**** off" in the face, than a knife in my back Right-Wing-Stein style.. |
Knee Jerk
"Steve Turner" wrote in message (and others) loudly assume that "everyone" shares your view when they in fact haven't said a word, well frankly it just ****es me off. Sure, you're right that respect. I'm putting words in your mouth when you haven't said anything. For that I'll apologize. Let me rephrase. A significant amount of people in involved in the thread appear to support much of my mindset. I hope that meets with your approval. :) |
Knee Jerk
Upscale wrote:
"Steve Turner" wrote in message (and others) loudly assume that "everyone" shares your view when they in fact haven't said a word, well frankly it just ****es me off. Sure, you're right that respect. I'm putting words in your mouth when you haven't said anything. For that I'll apologize. Let me rephrase. A significant amount of people in involved in the thread appear to support much of my mindset. I hope that meets with your approval. :) Thank you. :-) -- Free bad advice available here. To reply, eat the taco. http://www.flickr.com/photos/bbqboyee/ |
Knee Jerk
Robatoy wrote:
That label 'douche nozzle' is really bothering you isn't? Yeah, it's killing me! Your mastery of words is overwhelming... -- Jack Got Change: Oak trees ======= Acorns! http://jbstein.com |
Knee Jerk
Upscale wrote:
"Jack Stein" wrote in message Yes, that is the only way to go. Most ARE woodworkers though, but here is a short list to get him started: Only problem is that most everybody gets drawn into some completely off topic political or gun or medical or other non woodworking topic. Yet, it only seems to be you with your extremely limited intelligence that suggests filtering everybody. I wonder why that is? I never suggested any such thing. I merely provided a short list of folks that post off topic when someone else suggested filtering names rather than subjects. I may have correctly noted that filtering names would be much easier than filtering subjects. -- Jack Got Change: Van Guard ====== Van Jones! http://jbstein.com |
Knee Jerk
YAAFA
|
Knee Jerk
HeyBub wrote:
2. You can't really criticize a progressive for profanity - it's what they do. **** all socialists! Where did this "progressive" **** come from anyway? "Progressive" implies moving forward, making things better. This is like 180° opposite of the people being described. Socialist is the correct word, and "progressive" doesn't come close to describing power hungry, anti-individual, anti-freedom, left wing, socialists... A recent study of mainstream blogs found that the comments section of liberal blogs contained eighteen times the number of naughty words compared to conservative sites. For example, "Lucianne.com" has virtually zero profanity whereas "dailykos.com" contains a high percentage of "the seven forbidden words." I suspect, but can't prove, the latter is because liberals argue from an emotional, child-like, ego state rather than a dispassionate, adult position. I use expletives to keep in touch with my feminine side and to increase the likelihood those left wing, socialist *******s will comprehend whats being said... -- Jack Using FREE News Server: http://www.eternal-september.org/ http://jbstein.com |
Knee Jerk
Robatoy wrote:
I'd rather take a verbal "**** off" in the face, than a knife in my back Right-Wing-Stein style.. Thanks for the enlightenment. I'm sure I'm not the only one sitting on the edge of my chair wondering how you felt about that very thing... -- Jack Got Change: The Individual ===== The Collective! http://jbstein.com |
Knee Jerk
"Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message In actuality, it's always you who has made the first derogatory comments ~ in every discussion whatever the nature. Right from the first time we were discussing universal health care some years before anything 'mean' was said, you decided to come out with the fact that I was evil and a thief for accepting universal health care. (all the bull**** snipped) As usual, you don't bother to reply to the question at hand and launch into some unrelated rhetoric. Just between you and me, did you or did you not start with the accusations and recriminations. Answer the question dweeb. |
Knee Jerk
Jack Stein wrote:
Upscale wrote: "Jack Stein" wrote in message Yes, that is the only way to go. Most ARE woodworkers though, but here is a short list to get him started: Only problem is that most everybody gets drawn into some completely off topic political or gun or medical or other non woodworking topic. Yet, it only seems to be you with your extremely limited intelligence that suggests filtering everybody. I wonder why that is? I never suggested any such thing. I merely provided a short list of folks that post off topic when someone else suggested filtering names rather than subjects. I may have correctly noted that filtering names would be much easier than filtering subjects. Then your list may need some tuning. I have NEVER started an off-topic conversation (except maybe a humorous one or two and so labeled). On the other hand, I don't let some things go unchallenged either. |
Knee Jerk
Upscale wrote:
"HeyBub" wrote in message 1. Hypocrisy is not intrinsically bad; 95% of the nation's gynecologists are men. I've seen that statement before, but for the life of me, I don't see how it relates to being a hypocrite. With some things, I'm extraordinarily dumb. Guess this is one of them. Point is, it's okay to admonish someone about what they should do even though you, yourself, can't or won't do it. Like teachers. |
Knee Jerk
Robatoy wrote:
On Sep 23, 8:04 am, "HeyBub" wrote: [snipped stuff] I'd rather take a verbal "**** off" in the face, than a knife in my back Right-Wing-Stein style.. But you won't get a "**** off" from a right-winger. There are two reasons why this won't happen: 1. We don't often use profanity, and 2. As you correctly point out, we have no inhibition against killing our enemies. When Saul told David to bring back the foreskins of a hundred Phillistines as a bride-price, David got all excited and started figuring how many men he would need to subdue each Phillistine (because he wasn't counting on voluntary compliance) and how long it would take, considering he would have to sharpen his knife between events, and so on, Saul's emissary got all exasperated: "David, David," he said, "You don't understand! Saul want you to KILL the Phillistines, not CONVERT them! Saul doesn't care if you bring back the whole prick!" We have ways of detecting modern-day Phillistines: Usually it involves the spontaneous declaration of "**** off." |
Knee Jerk
Jack Stein wrote:
HeyBub wrote: 2. You can't really criticize a progressive for profanity - it's what they do. **** all socialists! Where did this "progressive" **** come from anyway? "Progressive" implies moving forward, making things better. This is like 180° opposite of the people being described. Socialist is the correct word, and "progressive" doesn't come close to describing power hungry, anti-individual, anti-freedom, left wing, socialists... A recent study of mainstream blogs found that the comments section of liberal blogs contained eighteen times the number of naughty words compared to conservative sites. For example, "Lucianne.com" has virtually zero profanity whereas "dailykos.com" contains a high percentage of "the seven forbidden words." I suspect, but can't prove, the latter is because liberals argue from an emotional, child-like, ego state rather than a dispassionate, adult position. I use expletives to keep in touch with my feminine side and to increase the likelihood those left wing, socialist *******s will comprehend whats being said... Well, there's that. To teach, you have to speak in a language that the child understands. That's why the liberals are going nuts over the "You lie!" shout-out and the Tea Party crowds and the "Help me set up a child-prostitution bordello so I can run for Congress" methodologies. These, they understand. |
Knee Jerk
Robatoy wrote:
As your application of the 'bull**** baffles brains' method is well known now, it cannot be dealt with by a rational person. Your elementary school debate tactics are as painfully transparent as Stein's ****ed-through panties. He forgets to take them down before he sits down to pee. Seeing that you have nothing else to offer, either in constructive or creative manner, I will now concentrate on getting Stein in a lather. He's a lot of fun. Not stale like you, Tim. I feel left out. Sniff. |
Knee Jerk
"HeyBub" writes:
DGDevin wrote: What cracks me up is folks upset at the notion of some govt. bureaucrat telling them which sort of health care they'll be allowed to have as if the same damn thing doesn't happen today with insurance company bureaucrats. I had an MRI awhile back and the hospital wouldn't give me an appointment until they'd heard from the insurance company. Ditto with appointments with specialists and so on, it all requires approval from some guy in a cubicle a thousand miles away. [...] Here's the difference: If you don't like the way your insurance company treats you - and your observation tends to imply that direction - you're free to change insurance companies! No, you're not. First, many employers only offer one choice. Second, non-employer sponsored plans will cost the employee much, much more than the employer sponsored plan; and the employee may not be able to afford it (note that the current figure for the average family employer plan is $13k per year between the employer and employee for premiums). scott |
Knee Jerk
"Scott Lurndal" wrote in message .. . "HeyBub" writes: DGDevin wrote: What cracks me up is folks upset at the notion of some govt. bureaucrat telling them which sort of health care they'll be allowed to have as if the same damn thing doesn't happen today with insurance company bureaucrats. I had an MRI awhile back and the hospital wouldn't give me an appointment until they'd heard from the insurance company. Ditto with appointments with specialists and so on, it all requires approval from some guy in a cubicle a thousand miles away. [...] Here's the difference: If you don't like the way your insurance company treats you - and your observation tends to imply that direction - you're free to change insurance companies! No, you're not. First, many employers only offer one choice. Second, non-employer sponsored plans will cost the employee much, much more than the employer sponsored plan; and the employee may not be able to afford it (note that the current figure for the average family employer plan is $13k per year between the employer and employee for premiums). scott one changes insurance companies by changing employers, if it's that important to the person. if it's a government 'insurance' company, i would suppose one would have to emmigrate to change. no one said either would be easy or have drawbacks. |
Knee Jerk
"DGDevin" writes:
HeyBub wrote: DGDevin wrote: What cracks me up is folks upset at the notion of some govt. bureaucrat telling them which sort of health care they'll be allowed to have as if the same damn thing doesn't happen today with insurance company bureaucrats. I had an MRI awhile back and the hospital wouldn't give me an appointment until they'd heard from the insurance company. Ditto with appointments with specialists and so on, it all requires approval from some guy in a cubicle a thousand miles away. [...] Here's the difference: If you don't like the way your insurance company treats you - and your observation tends to imply that direction - you're free to change insurance companies! Horsecrap. My wife and I have employer-provided insurance, but if we left that coverage I'd be one of those "pre-existing condition" cases, in other words, **** out of luck. There was a documentary on PBS not long ago that mentioned the CEO of Kaiser Permanente is in the same boat--uninsurable outside company coverage. Got any facile advice on what people should do when in that situation, any easy slogans? In their mind, you should just change employers. People like Tim, and Robots like HeyBub (who is too ashamed of his positions to post with his real name) think people are just resources that get slotted in wherever they are needed; whereas most people actually get jobs that they _like_, and resent being reslotted for whatever reason or being treated as interchangable parts in some vast machine. It's the old Repubs favor the freedom of business to do whatever they want, and Dems favor the freedom of individuals to do whatever they want. scott |
Knee Jerk
Scott Lurndal wrote:
In their mind, you should just change employers. People like Tim, and Robots like HeyBub (who is too ashamed of his positions to post with his real name) think people are just resources that get slotted in wherever they are needed; whereas most people actually get jobs that they _like_, and resent being reslotted for whatever reason or being treated as interchangable parts in some vast machine. It's the old Repubs favor the freedom of business to do whatever they want, and Dems favor the freedom of individuals to do whatever they want. Some observations: 1. I don't post with my real name because I change it often. The email address is, however, real. If you send a polite request, I'll be pleased to provide the name I'm using this week. 2. "Old Repubs" favor business being able to contract with a willing seller of labor and conditions of work for an agreed on wage. 3. I agree that Dems favor freedom of individuals to do CERTAIN things (smoke dope, marry the same sex, burn the flag, etc.) but they are, by no means, libertarians. For example, most liberals favor a woman using a name other than her real one (which is okay by me inasmuch as she's taking the name of TWO men instead of the traditional one). Oops. |
Knee Jerk
Scott Lurndal wrote:
Here's the difference: If you don't like the way your insurance company treats you - and your observation tends to imply that direction - you're free to change insurance companies! No, you're not. First, many employers only offer one choice. Second, non-employer sponsored plans will cost the employee much, much more than the employer sponsored plan; and the employee may not be able to afford it (note that the current figure for the average family employer plan is $13k per year between the employer and employee for premiums). Yes you are. If you don't like the POS you're driving, you can buy another car. The difference between a used Pinto and a new Lamborghini is one of price, not the availability of the choice. You can even self-insure! |
Knee Jerk
Scott Lurndal wrote:
"HeyBub" writes: DGDevin wrote: What cracks me up is folks upset at the notion of some govt. bureaucrat telling them which sort of health care they'll be allowed to have as if the same damn thing doesn't happen today with insurance company bureaucrats. I had an MRI awhile back and the hospital wouldn't give me an appointment until they'd heard from the insurance company. Ditto with appointments with specialists and so on, it all requires approval from some guy in a cubicle a thousand miles away. [...] Here's the difference: If you don't like the way your insurance company treats you - and your observation tends to imply that direction - you're free to change insurance companies! No, you're not. First, many employers only offer one choice. Second, non-employer sponsored plans will cost the employee much, much more than the employer sponsored plan; and the employee may not be able to afford it (note that the current figure for the average family employer plan is $13k per year between the employer and employee for premiums). scott If the company is providing the insurance then it belongs to the company and covers you. The same as any company policy, you live with it or look elsewhere. If you don't like the way the company is being run then, for many reasons, it is best if you look elsewhere. Because if you are right and it it is being badly run, then you may be out of work if you stay. I read some where that a recent graduate will have 6 jobs in the next 20 years. |
Knee Jerk
|
Knee Jerk
In article , "Upscale" wrote:
Daneliuk, you are full of ****. I know it, everybody else knows it. I suspect (although I could be wrong) even Doug Miller knows it, but he supports you just to hassle me. You certainly have an active imagination. I'm not going to allow you to drag me into this argument, though. |
Knee Jerk
|
Knee Jerk
"HeyBub" wrote in message exasperated: "David, David," he said, "You don't understand! Saul want you to KILL the Phillistines, not CONVERT them! Saul doesn't care if you bring back the whole prick!" Har! Now that's funny! |
Knee Jerk
"Doug Miller" wrote in message You certainly have an active imagination. I'm not going to allow you to drag me into this argument, though. Maybe, but it makes life interesting. However, if you want to go on record as being a supporter of Daneliuk, don't let me stand in your way. Personally, I don't like trying to make my way through the traffic on an eight lane highway. |
Knee Jerk
On Sat, 19 Sep 2009 13:12:34 -0500, Jack Stein
wrote: You would be better to killfile the posters, not the posts. A good start would be to filter everyone who posts in alt.home.repair. Regards, Tom Watson http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/ |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:59 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 DIYbanter