Question for Scottie Witlessmongrel

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

To His Magnificent Dumbness, duh-Scottie of San Diego:

Arnii Krooborg has proven himself the worst excuse for a self-described
"christian" in the history of Usenet. Of course, we all know the filthy
Beast is off his rails, as in not all there, looney-tunes, bazonkers, etc.
By contrast, you appear to be sane, albeit a bit slow. I would like to ask
you, as a lifelong and devout Lutheran, why you condone Bratzi's racist
rants.

By way of explaining your responsibility to deliver a rationalization for
your approval of RAO's little Nazi bedbug, I point out that you have adopted
the Krooborg's "debating trade" religion. Therefore we Smart Guys demand
that you conform to the least possible level of integrity in the performance
of the "debating trade". That means that you, like your hideous, misbegotten
idol Arnii Kroofeces, are required to utter frequent denunciations of every
opinion and every post of which you disapprove. Lacking such overt
denunciations, your allegiance to the "debating trade" indicates your
acceptance of such posts.

You've never been shy about tattling on me or Shhhh to Mistress Jenn. Nor
have you been reticent about launching volley after volley of impotent
puff-ball insults at John Atkinson, whose only crime, by the 'evidence'
you've cited, is drawing breath. Since you are not obviously insane, you
bear the obligation to denounce racism and other bigotry, else otherwise
your fealty to those antihuman values be presumed as dominant. Get on the
stick, you filthy mutt!

[Clyde Slick]

On 24 Noi, 17:35, George M. Middius > wrote:
> To His Magnificent Dumbness, duh-Scottie of San Diego:
>
> Arnii Krooborg has proven himself the worst excuse for a self-described
> "christian" in the history of Usenet. Of course, we all know the filthy
> Beast is off his rails, as in not all there, looney-tunes, bazonkers, etc.
> By contrast, you appear to be sane, albeit a bit slow. I would like to ask
> you, as a lifelong and devout Lutheran, why you condone Bratzi's racist
> rants.
>
> By way of explaining your responsibility to deliver a rationalization for
> your approval of RAO's little Nazi bedbug, I point out that you have adopted
> the Krooborg's "debating trade" religion. Therefore we Smart Guys demand
> that you conform to the least possible level of integrity in the performance
> of the "debating trade". That means that you, like your hideous, misbegotten
> idol Arnii Kroofeces, are required to utter frequent denunciations of every
> opinion and every post of which you disapprove. Lacking such overt
> denunciations, your allegiance to the "debating trade" indicates your
> acceptance of such posts.
>
> You've never been shy about tattling on me or Shhhh to Mistress Jenn. Nor
> have you been reticent about launching volley after volley of impotent
> puff-ball insults at John Atkinson, whose only crime, by the 'evidence'
> you've cited, is drawing breath. Since you are not obviously insane, you
> bear the obligation to denounce racism and other bigotry, else otherwise
> your fealty to those antihuman values be presumed as dominant. Get on the
> stick, you filthy mutt!

LOL!!!
That wasn't a question, that was a speech

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Clyde Slick said:

> > To His Magnificent Dumbness, duh-Scottie of San Diego:
> >
> > Arnii Krooborg has proven himself the worst excuse for a self-described
> > "christian" in the history of Usenet. Of course, we all know the filthy
> > Beast is off his rails, as in not all there, looney-tunes, bazonkers, etc.
> > By contrast, you appear to be sane, albeit a bit slow. I would like to ask
> > you, as a lifelong and devout Lutheran, why you condone Bratzi's racist
> > rants.
> >
> > By way of explaining your responsibility to deliver a rationalization for
> > your approval of RAO's little Nazi bedbug, I point out that you have adopted
> > the Krooborg's "debating trade" religion. Therefore we Smart Guys demand
> > that you conform to the least possible level of integrity in the performance
> > of the "debating trade". That means that you, like your hideous, misbegotten
> > idol Arnii Kroofeces, are required to utter frequent denunciations of every
> > opinion and every post of which you disapprove. Lacking such overt
> > denunciations, your allegiance to the "debating trade" indicates your
> > acceptance of such posts.
> >
> > You've never been shy about tattling on me or Shhhh to Mistress Jenn. Nor
> > have you been reticent about launching volley after volley of impotent
> > puff-ball insults at John Atkinson, whose only crime, by the 'evidence'
> > you've cited, is drawing breath. Since you are not obviously insane, you
> > bear the obligation to denounce racism and other bigotry, else otherwise
> > your fealty to those antihuman values be presumed as dominant. Get on the
> > stick, you filthy mutt!
>
> LOL!!!
> That wasn't a question, that was a speech

I believe in establishing a deep and detailed context for my probing
questions. There is a question inside that peroration, you know.

Also, your goofy "LOL!!!" suggests you're envious of Yapper's status as an
acolyte in the "debating trade". You might want to tune your laughter reflex
a bit.

[Clyde Slick]

On 24 Noi, 19:53, George M. Middius > wrote:
> Clyde Slick said:
>
>
>
>
>
> > > To His Magnificent Dumbness, duh-Scottie of San Diego:
>
> > > Arnii Krooborg has proven himself the worst excuse for a self-described
> > > "christian" in the history of Usenet. Of course, we all know the filthy
> > > Beast is off his rails, as in not all there, looney-tunes, bazonkers, etc.
> > > By contrast, you appear to be sane, albeit a bit slow. I would like to ask
> > > you, as a lifelong and devout Lutheran, why you condone Bratzi's racist
> > > rants.
>
> > > By way of explaining your responsibility to deliver a rationalization for
> > > your approval of RAO's little Nazi bedbug, I point out that you have adopted
> > > the Krooborg's "debating trade" religion. Therefore we Smart Guys demand
> > > that you conform to the least possible level of integrity in the performance
> > > of the "debating trade". That means that you, like your hideous, misbegotten
> > > idol Arnii Kroofeces, are required to utter frequent denunciations of every
> > > opinion and every post of which you disapprove. Lacking such overt
> > > denunciations, your allegiance to the "debating trade" indicates your
> > > acceptance of such posts.
>
> > > You've never been shy about tattling on me or Shhhh to Mistress Jenn. Nor
> > > have you been reticent about launching volley after volley of impotent
> > > puff-ball insults at John Atkinson, whose only crime, by the 'evidence'
> > > you've cited, is drawing breath. Since you are not obviously insane, you
> > > bear the obligation to denounce racism and other bigotry, else otherwise
> > > your fealty to those antihuman values be presumed as dominant. Get on the
> > > stick, you filthy mutt!
>
> > LOL!!!
> > That wasn't a question, that was a speech
>
> I believe in establishing a deep and detailed context for my probing
> questions. There is a question inside that peroration, you know.
>

Your question had more on it than a loded baked potato.
http://baltimore.metromix.com/restaurants/photogallery/discover-birches-baked-potato/708649/content

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Clyde Slick said:

> > I believe in establishing a deep and detailed context for my probing
> > questions. There is a question inside that peroration, you know.

> Your question had more on it than a loded[sic] baked potato.

Watch those carbs, Tubby.