OT Scott a sockpuppet?

[MiNe 109]

Scott's Jonah Goldberg!

http://mediamatters.org/columns/200902100011

I'll give JG the last word, as quoted by TBogg:

<http://tbogg.firedoglake.com/2009/02/10/horseshoes-hand-grenades-and-pan
tloads/>

Sigh. Obama¹s rhetoric has been relentless in its allusions to Roosevelt
and the New Deal in ways that make the comparison obvious. Hundreds of
reporters, columnists and bloggers have caught this. He has invoked FDR
and/or FDR's New Deal countless times to support his policies and his
philosophy of governance. But if Eric Boehlert is insufficiently
historically literate to hear it, that¹s his failing, not mine.

--

Stephen

[Arny Krueger]

"MiNe 109" > wrote in message
...

>Scott a sockpuppet?



And Stephen, you're not?

[MiNe 109]

In article
>,
ScottW > wrote:

> On Feb 12, 6:29*pm, MiNe 109 > wrote:
> > Scott's Jonah Goldberg!
> >
> > http://mediamatters.org/columns/200902100011
> >
> > I'll give JG the last word, as quoted by TBogg:
> >
> > <http://tbogg.firedoglake.com/2009/02/10/horseshoes-hand-grenades-and-pan
> > tloads/> *
>
> "Immediately, I wondered how Goldberg would prop up his argument about
> Obama's supposed media honeymoon when there's already been so much
> Beltway chatter suggesting the opposite"
>
>
> Contrast this with my statement that the media is starting to resent
> being used for the tools they've been.

Contrast that with the left-blog predictions that the media would return
to attacking the president as soon as a Democrat was in office.

> Once again silly Stephen can't give individuals there due position
> and instead in a sign of intellectual incapacity, paints from a 2
> color palette.

Once again, Scott indulges in making up stuff and throwing unsupported
accusations.

Remember how Trots used to say outrageous stuff so he could talk about
the genitalia of whoever responded?

Stephen

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

What could be more obvious than Scottie's mental infirmity?

> > Remember how Trots used to say outrageous stuff so he could talk about
> > the genitalia of whoever responded?
>
> No, I must have ignored those posts for obvious reasons.

Since we have no idea what you meant by "obvious reasons", we're left to
fill in the meaning based on our own observations. Mine is that Gregipus
routinely humiliated and debased you with sharp barbs, and you were unable
to come close to understanding his jokes at your expense, let alone matching
them with jokes of your own.

Pretty much the same as it is today, come to think of it.


--

"It is you who are completely unaware of what I perceive until
I choose to tell you. I rarely do."
-- Scottie Witlessmongrel, RAO, Feb. 3 2009

[MiNe 109]

In article
>,
ScottW > wrote:

> On Feb 13, 9:37*am, MiNe 109 > wrote:
> > In article
> > >,
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > *ScottW > wrote:
> > > On Feb 12, 6:29*pm, MiNe 109 * > wrote:
> > > > Scott's Jonah Goldberg!
> >
> > > >http://mediamatters.org/columns/200902100011
> >
> > > > I'll give JG the last word, as quoted by TBogg:
> >
> > > > <http://tbogg.firedoglake.com/2009/02/10/horseshoes-hand-grenades-and-pa
> > > > n
> > > > tloads/> *
> >
> > > "Immediately, I wondered how Goldberg would prop up his argument about
> > > Obama's supposed media honeymoon when there's already been so much
> > > Beltway chatter suggesting the opposite"
> >
> > > *Contrast this with my statement that the media is starting to resent
> > > being used for the tools they've been.
> >
> > Contrast that with the left-blog predictions that the media would return
> > to attacking the president as soon as a Democrat was in office.
>
> Nice admission that the media took a holiday from their role during
> the campaign.

No, during the Bush administration.

> Apparently they realized that Obama wasn't going to be the true
> liberal he made out to be in the primaries.

Right, the MSM is liberal.

> > > *Once again silly Stephen can't give individuals there due position
> > > and instead in a sign of intellectual incapacity, paints from a 2
> > > color palette.
> >
> > Once again, Scott indulges in making up stuff and throwing unsupported
> > accusations.
>
> You prove my point by trying to compare classes of blogs.
> I suggest you quit trying to judge the tide and embark on some
> individual thought.

I individually think you don't even believe your arguments but choose
for what you hope is maximum annoyance.

> > Remember how Trots used to say outrageous stuff so he could talk about
> > the genitalia of whoever responded?
>
> No, I must have ignored those posts for obvious reasons.

Too bad, as you're indulging in similar behavior.

Stephen

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

MiNe 109 said:

> > Apparently they realized that Obama wasn't going to be the true
> > liberal he made out to be in the primaries.
>
> Right, the MSM is liberal.

Only the classy publications. The yellow rags are true-red conservative.

[MiNe 109]

In article >,
George M. Middius > wrote:

> MiNe 109 said:
>
> > > Apparently they realized that Obama wasn't going to be the true
> > > liberal he made out to be in the primaries.
> >
> > Right, the MSM is liberal.
>
> Only the classy publications. The yellow rags are true-red conservative.

And there are no classy publications.

Stephen

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

MiNe 109 said:

> > > > Apparently they realized that Obama wasn't going to be the true
> > > > liberal he made out to be in the primaries.
> > >
> > > Right, the MSM is liberal.
> >
> > Only the classy publications. The yellow rags are true-red conservative.
>
> And there are no classy publications.

None? None at all? How about Stereophile?

[MiNe 109]

In article >,
George M. Middius > wrote:

> MiNe 109 said:
>
> > > > > Apparently they realized that Obama wasn't going to be the true
> > > > > liberal he made out to be in the primaries.
> > > >
> > > > Right, the MSM is liberal.
> > >
> > > Only the classy publications. The yellow rags are true-red conservative.
> >
> > And there are no classy publications.
>
> None? None at all? How about Stereophile?

Only the non-news part. The news section is entirely dependent on the
industry. :-)

Stephen

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Feb 12, 9:29*pm, MiNe 109 > wrote:
> Scott's Jonah Goldberg!

A sockpuppet cannot be smarter than the puppeteer. Therefore we can
safely conclude that 2pid could be anybody's sockpuppet, particularly
one of the non-English speakers of the world.

[Arny Krueger]

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" >
wrote in message

> On Feb 12, 9:29 pm, MiNe 109
> > wrote:
>> Scott's Jonah Goldberg!
>
> A sockpuppet cannot be smarter than the puppeteer.

That's a pretty good paraphrase of a post I made here on Aug 5, 2002:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.audio.opinion/msg/f07ea12286350378

"Rule number one of sockpuppetry: A sockpuppet cannot be smarter or
more knowledgeable than the human that animates it."

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Feb 14, 7:16*am, "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
> "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" >
> wrote in
>
> > On Feb 12, 9:29 pm, MiNe 109
> > > wrote:
> >> Scott's Jonah Goldberg!
>
> > A sockpuppet cannot be smarter than the puppeteer.
>
> That's a pretty good paraphrase of a post I made here on *Aug 5, 2002:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/rec.audio.opinion/msg/f07ea12286350378
>
> "Rule number one of sockpuppetry: A sockpuppet cannot be smarter or
> more knowledgeable than the human that animates it."

Brilliant, GOIA. You, and only you, are capable of figuring that out.

OTOH isn't it interesting that you can put your hands on a post you
made seven years ago this quickly, yet often when asked for proof of
your claims you cannot be bothered to search the 'goggle archive'? ;-)

So how's that insanity working for you, GOIA?

[Clyde Slick]

On 14 Feb, 09:34, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> wrote:
> On Feb 14, 7:16*am, "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
>
> > "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" >
> > wrote in
>
> > > On Feb 12, 9:29 pm, MiNe 109
> > > > wrote:
> > >> Scott's Jonah Goldberg!
>
> > > A sockpuppet cannot be smarter than the puppeteer.
>
> > That's a pretty good paraphrase of a post I made here on *Aug 5, 2002:
>
> >http://groups.google.com/group/rec.audio.opinion/msg/f07ea12286350378
>
> > "Rule number one of sockpuppetry: A sockpuppet cannot be smarter or
> > more knowledgeable than the human that animates it."
>
> Brilliant, GOIA. You, and only you, are capable of figuring that out.
>
> OTOH isn't it interesting that you can put your hands on a post you
> made seven years ago this quickly, yet often when asked for proof of
> your claims you cannot be bothered to search the 'goggle archive'? ;-)
>
> So how's that insanity working for you, GOIA?

Arny is four years older than I am. He was living on this planet
and breathing for four years before I was even born. So, when I popped
out and took MY first breath, I exclaimed, "Gee Arny!!!
Thanks for teaching me how to breathe!!!"

[Arny Krueger]

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" >
wrote in message

> On Feb 14, 7:16 am, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:
>> "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" >
>> wrote in
>>
>>
>>> On Feb 12, 9:29 pm, MiNe 109
>>> > wrote:
>>>> Scott's Jonah Goldberg!
>>
>>> A sockpuppet cannot be smarter than the puppeteer.
>>
>> That's a pretty good paraphrase of a post I made here on
>> Aug 5, 2002:
>>
>> http://groups.google.com/group/rec.audio.opinion/msg/f07ea12286350378
>>
>> "Rule number one of sockpuppetry: A sockpuppet cannot be
>> smarter or
>> more knowledgeable than the human that animates it."

> Brilliant,

Flattery will get you no where, grasshopper!

[Clyde Slick]

On 15 Feb, 21:32, "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
> "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" >
> wrote in
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Feb 14, 7:16 am, "Arny Krueger" >
> > wrote:
> >> "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" >
> >> wrote in
> >>
>
> >>> On Feb 12, 9:29 pm, MiNe 109
> >>> > wrote:
> >>>> Scott's Jonah Goldberg!
>
> >>> A sockpuppet cannot be smarter than the puppeteer.
>
> >> That's a pretty good paraphrase of a post I made here on
> >> Aug 5, 2002:
>
> >>http://groups.google.com/group/rec.audio.opinion/msg/f07ea12286350378
>
> >> "Rule number one of sockpuppetry: A sockpuppet cannot be
> >> smarter or
> >> more knowledgeable than the human that animates it."
> > Brilliant,
>
> Flattery will get you no where, grasshopper!-

your narcisstic overinflated ego will get you introuble with Jesus,
cockroach.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Feb 15, 9:32*pm, "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
> "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" >
> wrote in
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Feb 14, 7:16 am, "Arny Krueger" >
> > wrote:
> >> "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" >
> >> wrote in
> >>
>
> >>> On Feb 12, 9:29 pm, MiNe 109
> >>> > wrote:
> >>>> Scott's Jonah Goldberg!
>
> >>> A sockpuppet cannot be smarter than the puppeteer.
>
> >> That's a pretty good paraphrase of a post I made here on
> >> Aug 5, 2002:
>
> >>http://groups.google.com/group/rec.audio.opinion/msg/f07ea12286350378
>
> >> "Rule number one of sockpuppetry: A sockpuppet cannot be
> >> smarter or
> >> more knowledgeable than the human that animates it."
> > Brilliant,
>
> Flattery will get you no where, Master!

Sarcasm will, even if you don't get it, GOIA!