A question of morality for RAO's resident buffoons (Yes, that's youand Clyde, 2pid)

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

Suddenly, acknowledging the arbitrariness of consent laws has one
"supporting NAMBLA" to you bozos. LOL!

OK, let's examine this. Neither of you have a problem with an 80-year-
old man having sex with an 18-year-old. However, a 24-year-old having
sex with a 15-year-old is criminal.

What would you say about a 16-year-old having sex with his 14-year-old
girlfriend? Is that criminal? And if they stayed together for a few
years, should the now 18-year-old stop having sex with her for a few
years until she turned 18? Or should the law nab him the minute he
turns 18 if he doesn't?

Think about this (if you can) without the messed up confusion of
religiosity that neither of you is even aware possesses you. LoL.

[Boon[_2_]]

On Oct 13, 1:51*am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> wrote:
> Suddenly, acknowledging the arbitrariness of consent laws has one
> "supporting NAMBLA" to you bozos. LOL!
>
> OK, let's examine this. Neither of you have a problem with an 80-year-
> old man having sex with an 18-year-old. However, a 24-year-old having
> sex with a 15-year-old is criminal.
>
> What would you say about a 16-year-old having sex with his 14-year-old
> girlfriend? Is that criminal? And if they stayed together for a few
> years, should the now 18-year-old stop having sex with her for a few
> years until she turned 18? Or should the law nab him the minute he
> turns 18 if he doesn't?
>
> Think about this (if you can) without the messed up confusion of
> religiosity that neither of you is even aware possesses you. LoL.

It's similar to the prudes who think a young woman instantly becomes
beautiful and attractive on her 18th birthday, but when she's 17 years
and 364 days, she's "just a kid" so they "can't go there." Sort of
like the idiots who think American Beauty is about a pedophile. I
can't trust people like that because they're repressing their true
feelings.

The law is the law and it's there for a reason. But Art (and now
Dip****) possess the same sort of provincial thinking that would make
all sex under the age of 18 illegal. Yeah, try to enforce that.

[hoser1605]

On Oct 13, 9:00*am, Boon > wrote:
> On Oct 13, 1:51*am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
>
>
> > wrote:
> > Suddenly, acknowledging the arbitrariness of consent laws has one
> > "supporting NAMBLA" to you bozos. LOL!
>
> > OK, let's examine this. Neither of you have a problem with an 80-year-
> > old man having sex with an 18-year-old. However, a 24-year-old having
> > sex with a 15-year-old is criminal.
>
> > What would you say about a 16-year-old having sex with his 14-year-old
> > girlfriend? Is that criminal? And if they stayed together for a few
> > years, should the now 18-year-old stop having sex with her for a few
> > years until she turned 18? Or should the law nab him the minute he
> > turns 18 if he doesn't?
>
> > Think about this (if you can) without the messed up confusion of
> > religiosity that neither of you is even aware possesses you. LoL.
>
> It's similar to the prudes who think a young woman instantly becomes
> beautiful and attractive on her 18th birthday, but when she's 17 years
> and 364 days, she's "just a kid" so they "can't go there." Sort of
> like the idiots who think American Beauty is about a pedophile. I
> can't trust people like that because they're repressing their true
> feelings.
>
> The law is the law and it's there for a reason. But Art (and now
> Dip****) possess the same sort of provincial thinking that would make
> all sex under the age of 18 illegal. Yeah, try to enforce that.

Some jurisdictions have made exceptions for your 16 year old guy and
his 14 year old girlfriend. Usually a 2 or 3 year age gap.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Oct 13, 11:27*am, hoser1605 > wrote:
> On Oct 13, 9:00*am, Boon > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 13, 1:51*am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
> > > wrote:
> > > Suddenly, acknowledging the arbitrariness of consent laws has one
> > > "supporting NAMBLA" to you bozos. LOL!
>
> > > OK, let's examine this. Neither of you have a problem with an 80-year-
> > > old man having sex with an 18-year-old. However, a 24-year-old having
> > > sex with a 15-year-old is criminal.
>
> > > What would you say about a 16-year-old having sex with his 14-year-old
> > > girlfriend? Is that criminal? And if they stayed together for a few
> > > years, should the now 18-year-old stop having sex with her for a few
> > > years until she turned 18? Or should the law nab him the minute he
> > > turns 18 if he doesn't?
>
> > > Think about this (if you can) without the messed up confusion of
> > > religiosity that neither of you is even aware possesses you. LoL.
>
> > It's similar to the prudes who think a young woman instantly becomes
> > beautiful and attractive on her 18th birthday, but when she's 17 years
> > and 364 days, she's "just a kid" so they "can't go there." Sort of
> > like the idiots who think American Beauty is about a pedophile. I
> > can't trust people like that because they're repressing their true
> > feelings.
>
> > The law is the law and it's there for a reason. But Art (and now
> > Dip****) possess the same sort of provincial thinking that would make
> > all sex under the age of 18 illegal. Yeah, try to enforce that.
>
> Some jurisdictions have made exceptions for your 16 year old guy and
> his 14 year old girlfriend. *Usually a 2 or 3 year age gap.

2pid and Clyde better research those areas so they don't accidentally
move there. LoL.

[Boon[_2_]]

On Oct 13, 11:27*am, hoser1605 > wrote:
> On Oct 13, 9:00*am, Boon > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 13, 1:51*am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
> > > wrote:
> > > Suddenly, acknowledging the arbitrariness of consent laws has one
> > > "supporting NAMBLA" to you bozos. LOL!
>
> > > OK, let's examine this. Neither of you have a problem with an 80-year-
> > > old man having sex with an 18-year-old. However, a 24-year-old having
> > > sex with a 15-year-old is criminal.
>
> > > What would you say about a 16-year-old having sex with his 14-year-old
> > > girlfriend? Is that criminal? And if they stayed together for a few
> > > years, should the now 18-year-old stop having sex with her for a few
> > > years until she turned 18? Or should the law nab him the minute he
> > > turns 18 if he doesn't?
>
> > > Think about this (if you can) without the messed up confusion of
> > > religiosity that neither of you is even aware possesses you. LoL.
>
> > It's similar to the prudes who think a young woman instantly becomes
> > beautiful and attractive on her 18th birthday, but when she's 17 years
> > and 364 days, she's "just a kid" so they "can't go there." Sort of
> > like the idiots who think American Beauty is about a pedophile. I
> > can't trust people like that because they're repressing their true
> > feelings.
>
> > The law is the law and it's there for a reason. But Art (and now
> > Dip****) possess the same sort of provincial thinking that would make
> > all sex under the age of 18 illegal. Yeah, try to enforce that.
>
> Some jurisdictions have made exceptions for your 16 year old guy and
> his 14 year old girlfriend. *Usually a 2 or 3 year age gap.

When I first moved to Virginia in 1985, I met a 23-year-old guy with a
16-year-old girlfriend. I thought that was creepy until I found out it
was the age of consent. That didn't really change my mind, but it does
underline how state governments presume to tell us what's right and
wrong when it comes to sex...even if they can't agree among themselves
what that is.

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Boon said:

> it does
> underline how state governments presume to tell us what's right and
> wrong when it comes to sex...even if they can't agree among themselves
> what that is.

Remember what happened right after Clinton signed the "DADT" law? A couple
of states immediately passed laws making sodomy illegal. Eighteenth-century
enlightenment, here we come!

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Oct 13, 1:07*pm, George M. Middius >
wrote:
> Boon said:
>
> > it does
> > underline how state governments presume to tell us what's right and
> > wrong when it comes to sex...even if they can't agree among themselves
> > what that is.
>
> Remember what happened right after Clinton signed the "DADT" law? A couple
> of states immediately passed laws making sodomy illegal. Eighteenth-century
> enlightenment, here we come!

Oh, there are other examples as well. IIRC there was a town in
Illinois that banned handguns. A town in Georgia passed a law in
response *requiring* residents to have a handgun.

And then there's the whole anti-gay marriage crap that 2pid and his
ilk get all flustered over.

There's no shortage of ignorance in the US. There's no shortage of
dimwits like 2pid either. The only reason the republicans enjoyed some
momentary success is because their marketing department figured out
how to reach and manipulate them. LoL.

[Jenn[_2_]]

In article
>,
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" > wrote:

> On Oct 13, 1:07*pm, George M. Middius >
> wrote:
> > Boon said:
> >
> > > it does
> > > underline how state governments presume to tell us what's right and
> > > wrong when it comes to sex...even if they can't agree among themselves
> > > what that is.
> >
> > Remember what happened right after Clinton signed the "DADT" law? A couple
> > of states immediately passed laws making sodomy illegal. Eighteenth-century
> > enlightenment, here we come!
>
> Oh, there are other examples as well. IIRC there was a town in
> Illinois that banned handguns. A town in Georgia passed a law in
> response *requiring* residents to have a handgun.
>
> And then there's the whole anti-gay marriage crap that 2pid and his
> ilk get all flustered over.

"Gay people can marry those of those of the opposite sex just like
others." You mean crap like that?

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Jenn said:

> > > Remember what happened right after Clinton signed the "DADT" law? A couple
> > > of states immediately passed laws making sodomy illegal. Eighteenth-century
> > > enlightenment, here we come!

> > And then there's the whole anti-gay marriage crap that 2pid and his
> > ilk get all flustered over.
>
> "Gay people can marry those of those of the opposite sex just like
> others." You mean crap like that?

Clyde said that, not Witless. Not that it matters much.

[Jenn[_2_]]

In article >,
George M. Middius > wrote:

> Jenn said:
>
> > > > Remember what happened right after Clinton signed the "DADT" law? A
> > > > couple
> > > > of states immediately passed laws making sodomy illegal.
> > > > Eighteenth-century
> > > > enlightenment, here we come!
>
> > > And then there's the whole anti-gay marriage crap that 2pid and his
> > > ilk get all flustered over.
> >
> > "Gay people can marry those of those of the opposite sex just like
> > others." You mean crap like that?
>
> Clyde said that, not Witless.

He would be the "ilk" that was mentioned.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Oct 13, 7:22*pm, Jenn > wrote:
> In article
> >,
> *"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 13, 1:07*pm, George M. Middius >
> > wrote:
> > > Boon said:
>
> > > > it does
> > > > underline how state governments presume to tell us what's right and
> > > > wrong when it comes to sex...even if they can't agree among themselves
> > > > what that is.
>
> > > Remember what happened right after Clinton signed the "DADT" law? A couple
> > > of states immediately passed laws making sodomy illegal. Eighteenth-century
> > > enlightenment, here we come!
>
> > Oh, there are other examples as well. IIRC there was a town in
> > Illinois that banned handguns. A town in Georgia passed a law in
> > response *requiring* residents to have a handgun.
>
> > And then there's the whole anti-gay marriage crap that 2pid and his
> > ilk get all flustered over.
>
> "Gay people can marry those of those of the opposite sex just like
> others." *You mean crap like that?

That, and that homosexuality isn't "natural", using the "gays can't
procreate therefore they shouldn't be able to marry" argument, & etc.
& etc.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Oct 13, 7:23*pm, George M. Middius >
wrote:
> Jenn said:
>
> > > > Remember what happened right after Clinton signed the "DADT" law? A couple
> > > > of states immediately passed laws making sodomy illegal. Eighteenth-century
> > > > enlightenment, here we come!
> > > And then there's the whole anti-gay marriage crap that 2pid and his
> > > ilk get all flustered over.
>
> > "Gay people can marry those of those of the opposite sex just like
> > others." *You mean crap like that?
>
> Clyde said that, not Witless. Not that it matters much.

"People of 2pid's ilk."

IMO Clyde is a fully-qualified member. LoL.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Oct 13, 9:28*pm, ScottW2 > wrote:
> On Oct 13, 5:37*pm, Jenn > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article >,
> > *George M. Middius > wrote:
>
> > > Jenn said:
>
> > > > > > Remember what happened right after Clinton signed the "DADT" law? A
> > > > > > couple
> > > > > > of states immediately passed laws making sodomy illegal.
> > > > > > Eighteenth-century
> > > > > > enlightenment, here we come!
>
> > > > > And then there's the whole anti-gay marriage crap that 2pid and his
> > > > > ilk get all flustered over.
>
> > > > "Gay people can marry those of those of the opposite sex just like
> > > > others." *You mean crap like that?
>
> > > Clyde said that, not Witless.
>
> > He would be the "ilk" that was mentioned.
>
> *Jenn falls victim to the same stereotype mentality
> that she claims persecutes her.

Well, 2pid, as I've pointed out recently you have a drunk, a neo-Nazi
and someone named Sugar who fantasizes about jism and smegma.

Out of the four of you, who doesn't meet the criteria? LoL.

> Good job Jenn.

I thought so too. She sees through your barks about how different you
are and looks at your words and actions.

Once...again, Jenn hits it out of the park.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Oct 13, 6:30*pm, Boon > wrote:
> On Oct 13, 5:01*pm, MiNe 109 * > wrote:

> > In Texas, married gays can get divorced but not married.
>
> How about remarried? I bet there's a loophole somewhere.

Texas is a very enlightened state. Gays can remarry any member of the
opposite sex they choose to.

[Jenn[_2_]]

In article
>,
ScottW2 > wrote:

> On Oct 13, 5:37*pm, Jenn > wrote:
> > In article >,
> > *George M. Middius > wrote:
> >
> > > Jenn said:
> >
> > > > > > Remember what happened right after Clinton signed the "DADT" law? A
> > > > > > couple
> > > > > > of states immediately passed laws making sodomy illegal.
> > > > > > Eighteenth-century
> > > > > > enlightenment, here we come!
> >
> > > > > And then there's the whole anti-gay marriage crap that 2pid and his
> > > > > ilk get all flustered over.
> >
> > > > "Gay people can marry those of those of the opposite sex just like
> > > > others." *You mean crap like that?
> >
> > > Clyde said that, not Witless.
> >
> > He would be the "ilk" that was mentioned.
>
> Jenn falls victim to the same stereotype mentality
> that she claims persecutes her.
>
> Good job Jenn.
>
> ScottW

It's a direct quote from Clyde. Bring it up with him.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Oct 13, 10:53*pm, Jenn > wrote:
> In article
> >,
>
>
>
>
>
> *ScottW2 > wrote:
> > On Oct 13, 5:37*pm, Jenn > wrote:
> > > In article >,
> > > *George M. Middius > wrote:
>
> > > > Jenn said:
>
> > > > > > > Remember what happened right after Clinton signed the "DADT" law? A
> > > > > > > couple
> > > > > > > of states immediately passed laws making sodomy illegal.
> > > > > > > Eighteenth-century
> > > > > > > enlightenment, here we come!
>
> > > > > > And then there's the whole anti-gay marriage crap that 2pid and his
> > > > > > ilk get all flustered over.
>
> > > > > "Gay people can marry those of those of the opposite sex just like
> > > > > others." *You mean crap like that?
>
> > > > Clyde said that, not Witless.
>
> > > He would be the "ilk" that was mentioned.
>
> > *Jenn falls victim to the same stereotype mentality
> > that she claims persecutes her.
>
> > Good job Jenn.
>
> > ScottW
>
> It's a direct quote from Clyde. *Bring it up with him.

I think what 2pid was trying to yap was that he had an epiphany and he
is now 100% behind gays being able to marry just like white folks are.

[Boon[_2_]]

On Oct 14, 6:25*pm, ScottW > wrote:
> On Oct 13, 8:53*pm, Jenn > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article
> > >,
>
> > *ScottW2 > wrote:
> > > On Oct 13, 5:37*pm, Jenn > wrote:
> > > > In article >,
> > > > *George M. Middius > wrote:
>
> > > > > Jenn said:
>
> > > > > > > > Remember what happened right after Clinton signed the "DADT" law? A
> > > > > > > > couple
> > > > > > > > of states immediately passed laws making sodomy illegal.
> > > > > > > > Eighteenth-century
> > > > > > > > enlightenment, here we come!
>
> > > > > > > And then there's the whole anti-gay marriage crap that 2pid and his
> > > > > > > ilk get all flustered over.
>
> > > > > > "Gay people can marry those of those of the opposite sex just like
> > > > > > others." *You mean crap like that?
>
> > > > > Clyde said that, not Witless.
>
> > > > He would be the "ilk" that was mentioned.
>
> > > *Jenn falls victim to the same stereotype mentality
> > > that she claims persecutes her.
>
> > > Good job Jenn.
>
> > > ScottW
>
> > It's a direct quote from Clyde. *Bring it up with him.
>
> It's your naked "ilk" bigotry that is most repulsive
> though I'm sure you lack the self-awareness to see it.

Which begs the question...if you're so repulsed by us, why do you
stay?

This is not normal, healthy behavior. You need some sort of
intervention,

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Oct 14, 6:25*pm, ScottW > wrote:
> On Oct 13, 8:53*pm, Jenn > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article
> > >,
>
> > *ScottW2 > wrote:
> > > On Oct 13, 5:37*pm, Jenn > wrote:
> > > > In article >,
> > > > *George M. Middius > wrote:
>
> > > > > Jenn said:
>
> > > > > > > > Remember what happened right after Clinton signed the "DADT" law? A
> > > > > > > > couple
> > > > > > > > of states immediately passed laws making sodomy illegal.
> > > > > > > > Eighteenth-century
> > > > > > > > enlightenment, here we come!
>
> > > > > > > And then there's the whole anti-gay marriage crap that 2pid and his
> > > > > > > ilk get all flustered over.
>
> > > > > > "Gay people can marry those of those of the opposite sex just like
> > > > > > others." *You mean crap like that?
>
> > > > > Clyde said that, not Witless.
>
> > > > He would be the "ilk" that was mentioned.
>
> > > *Jenn falls victim to the same stereotype mentality
> > > that she claims persecutes her.
>
> > > Good job Jenn.

> > It's a direct quote from Clyde. *Bring it up with him.
>
> It's your naked "ilk" bigotry that is most repulsive
> though I'm sure you lack the self-awareness to see it.

ilk 1 (lk)
n.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Oct 14, 10:32*pm, ScottW > wrote:
> On Oct 14, 7:18*pm, Boon > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 14, 6:25*pm, ScottW > wrote:
>
> > > On Oct 13, 8:53*pm, Jenn > wrote:
>
> > > > In article
> > > > >,
>
> > > > *ScottW2 > wrote:
> > > > > On Oct 13, 5:37*pm, Jenn > wrote:
> > > > > > In article >,
> > > > > > *George M. Middius > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Jenn said:
>
> > > > > > > > > > Remember what happened right after Clinton signed the "DADT" law? A
> > > > > > > > > > couple
> > > > > > > > > > of states immediately passed laws making sodomy illegal..
> > > > > > > > > > Eighteenth-century
> > > > > > > > > > enlightenment, here we come!
>
> > > > > > > > > And then there's the whole anti-gay marriage crap that 2pid and his
> > > > > > > > > ilk get all flustered over.
>
> > > > > > > > "Gay people can marry those of those of the opposite sex just like
> > > > > > > > others." *You mean crap like that?
>
> > > > > > > Clyde said that, not Witless.
>
> > > > > > He would be the "ilk" that was mentioned.
>
> > > > > *Jenn falls victim to the same stereotype mentality
> > > > > that she claims persecutes her.
>
> > > > > Good job Jenn.
>
> > > > > ScottW
>
> > > > It's a direct quote from Clyde. *Bring it up with him.
>
> > > It's your naked "ilk" bigotry that is most repulsive
> > > though I'm sure you lack the self-awareness to see it.
>
> > Which begs the question...if you're so repulsed by us, why do you
> > stay?
>
> *It's not your repulsiveness that is repulsive. *It's more the facade
> of
> Jenn's decency that really disgusts.
> That's a facade you've never mastered in spite of all your efforts.
>
> Once I realize how prone to bigotry she really is...She's not
> intolerable.
>
> So you see, I'm really a pretty tolerant person.

Except for the stupidity of thinking that Jenn isn't actually a decent
person. You see, 2pid, it isn't you that's totally disgusting. It's
your being oblivious to exactly how stupid you are that is. LoL.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Oct 14, 10:34*pm, ScottW > wrote:
> On Oct 14, 7:43*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
>
>
>
>
> > wrote:
> > On Oct 14, 6:25*pm, ScottW > wrote:
>
> > > On Oct 13, 8:53*pm, Jenn > wrote:
>
> > > > In article
> > > > >,
>
> > > > *ScottW2 > wrote:
> > > > > On Oct 13, 5:37*pm, Jenn > wrote:
> > > > > > In article >,
> > > > > > *George M. Middius > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Jenn said:
>
> > > > > > > > > > Remember what happened right after Clinton signed the "DADT" law? A
> > > > > > > > > > couple
> > > > > > > > > > of states immediately passed laws making sodomy illegal..
> > > > > > > > > > Eighteenth-century
> > > > > > > > > > enlightenment, here we come!
>
> > > > > > > > > And then there's the whole anti-gay marriage crap that 2pid and his
> > > > > > > > > ilk get all flustered over.
>
> > > > > > > > "Gay people can marry those of those of the opposite sex just like
> > > > > > > > others." *You mean crap like that?
>
> > > > > > > Clyde said that, not Witless.
>
> > > > > > He would be the "ilk" that was mentioned.
>
> > > > > *Jenn falls victim to the same stereotype mentality
> > > > > that she claims persecutes her.
>
> > > > > Good job Jenn.
> > > > It's a direct quote from Clyde. *Bring it up with him.
>
> > > It's your naked "ilk" bigotry that is most repulsive
> > > though I'm sure you lack the self-awareness to see it.
>
> > ilk 1 (lk)
> > n.
> > Type or kind
>
> > You and Clyde are of the same ilk, 2pid. You don't support gay
> > marriage for dumb reasons. Get over it. LoL.
>
> *You and your ilk don't pay much attention and stoop to ill-informed
> stereotypes too often. *If you paid attention I am less opposed to gay
> marriage than I am opposed to it being implemented at the expense of
> democracy.

So you're in favor of gay marriage. That's great!

Who knew? That runs exactly counter to your trumpeting when the
amendment in California passed though, dum-dum.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Oct 14, 10:48*pm, ScottW > wrote:
> On Oct 14, 8:36*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
>
>
>
>
> > wrote:
> > On Oct 14, 10:32*pm, ScottW > wrote:
>
> > > On Oct 14, 7:18*pm, Boon > wrote:
>
> > > > On Oct 14, 6:25*pm, ScottW > wrote:
>
> > > > > On Oct 13, 8:53*pm, Jenn > wrote:
>
> > > > > > In article
> > > > > > >,
>
> > > > > > *ScottW2 > wrote:
> > > > > > > On Oct 13, 5:37*pm, Jenn > wrote:
> > > > > > > > In article >,
> > > > > > > > *George M. Middius > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > Jenn said:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Remember what happened right after Clinton signed the "DADT" law? A
> > > > > > > > > > > > couple
> > > > > > > > > > > > of states immediately passed laws making sodomy illegal.
> > > > > > > > > > > > Eighteenth-century
> > > > > > > > > > > > enlightenment, here we come!
>
> > > > > > > > > > > And then there's the whole anti-gay marriage crap that 2pid and his
> > > > > > > > > > > ilk get all flustered over.
>
> > > > > > > > > > "Gay people can marry those of those of the opposite sex just like
> > > > > > > > > > others." *You mean crap like that?
>
> > > > > > > > > Clyde said that, not Witless.
>
> > > > > > > > He would be the "ilk" that was mentioned.
>
> > > > > > > *Jenn falls victim to the same stereotype mentality
> > > > > > > that she claims persecutes her.
>
> > > > > > > Good job Jenn.
>
> > > > > > > ScottW
>
> > > > > > It's a direct quote from Clyde. *Bring it up with him.
>
> > > > > It's your naked "ilk" bigotry that is most repulsive
> > > > > though I'm sure you lack the self-awareness to see it.
>
> > > > Which begs the question...if you're so repulsed by us, why do you
> > > > stay?
>
> > > *It's not your repulsiveness that is repulsive. *It's more the facade
> > > of
> > > Jenn's decency that really disgusts.
> > > That's a facade you've never mastered in spite of all your efforts.
>
> > > Once I realize how prone to bigotry she really is...She's not
> > > intolerable.
>
> > > So you see, I'm really a pretty tolerant person.
>
> > Except for the stupidity of thinking that Jenn isn't actually a decent
> > person.
>
> *It's all relative.

Oh, a moral relativist. What a refreshing change for you!

> She's far more decent than you.

Why? Because she's too 'polite' to call you an imbecile?

> Everyone here must be a charicature in your twisted view of reality.

Hm. No, that's reserved for you, 2pid. If you're not a caricature you
should be. That would be a step up.

If you're anything like you are here in real life you should consider
euthanasia. And I say that with all the best intentions.

> Anyway She's not nearly as decent as she puts on and
> when her prejudice and bigotry escape her cover, it's all denial.

LoL.

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Witless runs afoul of Mrs. Grundy's language lessons.

> charicature

I think your spellchecker lied to you again, Scoots.

BTW, how many of your real-life acquaintances believe you're a closet
case? I have to admit I don't subscribe to that theory, but other RAOers
embrace it.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Oct 14, 10:54*pm, George M. Middius >
wrote:
> Witless runs afoul of Mrs. Grundy's language lessons.
>
> > charicature
>
> I think your spellchecker lied to you again, Scoots.
>
> BTW, how many of your real-life acquaintances believe you're a closet
> case? I have to admit I don't subscribe to that theory, but other RAOers
> embrace it.

I don't think he's a closet case, but people who hide behind material
success and kept trophy wives tend to have small weenies and smaller
'brains'. They also tend to be unattentive parents who end up with
criminal offspring. LOL!

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Shhhh! said:

> > BTW, how many of your real-life acquaintances believe you're a closet
> > case? I have to admit I don't subscribe to that theory, but other RAOers
> > embrace it.
>
> I don't think he's a closet case, but people who hide behind material
> success and kept trophy wives tend to have small weenies and smaller
> 'brains'. They also tend to be unattentive parents who end up with
> criminal offspring. LOL!

Witless is always barking plaintively that we're ganging up on him, or
making him sit alone at the Nerds' Table, or being more fun than he is.
Well, I have a gesture to make the pooch feel less ostracized: I say we
each go out and piddle on a tree or bush this weekend.

[MiNe 109]

In article >,
George M. Middius > wrote:

> Witless runs afoul of Mrs. Grundy's language lessons.
>
> > charicature
>
> I think your spellchecker lied to you again, Scoots.
>
> BTW, how many of your real-life acquaintances believe you're a closet
> case? I have to admit I don't subscribe to that theory, but other RAOers
> embrace it.

It would explain some of his spontaneous outbursts that can resemble
that famous Onion report.

Stephen

[Jenn[_2_]]

In article
>,
ScottW > wrote:

> On Oct 14, 7:18*pm, Boon > wrote:
> > On Oct 14, 6:25*pm, ScottW > wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Oct 13, 8:53*pm, Jenn > wrote:
> >
> > > > In article
> > > > >,
> >
> > > > *ScottW2 > wrote:
> > > > > On Oct 13, 5:37*pm, Jenn > wrote:
> > > > > > In article >,
> > > > > > *George M. Middius > wrote:
> >
> > > > > > > Jenn said:
> >
> > > > > > > > > > Remember what happened right after Clinton signed the
> > > > > > > > > > "DADT" law? A
> > > > > > > > > > couple
> > > > > > > > > > of states immediately passed laws making sodomy illegal.
> > > > > > > > > > Eighteenth-century
> > > > > > > > > > enlightenment, here we come!
> >
> > > > > > > > > And then there's the whole anti-gay marriage crap that 2pid
> > > > > > > > > and his
> > > > > > > > > ilk get all flustered over.
> >
> > > > > > > > "Gay people can marry those of those of the opposite sex just
> > > > > > > > like
> > > > > > > > others." *You mean crap like that?
> >
> > > > > > > Clyde said that, not Witless.
> >
> > > > > > He would be the "ilk" that was mentioned.
> >
> > > > > *Jenn falls victim to the same stereotype mentality
> > > > > that she claims persecutes her.
> >
> > > > > Good job Jenn.
> >
> > > > > ScottW
> >
> > > > It's a direct quote from Clyde. *Bring it up with him.
> >
> > > It's your naked "ilk" bigotry that is most repulsive
> > > though I'm sure you lack the self-awareness to see it.
> >
> > Which begs the question...if you're so repulsed by us, why do you
> > stay?
>
> It's not your repulsiveness that is repulsive. It's more the facade
> of
> Jenn's decency that really disgusts.
> That's a facade you've never mastered in spite of all your efforts.
>
> Once I realize how prone to bigotry she really is...She's not
> intolerable.

OK, I'll bite, troll. What, according to you, am I bigoted about?

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Jenn said:

> > > > > > > > > > And then there's the whole anti-gay marriage crap that 2pid
> > > > > > > > > > and his ilk get all flustered over.

> > > > > > > > > "Gay people can marry those of those of the opposite sex just
> > > > > > > > > like others." *You mean crap like that?

> > > > > > > > Clyde said that, not Witless.

> > > > > > > He would be the "ilk" that was mentioned.

> > > > > > *Jenn falls victim to the same stereotype mentality
> > > > > > that she claims persecutes her.

> OK, I'll bite, troll. What, according to you, am I bigoted about?

I think Clyde has more reason to be offended by the lumping together than
Witless has. But the pooch has an insatiable need to be the center of
attention, so it's yap-yap-yap about "ilks".

[Boon[_2_]]

On Oct 14, 10:51*pm, ScottW > wrote:

> *And some claimed to file police reports when they didn't.

Gee, who would that be, dip****?

Funny thing is, you've been told the story and yet you still choose to
recycle these lies on RAO.

What's your motive here? Are you trying to get in good with the group?
Still trying to explain yourself and your despicable behavior?

That ship sailed a long time ago, Internet whacko. Maybe Bob, Bwian or
PLF will pat you on your back. Most of the group has killfiled those
three losers, too. Misery loves company. LoL!

[Boon[_2_]]

On Oct 15, 1:56*pm, ScottW > wrote:
> On Oct 14, 10:10*pm, Boon > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 14, 11:19*pm, ScottW > wrote:
>
> > > On Oct 14, 9:05*pm, George M. Middius >
> > > wrote:
>
> > > > Shhhh! said:
>
> > > > > > BTW, how many of your real-life acquaintances believe you're a closet
> > > > > > case? I have to admit I don't subscribe to that theory, but other RAOers
> > > > > > embrace it.
>
> > > > > I don't think he's a closet case, but people who hide behind material
> > > > > success and kept trophy wives tend to have small weenies and smaller
> > > > > 'brains'. They also tend to be unattentive parents who end up with
> > > > > criminal offspring. LOL!
>
> > > > Witless is always barking plaintively that we're ganging up on him, or
> > > > making him sit alone at the Nerds' Table, or being more fun than he is.
>
> > > *I could give a crap about any of that. *The total disregard for the
> > > truth you all have is what I find perplexing.
> > > You're one big bunch of liars and proud of it trying to one up each
> > > other.
>
> > > All I have to do is bring a glimmer of reality in this virtual
> > > gathering
> > > that doesn't fit your paradigm....and watch you all go freaky.
>
> > > Stephen's the ultimate coward having KF'd me but still sniping
> > > like a 2nd grader who can't pass the class. *Yet that pathetic
> > > behavior leaves him a standup guy compared to you.
>
> > The fact that you consider killfiling an act of cowardice is just
> > another way of saying that you need our abuse.
>
> Wrong again dirtbag. *KF all you want, but to keep sniping
> after is really the essence of chicken.

Not really. Who made the rule that once you killfile someone, you can
no longer acknowledge their existence? No, it just really bugs you
because you can't wage your petty little wars the way you want to. If
you don't like it, you can always leave. But you can't.

Really, if you think killfiling has anything to do with cowardice or
bravery, you're an idiot. This is Usenet. It's supposed to be somewhat
enjoyable. There's no bravery involved, you lunatic.

>
> > *You thrive on it.
>
> > If you think I'm bull****ting you, ask a mental health professional.
>
> *LoL. * You seem to claim a lot of experience with mental health
> professionals.

You've asked me this before, dum dum.

> *It's just more dirtbag debating trade nonsense you've used before
> in the only thing that makes you happy on usenet.

No, not really. It bothers me that Usenet seems to attract those with
mental disorders. I would like to talk to people. kid around and even
possible trade jabs with people who AREN'T suffering from a variety of
personality disorders.

Rest assured, I do not think that you suffer from one. No, I think
like Bratzi you are somewhere on the ASD scale. That explains why you
can't figure out why people are so put off by your behavior.

> (snip the repetitious argument that I've read at least a dozen times
> before with different subjects).

Look at that. Your penis is in little ribbons on the ground. Talk
about cowardice. LoL.

[Boon[_2_]]

On Oct 15, 2:04*pm, ScottW > wrote:
> On Oct 15, 6:03*am, Boon > wrote:
>
> > On Oct 14, 10:51*pm, ScottW > wrote:
>
> > > *And some claimed to file police reports when they didn't.
>
> > Gee, who would that be, dip****?
>
> * I think that was you on RAO though you've also told
> me you didn't really do it.
> * Just more lies on RAO.
>
> *I doubt you...well actually I hope you didn't really drive
> by his house...beause that's pretty creepy even for you.
>
>
>
> > Funny thing is, you've been told the story and yet you still choose to
> > recycle these lies on RAO.
>
> *Lies? *LoL. *As you say it's a story that I retell.
> If the story was largely fiction...well I'll have to give you credit
> for
> that.

Well, first show where I said I filed a police report.

[Jenn[_4_]]

On Oct 15, 12:00Â*pm, ScottW > wrote:
> On Oct 14, 11:14Â*pm, Jenn > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article
> > >,
>
> > Â*ScottW > wrote:
> > > On Oct 14, 7:18Â*pm, Boon > wrote:
> > > > On Oct 14, 6:25Â*pm, ScottW > wrote:
>
> > > > > On Oct 13, 8:53Â*pm, Jenn > wrote:
>
> > > > > > In article
> > > > > > >,
>
> > > > > > Â*ScottW2 > wrote:
> > > > > > > On Oct 13, 5:37Â*pm, Jenn > wrote:
> > > > > > > > In article >,
> > > > > > > > Â*George M. Middius > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > Jenn said:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Remember what happened right after Clinton signed the
> > > > > > > > > > > > "DADT" law? A
> > > > > > > > > > > > couple
> > > > > > > > > > > > of states immediately passed laws making sodomy illegal.
> > > > > > > > > > > > Eighteenth-century
> > > > > > > > > > > > enlightenment, here we come!
>
> > > > > > > > > > > And then there's the whole anti-gay marriage crap that 2pid
> > > > > > > > > > > and his
> > > > > > > > > > > ilk get all flustered over.
>
> > > > > > > > > > "Gay people can marry those of those of the opposite sex just
> > > > > > > > > > like
> > > > > > > > > > others." Â*You mean crap like that?
>
> > > > > > > > > Clyde said that, not Witless.
>
> > > > > > > > He would be the "ilk" that was mentioned.
>
> > > > > > > Â*Jenn falls victim to the same stereotype mentality
> > > > > > > that she claims persecutes her.
>
> > > > > > > Good job Jenn.
>
> > > > > > > ScottW
>
> > > > > > It's a direct quote from Clyde. Â*Bring it up with him.
>
> > > > > It's your naked "ilk" bigotry that is most repulsive
> > > > > though I'm sure you lack the self-awareness to see it.
>
> > > > Which begs the question...if you're so repulsed by us, why do you
> > > > stay?
>
> > > Â*It's not your repulsiveness that is repulsive. Â*It's more the facade
> > > of
> > > Jenn's decency that really disgusts.
> > > That's a facade you've never mastered in spite of all your efforts.
>
> > > Once I realize how prone to bigotry she really is...She's not
> > > intolerable.
>
> > OK, I'll bite, troll.
>
> Â* More debating from Jenn. Â*You're naked enough, please stop exposing
> yourself.
>
> > Â*What, according to you, am I bigoted about?
>
> Anyone who talks about people of an "ilk" are bigots.
>
> Main Entry: big·ot
> Pronunciation: \ˈbi-gət\
> Function: noun
> Etymology: French, hypocrite, bigot
> Date: 1660
> : a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own
> opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the
> members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and
> intolerance
>
> The group does not have to be racial or ethically defined. Â*That's
> just the easiest example to portray.
>
> ScottW

A common definition of "ilk" is "member of a group". The group of
people who share the beliefs thar you and Clyde share about SSM often
use the sentence that I quoted. It's really that simple, Scott. If you
wish to believe that I'm a bigot, feel free. It only adds fuel for
those who laugh at you though.

By the way, would those who say things like. "Gay people ____." be
bigots in your view?

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Jenn said:

> A common definition of "ilk" is "member of a group". The group of
> people who share the beliefs thar you and Clyde share about SSM often
> use the sentence that I quoted. It's really that simple, Scott. If you
> wish to believe that I'm a bigot, feel free. It only adds fuel for
> those who laugh at you though.
>
> By the way, would those who say things like. "Gay people ____." be
> bigots in your view?

Of course not. Scottie has already stated that Gays are pervs, so he's
allowed to generalize about them in any way he wants to.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Oct 15, 2:00Â*pm, ScottW > wrote:
> On Oct 14, 11:14Â*pm, Jenn > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article
> > >,
>
> > Â*ScottW > wrote:
> > > On Oct 14, 7:18Â*pm, Boon > wrote:
> > > > On Oct 14, 6:25Â*pm, ScottW > wrote:
>
> > > > > On Oct 13, 8:53Â*pm, Jenn > wrote:
>
> > > > > > In article
> > > > > > >,
>
> > > > > > Â*ScottW2 > wrote:
> > > > > > > On Oct 13, 5:37Â*pm, Jenn > wrote:
> > > > > > > > In article >,
> > > > > > > > Â*George M. Middius > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > Jenn said:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Remember what happened right after Clinton signed the
> > > > > > > > > > > > "DADT" law? A
> > > > > > > > > > > > couple
> > > > > > > > > > > > of states immediately passed laws making sodomy illegal.
> > > > > > > > > > > > Eighteenth-century
> > > > > > > > > > > > enlightenment, here we come!
>
> > > > > > > > > > > And then there's the whole anti-gay marriage crap that 2pid
> > > > > > > > > > > and his
> > > > > > > > > > > ilk get all flustered over.
>
> > > > > > > > > > "Gay people can marry those of those of the opposite sex just
> > > > > > > > > > like
> > > > > > > > > > others." Â*You mean crap like that?
>
> > > > > > > > > Clyde said that, not Witless.
>
> > > > > > > > He would be the "ilk" that was mentioned.
>
> > > > > > > Â*Jenn falls victim to the same stereotype mentality
> > > > > > > that she claims persecutes her.
>
> > > > > > > Good job Jenn.
>
> > > > > > > ScottW
>
> > > > > > It's a direct quote from Clyde. Â*Bring it up with him.
>
> > > > > It's your naked "ilk" bigotry that is most repulsive
> > > > > though I'm sure you lack the self-awareness to see it.
>
> > > > Which begs the question...if you're so repulsed by us, why do you
> > > > stay?
>
> > > Â*It's not your repulsiveness that is repulsive. Â*It's more the facade
> > > of
> > > Jenn's decency that really disgusts.
> > > That's a facade you've never mastered in spite of all your efforts.
>
> > > Once I realize how prone to bigotry she really is...She's not
> > > intolerable.
>
> > OK, I'll bite, troll.
>
> Â* More debating from Jenn. Â*You're naked enough, please stop exposing
> yourself.
>
> > Â*What, according to you, am I bigoted about?
>
> Anyone who talks about people of an "ilk" are bigots.
>
> Main Entry: big·ot
> Pronunciation: \ˈbi-gət\
> Function: noun
> Etymology: French, hypocrite, bigot
> Date: 1660
> : a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own
> opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the
> members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and
> intolerance
>
> The group does not have to be racial or ethically defined. Â*That's
> just the easiest example to portray.

So someone who agrees on the same issue for stupid reasons cannot be
referred to as "being of the same ilk" without being a "bigot".

I see, 2pid, I see.

BTW, 2pid: "ridicule" is not synonymous with "hatred and intolerance".

Duh. LOL!

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Oct 15, 5:52*pm, Jenn > wrote:

> By the way, would those who say things like. "Gay people ____." be
> bigots in your view?

People who live the Gay lifestyle deserve whatever they get. LoL.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Oct 15, 11:12Â*pm, ScottW > wrote:
> On Oct 15, 3:52Â*pm, Jenn > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 15, 12:00Â*pm, ScottW > wrote:
>
> > > On Oct 14, 11:14Â*pm, Jenn > wrote:
>
> > > > In article
> > > > >,
>
> > > > Â*ScottW > wrote:
> > > > > On Oct 14, 7:18Â*pm, Boon > wrote:
> > > > > > On Oct 14, 6:25Â*pm, ScottW > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > On Oct 13, 8:53Â*pm, Jenn > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > In article
> > > > > > > > >,
>
> > > > > > > > Â*ScottW2 > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > On Oct 13, 5:37Â*pm, Jenn > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > In article >,
> > > > > > > > > > Â*George M. Middius > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Jenn said:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Remember what happened right after Clinton signed the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > "DADT" law? A
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > couple
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > of states immediately passed laws making sodomy illegal.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Eighteenth-century
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > enlightenment, here we come!
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > And then there's the whole anti-gay marriage crap that 2pid
> > > > > > > > > > > > > and his
> > > > > > > > > > > > > ilk get all flustered over.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > "Gay people can marry those of those of the opposite sex just
> > > > > > > > > > > > like
> > > > > > > > > > > > others." Â*You mean crap like that?
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Clyde said that, not Witless.
>
> > > > > > > > > > He would be the "ilk" that was mentioned.
>
> > > > > > > > > Â*Jenn falls victim to the same stereotype mentality
> > > > > > > > > that she claims persecutes her.
>
> > > > > > > > > Good job Jenn.
>
> > > > > > > > > ScottW
>
> > > > > > > > It's a direct quote from Clyde. Â*Bring it up with him.
>
> > > > > > > It's your naked "ilk" bigotry that is most repulsive
> > > > > > > though I'm sure you lack the self-awareness to see it.
>
> > > > > > Which begs the question...if you're so repulsed by us, why do you
> > > > > > stay?
>
> > > > > Â*It's not your repulsiveness that is repulsive. Â*It's more the facade
> > > > > of
> > > > > Jenn's decency that really disgusts.
> > > > > That's a facade you've never mastered in spite of all your efforts.
>
> > > > > Once I realize how prone to bigotry she really is...She's not
> > > > > intolerable.
>
> > > > OK, I'll bite, troll.
>
> > > Â* More debating from Jenn. Â*You're naked enough, please stop exposing
> > > yourself.
>
> > > > Â*What, according to you, am I bigoted about?
>
> > > Anyone who talks about people of an "ilk" are bigots.
>
> > > Main Entry: big·ot
> > > Pronunciation: \ˈbi-gət\
> > > Function: noun
> > > Etymology: French, hypocrite, bigot
> > > Date: 1660
> > > : a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own
> > > opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the
> > > members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and
> > > intolerance
>
> > > The group does not have to be racial or ethically defined. Â*That's
> > > just the easiest example to portray.
>
> > > ScottW
>
> > A common definition of "ilk" is "member of a group". The group of
> > people who share the beliefs thar you and Clyde share about SSM often
> > use the sentence that I quoted.
>
> It's your presumption of common beliefs that is the basis for all
> bigotry.

You are against gay marriage. Clyde is against gay marriage. The
reasons are illogical.

You are of the same ilk no matter how much you weep and wail. Duh.
LOL!

> > It's really that simple, Scott. If you
> > wish to believe that I'm a bigot, feel free.
>
> Â*You've proven it. Â*You group people and assert beliefs
> they do not equally hold.

So IY(S)O there are "good" reasons to be anti-gay and "bad" reasons
and yours are "good" reasons. LOL!

> > It only adds fuel for
> > those who laugh at you though.
>
> Â* Are you so spineless that you care what
> the we-minded think?

We all laugh at you for various reasons, 2pid. We are "of the same
ilk" in that regard, dum-dum.

> Â* I gave you more credit than that, but I guess I
> was wrong.

Wah.

> > By the way, would those who say things like. "Gay people ____." be
> > bigots in your view?
>
> Â*No. Â*That's the problem with bigots. Â*Everything is so full
> of blanks. Â*Try understanding people as individuals and
> stop stereotyping. Â*That only results in you invariably being wrong
> and a bigot.

So which gays do you individually support for the right to marry in
California? And whom do you oppose for that right?

[Jenn[_2_]]

In article
>,
ScottW > wrote:

> On Oct 15, 9:03*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> > wrote:
> > On Oct 15, 5:52*pm, Jenn > wrote:
> >
> > > By the way, would those who say things like. "Gay people ____." be
> > > bigots in your view?
> >
> > People who live the Gay lifestyle deserve whatever they get. LoL.
>
> Apparently Jenn is stupid enough

lol You really want to go there? OK, I'll play along for awhile.

> to be influenced by the lies
> you two.
>
> Explains why Obermann confuses her so.

He doesn't confuse me at all. I have at average comprehension skills.
Between you and me, that makes one of us.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Oct 15, 11:14*pm, ScottW > wrote:
> On Oct 15, 9:03*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
> > wrote:
> > On Oct 15, 5:52*pm, Jenn > wrote:
>
> > > By the way, would those who say things like. "Gay people ____." be
> > > bigots in your view?
>
> > People who live the Gay lifestyle deserve whatever they get. LoL.
>
> Apparently Jenn is stupid enough to be influenced by the lies
> you two.

What "lies", 2pid? Those stupid ****ing Gays all go to "pos-pos"
parties as a result of their "lifestyle", right?

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Witless barked:

> > People who live the Gay lifestyle deserve whatever they get. LoL.
>
> Apparently Jenn is stupid enough to be influenced by the lies
> you two.

You claim to be educated and to have a job with considerable responsibility,
and yet you are incapable of writing a 10-word sentence without ****ing it up.
A Smart Person would be ashamed of such poor expression, but all you can do is
bark and chase your tail.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Oct 15, 2:12*pm, Boon > wrote:
> On Oct 15, 2:04*pm, ScottW > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 15, 6:03*am, Boon > wrote:
>
> > > On Oct 14, 10:51*pm, ScottW > wrote:
>
> > > > *And some claimed to file police reports when they didn't.
>
> > > Gee, who would that be, dip****?
>
> > * I think that was you on RAO though you've also told
> > me you didn't really do it.
> > * Just more lies on RAO.
>
> > *I doubt you...well actually I hope you didn't really drive
> > by his house...beause that's pretty creepy even for you.
>
> > > Funny thing is, you've been told the story and yet you still choose to
> > > recycle these lies on RAO.
>
> > *Lies? *LoL. *As you say it's a story that I retell.
> > If the story was largely fiction...well I'll have to give you credit
> > for
> > that.
>
> Well, first show where I said I filed a police report.

2pid already "proved" that beyond a shadow of a doubt: "I think that
was you on RAO".

Learn to read. Geez.

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Witless is on a tear.

> > By the way, would those who say things like. "Gay people ____." be
> > bigots in your view?
>
> No. That's the problem with bigots.

I have here a quote from one of your earlier yapdowns. As usual, it's little
more than word salad, but I suspect you were yapping about your own bigotry:

The George needs a new liver cuz his gay lifestyle
killed his but he can't pay for the operation kind of
healthcare that is a problem.

You upchucked that glob of malformed yapping in August 2008. That probably
means you'll deny responsibility for translating it. My question is why did
you refer to me as "The George", or in the alternative, were you referring to
somebody else?

Don't worry about translating the rest of the gibberish. It's enough that you
did, in fact, use the odious term "gay lifestyle" to cloak your bigotry.

Shall we revisit your rants about "pos-pos parties"?

[Jenn[_2_]]

In article
>,
ScottW > wrote:

> On Oct 15, 3:52Â*pm, Jenn > wrote:
> > On Oct 15, 12:00Â*pm, ScottW > wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Oct 14, 11:14Â*pm, Jenn > wrote:
> >
> > > > In article
> > > > >,
> >
> > > > Â*ScottW > wrote:
> > > > > On Oct 14, 7:18Â*pm, Boon > wrote:
> > > > > > On Oct 14, 6:25Â*pm, ScottW > wrote:
> >
> > > > > > > On Oct 13, 8:53Â*pm, Jenn > wrote:
> >
> > > > > > > > In article
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > om>,
> >
> > > > > > > > Â*ScottW2 > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > On Oct 13, 5:37Â*pm, Jenn >
> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > In article >,
> > > > > > > > > > Â*George M. Middius > wrote:
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > Jenn said:
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Remember what happened right after Clinton signed
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > "DADT" law? A
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > couple
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > of states immediately passed laws making sodomy
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > illegal.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Eighteenth-century
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > enlightenment, here we come!
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > And then there's the whole anti-gay marriage crap
> > > > > > > > > > > > > that 2pid
> > > > > > > > > > > > > and his
> > > > > > > > > > > > > ilk get all flustered over.
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > "Gay people can marry those of those of the opposite
> > > > > > > > > > > > sex just
> > > > > > > > > > > > like
> > > > > > > > > > > > others." Â*You mean crap like that?
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > Clyde said that, not Witless.
> >
> > > > > > > > > > He would be the "ilk" that was mentioned.
> >
> > > > > > > > > Â*Jenn falls victim to the same stereotype mentality
> > > > > > > > > that she claims persecutes her.
> >
> > > > > > > > > Good job Jenn.
> >
> > > > > > > > > ScottW
> >
> > > > > > > > It's a direct quote from Clyde. Â*Bring it up with him.
> >
> > > > > > > It's your naked "ilk" bigotry that is most repulsive
> > > > > > > though I'm sure you lack the self-awareness to see it.
> >
> > > > > > Which begs the question...if you're so repulsed by us, why do you
> > > > > > stay?
> >
> > > > > Â*It's not your repulsiveness that is repulsive. Â*It's more the facade
> > > > > of
> > > > > Jenn's decency that really disgusts.
> > > > > That's a facade you've never mastered in spite of all your efforts.
> >
> > > > > Once I realize how prone to bigotry she really is...She's not
> > > > > intolerable.
> >
> > > > OK, I'll bite, troll.
> >
> > > Â* More debating from Jenn. Â*You're naked enough, please stop exposing
> > > yourself.
> >
> > > > Â*What, according to you, am I bigoted about?

Stop fantasizing.

> >
> > > Anyone who talks about people of an "ilk" are bigots.
> >
> > > Main Entry: big·ot
> > > Pronunciation: \?bi-g?t\
> > > Function: noun
> > > Etymology: French, hypocrite, bigot
> > > Date: 1660
> > > : a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own
> > > opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the
> > > members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and
> > > intolerance
> >
> > > The group does not have to be racial or ethically defined. Â*That's
> > > just the easiest example to portray.
> >
> > > ScottW
> >
> > A common definition of "ilk" is "member of a group". The group of
> > people who share the beliefs thar you and Clyde share about SSM often
> > use the sentence that I quoted.
>
> It's your presumption of common beliefs that is the basis for all
> bigotry.

It's not a presumption. You and Clyde have expressed similar opinions
about SSM.

>
> > It's really that simple, Scott. If you
> > wish to believe that I'm a bigot, feel free.
>
> You've proven it. You group people and assert beliefs
> they do not equally hold.

Are you in favor of SSM? Is Clyde?

>
> > It only adds fuel for
> > those who laugh at you though.
>
> Are you so spineless that you care what
> the we-minded think?

Not really. I'm just cluing you into reality. You seemed to need help
with it.

> I gave you more credit than that, but I guess I
> was wrong.

You usually are.

>
> >
> > By the way, would those who say things like. "Gay people ____." be
> > bigots in your view?
>
> No. That's the problem with bigots. Everything is so full
> of blanks. Try understanding people as individuals and
> stop stereotyping. That only results in you invariably being wrong
> and a bigot.

I see. So a person reading this:
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gutnLWP4KNjECVTydghhwRVzJikAD94DOQ380
and replying:
"I don't think I shall support rights for people who condone acquiring
them by depriving others of their rights" is not judging people as
individuals and is stereotyping, and is therefore a bigot. Got it.

[Boon[_2_]]

On Oct 15, 11:03*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> wrote:
> On Oct 15, 5:52*pm, Jenn > wrote:
>
> > By the way, would those who say things like. "Gay people ____." be
> > bigots in your view?
>
> People who live the Gay lifestyle deserve whatever they get. LoL.

Gay people don't wear mullets like Scott's. Well, at least the male
ones don't.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Oct 16, 8:30*am, Boon > wrote:
> On Oct 15, 11:03*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
> > wrote:
> > On Oct 15, 5:52*pm, Jenn > wrote:
>
> > > By the way, would those who say things like. "Gay people ____." be
> > > bigots in your view?
>
> > People who live the Gay lifestyle deserve whatever they get. LoL.
>
> Gay people don't wear mullets like Scott's. Well, at least the male
> ones don't.

So 2pid seriously has a mullet?

Dayum. LoL.

I joked with my kids when I retired from the military: "I missed
having a mullet because they weren't allowed. I think I'm going to
grow one now." They said they'd cut it off when I was sleeping. LoL.

[Boon[_2_]]

On Oct 16, 1:04*pm, ScottW > wrote:
> On Oct 15, 9:24*pm, Jenn > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article
> > >,
>
> > *ScottW > wrote:
> > > On Oct 15, 9:03*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> > > > wrote:
> > > > On Oct 15, 5:52*pm, Jenn > wrote:
>
> > > > > By the way, would those who say things like. "Gay people ____." be
> > > > > bigots in your view?
>
> > > > People who live the Gay lifestyle deserve whatever they get. LoL.
>
> > > Apparently Jenn is stupid enough
>
> > lol *You really want to go there? *OK, I'll play along for awhile.
>
> > > to be influenced by the lies
> > > you two.
>
> > > Explains why Obermann confuses her so.
>
> > He doesn't confuse me at all. *I have at average comprehension skills.. *
>
> *At average? *Ok, you are "at average" at determining truth from lies..
>
> *The liars are going to own you.
>
> > Between you and me, that makes one of us.
>
> *That was substantive. *You and Marc would make a cute couple.

Gee, and I just caught you lying today about having your wife read
your posts from the last month.

You're really too dumb to be here. Really. It's just way too easy for
us to make you look like an idiot.

[Boon[_2_]]

On Oct 16, 1:05*pm, ScottW > wrote:
> On Oct 16, 10:45*am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
>
>
>
>
> > wrote:
> > On Oct 16, 8:30*am, Boon > wrote:
>
> > > On Oct 15, 11:03*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > On Oct 15, 5:52*pm, Jenn > wrote:
>
> > > > > By the way, would those who say things like. "Gay people ____." be
> > > > > bigots in your view?
>
> > > > People who live the Gay lifestyle deserve whatever they get. LoL.
>
> > > Gay people don't wear mullets like Scott's. Well, at least the male
> > > ones don't.
>
> > So 2pid seriously has a mullet?
>
> *Just another of Marc's silly and childish lies.

So your wife finally made you cut it off? Is that why she's no longer
rolling her eyes at you? LoL.

Trust me, dum dum...your mullet is the least of your worries.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Oct 16, 1:05*pm, ScottW > wrote:
> On Oct 16, 10:45*am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
>
>
>
>
> > wrote:
> > On Oct 16, 8:30*am, Boon > wrote:
>
> > > On Oct 15, 11:03*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > On Oct 15, 5:52*pm, Jenn > wrote:
>
> > > > > By the way, would those who say things like. "Gay people ____." be
> > > > > bigots in your view?
>
> > > > People who live the Gay lifestyle deserve whatever they get. LoL.
>
> > > Gay people don't wear mullets like Scott's. Well, at least the male
> > > ones don't.
>
> > So 2pid seriously has a mullet?
>
> *Just another of Marc's silly and childish lies.

Just another useless Internet claim from you.

So how long is it in back?

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

How can 2pid cram so much ignorance into so few words?

Is it because he's a gud ryter? LoL.

On Oct 16, 1:18*pm, ScottW > wrote:
> On Oct 15, 9:39*pm, Jenn > wrote:

> *Try to make a substantive argument rather employing cheap debating
> trade crap.

LoL.

> > It's not a presumption. *You and Clyde have expressed similar opinions
> > about SSM.
>
> *No, we did not. * You paint with a very broad brush.

It's a narrow brush, 2pid. It's just wide enough to cover you and
Clyde.

> *Should I claim you and George have similar sexual desires?

No, but you can claim they're both gay, dum-dum.

Should we claim that Clyde has a mullet too? LoL.

> > > > It's really that simple, Scott. If you
> > > > wish to believe that I'm a bigot, feel free.
>
> > > *You've proven it. *You group people and assert beliefs
> > > they do not equally hold.
>
> > Are you in favor of SSM?
>
> *No, nor am I opposed. I am pretty much agnostic on it.

LoL.

> I am more concerned about the decision process remaining
> a democratic one. *I don't consider SSM a "civil rights" issue.
> Virtually anything can be declared a civil right.

So you don't have a right to choose your marriage partner.

Oh, wait. I recall 2pid claiming that driving was a "right". He's just
really confused...again. LoL.

> *Sounds like "people" isn't clear to you. *Yes, I withhold my support
> for
> gay marriage for all gays based on the actions of a few.
> I do that because I expect the majority to vehemently reject the
> McCartyist actions of the few. * I see no evidence of that.
> The few who do can go to Iowa to marry and be recognized
> in Ca. * It's a trifle hardship.

So you oppose SSM. Just say so, 2pid! We all know it anyway.

Aside one: did you know punishing the masses for the infractions of
the few is against the Geneva Convention? We can't even do that to our
enemies let alone our own citizens. Can you imagine the police
arresting a whole block because a few kids spraypainted graffiti on a
wall? LoL What a dunce.

Say, 2pid, if choosing your marriage partner isn't a civil right, does
that mean it's a privilege? Can a marriage license be revoked like a
driver's license? Be careful of the slippery slope you're creating
here.

Duh.

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Boon said:

> > *Just another of Marc's silly and childish lies.
>
> So your wife finally made you cut it off? Is that why she's no longer
> rolling her eyes at you? LoL.

Cut it off? My god!

> Trust me, dum dum...your mullet is the least of your worries.

Oh. Cut off the mullet. Whew.

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Shhhh! said:

> So how long is [Witless's mullet] in back?

You can sneer at him, but Scottie knows the value of his hairstyle. It enables
him to interpret the preachings of Blimpie and Hannity with great clarity.

[Jenn[_2_]]

In article
>,
ScottW > wrote:

> On Oct 15, 9:39*pm, Jenn > wrote:
> > In article
> > >,
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > *ScottW > wrote:
> > > On Oct 15, 3:52*pm, Jenn > wrote:
> > > > On Oct 15, 12:00*pm, ScottW > wrote:
> >
> > > > > On Oct 14, 11:14*pm, Jenn > wrote:
> >
> > > > > > In article
> > > > > > >,
> >
> > > > > > *ScottW > wrote:
> > > > > > > On Oct 14, 7:18*pm, Boon > wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Oct 14, 6:25*pm, ScottW > wrote:
> >
> > > > > > > > > On Oct 13, 8:53*pm, Jenn >
> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> >
> > > > > > > > > > In article
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > ps.c
> > > > > > > > > > om>,
> >
> > > > > > > > > > *ScottW2 > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > On Oct 13, 5:37*pm, Jenn >
> > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > In article
> > > > > > > > > > > > >,
> > > > > > > > > > > > *George M. Middius > wrote:
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Jenn said:
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Remember what happened right after Clinton
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > signed
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "DADT" law? A
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > couple
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of states immediately passed laws making sodomy
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > illegal.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Eighteenth-century
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > enlightenment, here we come!
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And then there's the whole anti-gay marriage crap
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that 2pid
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and his
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ilk get all flustered over.
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > "Gay people can marry those of those of the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > opposite
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > sex just
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > like
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > others." *You mean crap like that?
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Clyde said that, not Witless.
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > He would be the "ilk" that was mentioned.
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > *Jenn falls victim to the same stereotype mentality
> > > > > > > > > > > that she claims persecutes her.
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > Good job Jenn.
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > ScottW
> >
> > > > > > > > > > It's a direct quote from Clyde. *Bring it up with him.
> >
> > > > > > > > > It's your naked "ilk" bigotry that is most repulsive
> > > > > > > > > though I'm sure you lack the self-awareness to see it.
> >
> > > > > > > > Which begs the question...if you're so repulsed by us, why do
> > > > > > > > you
> > > > > > > > stay?
> >
> > > > > > > *It's not your repulsiveness that is repulsive. *It's more the
> > > > > > > facade
> > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > Jenn's decency that really disgusts.
> > > > > > > That's a facade you've never mastered in spite of all your
> > > > > > > efforts.
> >
> > > > > > > Once I realize how prone to bigotry she really is...She's not
> > > > > > > intolerable.
> >
> > > > > > OK, I'll bite, troll.
> >
> > > > > * More debating from Jenn. *You're naked enough, please stop exposing
> > > > > yourself.
> >
> > > > > > *What, according to you, am I bigoted about?
> >
> > Stop fantasizing.
>
> Try to make a substantive argument rather employing cheap debating
> trade crap.

"You're naked enough, please stop exposing yourself."

>
> >
> >
> > > > > Anyone who talks about people of an "ilk" are bigots.
> >
> > > > > Main Entry: big·ot
> > > > > Pronunciation: \?bi-g?t\
> > > > > Function: noun
> > > > > Etymology: French, hypocrite, bigot
> > > > > Date: 1660
> > > > > : a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own
> > > > > opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the
> > > > > members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and
> > > > > intolerance
> >
> > > > > The group does not have to be racial or ethically defined. *That's
> > > > > just the easiest example to portray.
> >
> > > > > ScottW
> >
> > > > A common definition of "ilk" is "member of a group". The group of
> > > > people who share the beliefs thar you and Clyde share about SSM often
> > > > use the sentence that I quoted.
> >
> > > It's your presumption of common beliefs that is the basis for all
> > > bigotry.
> >
> > It's not a presumption. *You and Clyde have expressed similar opinions
> > about SSM.
>
> No, we did not. You paint with a very broad brush.

You have said that you don't support SSM. Clyde has also said that.

>
> Should I claim you and George have similar sexual desires?

No, because we don't. He's attracted to men. I'm attracted to women.

>
> >
> >
> >
> > > > It's really that simple, Scott. If you
> > > > wish to believe that I'm a bigot, feel free.
> >
> > > *You've proven it. *You group people and assert beliefs
> > > they do not equally hold.
> >
> > Are you in favor of SSM?
>
> No, nor am I opposed. I am pretty much agnostic on it.

You have said that you won't support equal marriage rights for gay
people.

> I am more concerned about the decision process remaining
> a democratic one. I don't consider SSM a "civil rights" issue.
> Virtually anything can be declared a civil right.

So you disagree with the ruling on Loving vs Virginia?

>
>
>
> > *Is Clyde?
>
> Ask him.

He has made it quite clear for people of normal reading comprehension.

>
> >
> >
> >
> > > > It only adds fuel for
> > > > those who laugh at you though.
> >
> > > * Are you so spineless that you care what
> > > the we-minded think?
> >
> > Not really. *I'm just cluing you into reality.
>
> Reality is dirtbags exist. If you choose to alter your
> behavior to accomodate them, that's your choice.
> I consider it weak and certainly makes you a person
> of less integrity than I'd prefer to think of you.

I'm not altering my behavior.

>
>
>
> > *You seemed to need help
> > with it.
> >
> > > * I gave you more credit than that, but I guess I
> > > was wrong.
> >
> > You usually are.
> >
> >
> >
> > > > By the way, would those who say things like. "Gay people ____." be
> > > > bigots in your view?
> >
> > > *No. *That's the problem with bigots. *Everything is so full
> > > of blanks. *Try understanding people as individuals and
> > > stop stereotyping. *That only results in you invariably being wrong
> > > and a bigot.
> >
> > I see. *So a person reading
> > this:http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gutnLWP4KNjECVTydghhwRVzJikAD94DOQ38
> > 0
> > and replying:
> > "I don't think I shall support rights for people who condone acquiring
> > them by depriving others of their rights"
>
> Sounds like "people" isn't clear to you. Yes, I withhold my support
> for
> gay marriage for all gays

There you go. "Agnostic" lol

> based on the actions of a few.
> I do that because I expect the majority to vehemently reject the
> McCartyist actions of the few. I see no evidence of that.

Too funny!

> The few who do can go to Iowa to marry and be recognized
> in Ca.

No they can't.

> It's a trifle hardship.

OK, from now on, all hetero people should have to go to Iowa to get
married.

[Jenn[_2_]]

In article
>,
ScottW > wrote:

> On Oct 15, 9:24*pm, Jenn > wrote:
> > In article
> > >,
> >
> > *ScottW > wrote:
> > > On Oct 15, 9:03*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> > > > wrote:
> > > > On Oct 15, 5:52*pm, Jenn > wrote:
> >
> > > > > By the way, would those who say things like. "Gay people ____." be
> > > > > bigots in your view?
> >
> > > > People who live the Gay lifestyle deserve whatever they get. LoL.
> >
> > > Apparently Jenn is stupid enough
> >
> > lol *You really want to go there? *OK, I'll play along for awhile.
> >
> > > to be influenced by the lies
> > > you two.
> >
> > > Explains why Obermann confuses her so.
> >
> > He doesn't confuse me at all. *I have at average comprehension skills. *
>
> At average? Ok, you are "at average" at determining truth from lies.

Typo. Should have read "I have at least average comprehension skills."

>
> The liars are going to own you.

What liars?

>
>
> > Between you and me, that makes one of us.
>
> That was substantive. You and Marc would make a cute couple.

I see. Everything has to be "substantive" now. I'll read your posts
while keeping that in mind.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Oct 16, 3:42*pm, Jenn > wrote:

> *ScottW > wrote:

> > *That was substantive. *You and Marc would make a cute couple.
>
> I see. *Everything has to be "substantive" now. *I'll read your posts
> while keeping that in mind.

I'd try to get a definition of "substansive" from 2pid first.

It won't be right but you'll know how to decipher his unintelligible
'thoughts'. You may save some time too.

It took me a long time to figure out what 2pid means when he barks
about "lies", "honesty", "integrity" "hypocrisy" and the like. (Of
course now that I know it just makes me laugh harder so be careful.)

[Boon[_2_]]

On Oct 16, 3:42*pm, Jenn > wrote:
> In article
> >,
>
>
>
>
>
> *ScottW > wrote:
> > On Oct 15, 9:24*pm, Jenn > wrote:
> > > In article
> > > >,
>
> > > *ScottW > wrote:
> > > > On Oct 15, 9:03*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > On Oct 15, 5:52*pm, Jenn > wrote:
>
> > > > > > By the way, would those who say things like. "Gay people ____." be
> > > > > > bigots in your view?
>
> > > > > People who live the Gay lifestyle deserve whatever they get. LoL.
>
> > > > Apparently Jenn is stupid enough
>
> > > lol *You really want to go there? *OK, I'll play along for awhile..
>
> > > > to be influenced by the lies
> > > > you two.
>
> > > > Explains why Obermann confuses her so.
>
> > > He doesn't confuse me at all. *I have at average comprehension skills. *
>
> > *At average? *Ok, you are "at average" at determining truth from lies.
>
> Typo. *Should have read "I have at least average comprehension skills."
>
>
>
> > *The liars are going to own you.
>
> What liars?
>
>
>
> > > Between you and me, that makes one of us.
>
> > *That was substantive. *You and Marc would make a cute couple.
>
> I see. *Everything has to be "substantive" now. *I'll read your posts
> while keeping that in mind.

He thinks we're cute, though, even though neither one of us would
touch him with a ten-foot-pole.

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Boon said:

> > > *That was substantive. *You and Marc would make a cute couple.
> >
> > I see. *Everything has to be "substantive" now. *I'll read your posts
> > while keeping that in mind.
>
> He thinks we're cute, though, even though neither one of us would
> touch him with a ten-foot-pole.

I believe that should be 'cute'. Definition pending.

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Witless is on a tear.

> > By the way, would those who say things like. "Gay people ____." be
> > bigots in your view?
>
> No. That's the problem with bigots.

I have here a quote from one of your earlier yapdowns. As usual, it's little
more than word salad, but I suspect you were yapping about your own bigotry:

The George needs a new liver cuz his gay lifestyle
killed his but he can't pay for the operation kind of
healthcare that is a problem.

You upchucked that glob of malformed yapping in August 2008. That probably
means you'll deny responsibility for translating it. My question is why did
you refer to me as "The George", or in the alternative, were you referring to
somebody else?

Don't worry about translating the rest of the gibberish. It's enough that you
did, in fact, use the odious term "gay lifestyle" to cloak your bigotry.

Shall we revisit your rants about "pos-pos parties"?

[MiNe 109]

In article
>,
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" > wrote:
Scott sez:

> McCartyist

This is a good place to applaud Austin's Kathy McCarty.

Daniel Johnston's Rocket Ship:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZLdgb3kZpM

Stephen

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

MiNe 109 said:

> > McCartyist
>
> This is a good place to applaud Austin's Kathy McCarty.

Please stop fawning.

[Jenn[_2_]]

In article >,
George M. Middius > wrote:

> MiNe 109 said:
>
> > > McCartyist
> >
> > This is a good place to applaud Austin's Kathy McCarty.
>
> Please stop fawning.

lol

[MiNe 109]

In article >,
George M. Middius > wrote:

> MiNe 109 said:
>
> > > McCartyist
> >
> > This is a good place to applaud Austin's Kathy McCarty.
>
> Please stop fawning.

Did I say applaud? I meant compare unfavorably to better musicians and
favorably to worse.

Stephen

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

MiNe 109 said:

> > > This is a good place to applaud Austin's Kathy McCarty.
> >
> > Please stop fawning.
>
> Did I say applaud? I meant compare unfavorably to better musicians and
> favorably to worse.

Now yer talking.

The loony right wingnuts are trying to spin Obama's snub of Fox "News" as the
Prez's inability to accept criticism.

[MiNe 109]

In article >,
George M. Middius > wrote:

> MiNe 109 said:
>
> > > > This is a good place to applaud Austin's Kathy McCarty.
> > >
> > > Please stop fawning.
> >
> > Did I say applaud? I meant compare unfavorably to better musicians and
> > favorably to worse.
>
> Now yer talking.
>
> The loony right wingnuts are trying to spin Obama's snub of Fox "News" as the
> Prez's inability to accept criticism.

A stinging rebuke, to be sure. I hope the Democrats don't respond with a
sharply worded letter.

Stephen

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

MiNe 109 said:

> > > > > This is a good place to applaud Austin's Kathy McCarty.
> > > >
> > > > Please stop fawning.
> > >
> > > Did I say applaud? I meant compare unfavorably to better musicians and
> > > favorably to worse.
> >
> > Now yer talking.
> >
> > The loony right wingnuts are trying to spin Obama's snub of Fox "News" as the
> > Prez's inability to accept criticism.
>
> A stinging rebuke, to be sure. I hope the Democrats don't respond with a
> sharply worded letter.

A letter? Really? At least they wouldn't enlist Scottie to proofread it.

[GeoSynch]

Buffoon stooped:

> MiNe 109 wrote:

> > In Texas, married gays can get divorced but not married.

> How about remarried? I bet there's a loophole somewhere.

What an idiot. That one sailed right past your addled noggin.

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Witless is on a tear.

> > By the way, would those who say things like. "Gay people ____." be
> > bigots in your view?
>
> No. That's the problem with bigots.

I have here a quote from one of your earlier yapdowns. As usual, it's
little more than word salad, but I suspect you were yapping about your own
bigotry:

The George needs a new liver cuz his gay lifestyle
killed his but he can't pay for the operation kind of
healthcare that is a problem.

You upchucked that glob of malformed yapping in August 2008. That probably
means you'll deny responsibility for translating it. My question is why
did you refer to me as "The George", or in the alternative, were you
referring to somebody else?

Don't worry about translating the rest of the gibberish. It's enough that
you did, in fact, use the odious term "gay lifestyle" to cloak your
bigotry.

Shall we revisit your rants about "pos-pos parties"?

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

A certain pooch has dropped out of his remedial language class.

> > Witless is on a tear.
> >
> > > > By the way, would those who say things like. "Gay people ____." be
> > > > bigots in your view?
> >
> > > *No. *That's the problem with bigots.
> >
> > I have here a quote from one of your earlier yapdowns. As usual, it's
> > little more than word salad, but I suspect you were yapping about your own
> > bigotry:
> >
> > * * * * The George *needs a new liver cuz his gay lifestyle
> > * * * * killed his but he can't pay for the operation kind of
> > * * * * healthcare that is a problem.
> >
> > You upchucked that glob of malformed yapping in August 2008. That probably
> > means you'll deny responsibility for translating it. My question is why
> > did you refer to me as "The George", or in the alternative, were you
> > referring to somebody else?

Cat got your tongue, Pooch?

> > Don't worry about translating the rest of the gibberish. It's enough that
> > you did, in fact, use the odious term "gay lifestyle" to cloak your
> > bigotry.
>
> Why do you consider your lifestyle "odious"?

<snicker>

> Anyway, it was not just "gay lifestyle" applied broadly, it was "his
> gay lifestyle"
> as odious as it may be.

"his"? Who does that refer to, Slobberboy?

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Oct 19, 11:54*pm, ScottW > wrote:
> On Oct 19, 4:17*pm, George M. Middius >
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > A certain pooch has dropped out of his remedial language class.
>
> > > > Witless is on a tear.
>
> > > > > > By the way, would those who say things like. "Gay people ____." be
> > > > > > bigots in your view?
>
> > > > > *No. *That's the problem with bigots.
>
> > > > I have here a quote from one of your earlier yapdowns. As usual, it's
> > > > little more than word salad, but I suspect you were yapping about your own
> > > > bigotry:
>
> > > > * * * * The George *needs a new liver cuz his gay lifestyle
> > > > * * * * killed his but he can't pay for the operation kind of
> > > > * * * * healthcare that is a problem.
>
> > > > You upchucked that glob of malformed yapping in August 2008. That probably
> > > > means you'll deny responsibility for translating it. My question is why
> > > > did you refer to me as "The George", or in the alternative, were you
> > > > referring to somebody else?
>
> > Cat got your tongue, Pooch?
>
> > > > Don't worry about translating the rest of the gibberish. It's enough that
> > > > you did, in fact, use the odious term "gay lifestyle" to cloak your
> > > > bigotry.
>
> > > *Why do you consider your lifestyle "odious"?
>
> > <snicker>
>
> > > Anyway, it was not just "gay lifestyle" applied broadly, it was "his
> > > gay lifestyle"
> > > as odious as it may be.
>
> > "his"? Who does that refer to, Slobberboy?
>
> *I believe that would be you....which actually explains the odious
> part.

And exactly what is "his" gay lifestyle, dum-dum? LoL.

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Witless examines the floor for spider droppings.

> > A certain pooch has dropped out of his remedial language class.

Why did you quit, Pooch? Just last week you were bragging about learning
to be an excellent writer.

> > > > * * * * The George *needs a new liver cuz his gay lifestyle
> > > > * * * * killed his but he can't pay for the operation kind of
> > > > * * * * healthcare that is a problem.
> >
> > > > You upchucked that glob of malformed yapping in August 2008. That probably
> > > > means you'll deny responsibility for translating it. My question is why
> > > > did you refer to me as "The George", or in the alternative, were you
> > > > referring to somebody else?
> >
> > Cat got your tongue, Pooch?

Still can't figure out what you meant, eh?

> > > Anyway, it was not just "gay lifestyle" applied broadly, it was "his
> > > gay lifestyle"
> > > as odious as it may be.
> >
> > "his"? Who does that refer to, Slobberboy?
>
> I believe that would be you....which actually explains the odious
> part.

Hey, look, everybody -- Witless got hold of a dictionary!

Still waiting to find out why you called me "The George". Tick-tock,
tick-tock, tick-tock. The doomsday clock is ticking for your Final
Yapdown.

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Shhhh! said:

> > > > Anyway, it was not just "gay lifestyle" applied broadly, it was "his
> > > > gay lifestyle"
> > > > as odious as it may be.
> >
> > > "his"? Who does that refer to, Slobberboy?
> >
> > *I believe that would be you....which actually explains the odious
> > part.
>
> And exactly what is "his" gay lifestyle, dum-dum? LoL.

I have a theory about Scottie's slide into dementia. I think he was
running after a delivery truck one day, and like the shortsighted pooch he
is, he ran headfirst into a hydrant. He's been seeing stars ever since.

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

So much yapping, so little meaning....

> > Witless examines the floor for spider droppings.
> >
> > > > A certain pooch has dropped out of his remedial language class.
> >
> > Why did you quit, Pooch? Just last week you were bragging about learning
> > to be an excellent writer.

Do you limit yourself to "answering" only one direct question per post?
(Note: If you answer that meta-question, you'll have filled your quota,
making it impossible for you to answer the real question.)

> > > > > > * * * * The George *needs a new liver cuz his gay lifestyle
> > > > > > * * * * killed his but he can't pay for the operation kind of
> > > > > > * * * * healthcare that is a problem.
> >
> > > > > > You upchucked that glob of malformed yapping in August 2008. That probably
> > > > > > means you'll deny responsibility for translating it. My question is why
> > > > > > did you refer to me as "The George", or in the alternative, were you
> > > > > > referring to somebody else?
> >
> > > > Cat got your tongue, Pooch?
> >
> > Still can't figure out what you meant, eh?

[snip yapping]

> > Still waiting to find out why you called me "The George". Tick-tock,
> > tick-tock, tick-tock. The doomsday clock is ticking for your Final
> > Yapdown.
>
> The, as in The only one so odious as you.

Marc has been commenting on your inability to formulate meaningful replies
when cornered. This nonsense is a pointed example. Have you tried
fortifying yourself with something alcoholic before yapping in this
mindless manner?

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Oct 20, 2:03*pm, ScottW > wrote:
> On Oct 20, 10:52*am, George M. Middius >
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > > > Still waiting to find out why you called me "The George". Tick-tock,
> > > > tick-tock, tick-tock. The doomsday clock is ticking for your Final
> > > > Yapdown.
>
> > > *The, as in The only one so odious as you.
>
> > Marc has been commenting on your inability to formulate meaningful replies
> > when cornered.
>
> Don't tell me your even less normal than his marginally average
> inability?
> Normal people are so dimwitted, really no fun at all.
>
> > This nonsense is a pointed example.
>
> *Over your pointed little head. * Too bad Odius One.
> I shall drop the "The". You're not worthy.

2pid likes to pretend his inability communicate is not his fault. LoL.

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Shhhh! said:

> > > This nonsense is a pointed example.
> >
> > *Over your pointed little head. * Too bad Odius One.
> > I shall drop the "The". You're not worthy.
>
> 2pid likes to pretend his inability communicate is not his fault. LoL.

You're interpretorial skill's are lacking.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Oct 20, 8:05*pm, ScottW > wrote:
> On Oct 20, 12:11*pm, Boon > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 20, 2:03*pm, ScottW > wrote:
>
> > > On Oct 20, 10:52*am, George M. Middius >
> > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > Still waiting to find out why you called me "The George". Tick-tock,
> > > > > > tick-tock, tick-tock. The doomsday clock is ticking for your Final
> > > > > > Yapdown.
>
> > > > > *The, as in The only one so odious as you.
>
> > > > Marc has been commenting on your inability to formulate meaningful replies
> > > > when cornered.
>
> > > Don't tell me your even less normal than his marginally average
> > > inability?
> > > Normal people are so dimwitted, really no fun at all.
>
> > > > This nonsense is a pointed example.
>
> > > *Over your pointed little head. * Too bad Odius One.
> > > I shall drop the "The". You're not worthy.
>
> > Hmmm...let's see. You're calling everyone here "NAMBLA supporters."
>
> *Wrong again. *Just the few who do, like you.

LOL!

2pid, there is no traction with this one. "Imbecile" stuck with you
for a reason (because you are one). That doesn't mean you can call
someone a "NAMBLA-supporter" and have that stick when they're not one.
LOL!

Your simply a juvenile name caller. LoL.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Oct 20, 2:03*pm, ScottW > wrote:
> On Oct 20, 10:52*am, George M. Middius >
> wrote:

> > Marc has been commenting on your inability to formulate meaningful replies
> > when cornered.
>
> Don't tell me your even less normal than his marginally average
> inability?
> Normal people are so dimwitted, really no fun at all.

LoL.

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Shhhh! said:

> > > Marc has been commenting on your inability to formulate meaningful replies
> > > when cornered.
> >
> > Don't tell me your even less normal than his marginally average
> > inability?
> > Normal people are so dimwitted, really no fun at all.
>
> LoL.

I think Witless was making a 'joke'.

[Boon[_2_]]

On Oct 20, 8:05*pm, ScottW > wrote:
> On Oct 20, 12:11*pm, Boon > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 20, 2:03*pm, ScottW > wrote:
>
> > > On Oct 20, 10:52*am, George M. Middius >
> > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > Still waiting to find out why you called me "The George". Tick-tock,
> > > > > > tick-tock, tick-tock. The doomsday clock is ticking for your Final
> > > > > > Yapdown.
>
> > > > > *The, as in The only one so odious as you.
>
> > > > Marc has been commenting on your inability to formulate meaningful replies
> > > > when cornered.
>
> > > Don't tell me your even less normal than his marginally average
> > > inability?
> > > Normal people are so dimwitted, really no fun at all.
>
> > > > This nonsense is a pointed example.
>
> > > *Over your pointed little head. * Too bad Odius One.
> > > I shall drop the "The". You're not worthy.
>
> > Hmmm...let's see. You're calling everyone here "NAMBLA supporters."
>
> *Wrong again. *Just the few who do, like you.

Well, Scott Wittevrongel of Vista, California...apparently you like
having your name linked to "NAMBLA supporter" on Google search
engines. If you weren't such an Internet addict, you would have been
able to control yourself. LoL.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Oct 20, 9:17*pm, George M. Middius >
wrote:
> Shhhh! said:
>
> > > > Marc has been commenting on your inability to formulate meaningful replies
> > > > when cornered.
>
> > > Don't tell me your even less normal than his marginally average
> > > inability?
> > > Normal people are so dimwitted, really no fun at all.
>
> > LoL.
>
> I think Witless was making a 'joke'.

Let me know when you're sure. I want to laugh at the appropriate
moment. I may have jumped the gun here.

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Shhhh! said:

> > > > > Marc has been commenting on your inability to formulate meaningful replies
> > > > > when cornered.
> >
> > > > Normal people are so dimwitted, really no fun at all.
> >
> > > LoL.
> >
> > I think Witless was making a 'joke'.
>
> Let me know when you're sure. I want to laugh at the appropriate
> moment. I may have jumped the gun here.

Scottie's range of emotions is so limited that I've only been able to
discern two separate frequency bands: anger and spite. Nothing he
experiences approaches what Normals know as fun. He gets angry over
politics and other areas over which he has no control. He gets spiteful on
topics close to home, such as his dysfunctional family and being chained
to a cubicle farm at work. In this thread, he has navigated away from both
what angers him and what spites him, so he's untethered. That's his cue to
engage in the Witlessmongrel version of badinage.

So no, I'm not sure. Who can be sure when it comes to mapping the
responses of a rabid and deranged ideologue? That said, I do have a strong
suspicion that Witless was trying to make a 'joke'.

woof.

[GeoSynch]

Pudge the Gimp minced:

> Nothing he experiences approaches what Normals know as fun.

Taking unwarranted liberties with that word 'Normal' again, 'lil Georgie?

[GeoSynch]

BaBoon hooted:

> Are you afraid to let her near your computer because of what she'll find?

She'd rightly conclude you're a mentally unhinged creep who has the hots for
her.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Oct 21, 12:17*am, "GeoSynch" > wrote:
> Pudge the Gimp minced:
>
> > Nothing he experiences approaches what Normals know as fun.
>
> Taking unwarranted liberties with that word 'Normal' again, 'lil Georgie?

Damn, you're right, Sugar. "Normal" people fear everything. They live
for reading blogs and off-the-wall conspiracy theories. They hate (I
SAY AGAIN) HATE "fags".

Why, now that you point it out you, 2pid and Bratzi are the only three
"normals" here!

Thanks! LOL!

[Boon[_2_]]

On Oct 21, 3:33*am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> wrote:
> On Oct 21, 12:17*am, "GeoSynch" > wrote:
>
> > Pudge the Gimp minced:
>
> > > Nothing he experiences approaches what Normals know as fun.
>
> > Taking unwarranted liberties with that word 'Normal' again, 'lil Georgie?
>
> Damn, you're right, Sugar. "Normal" people fear everything. They live
> for reading blogs and off-the-wall conspiracy theories. They hate (I
> SAY AGAIN) HATE "fags".
>
> Why, now that you point it out you, 2pid and Bratzi are the only three
> "normals" here!
>
> Thanks! LOL!

Exactly. In PLF's world, it's normal to hide behind so many
anonymizing programs that Google no longer acknowledges your
existence. THAT'S normal. LoL!

[GeoSynch]

Marc Phillips, the Mad BaBoon, wrote:

> Exactly. In PLF's world, it's normal to hide behind so many anonymizing
> programs that Google no longer acknowledges your existence. THAT'S normal.
> LoL!

Medical experts have confirmed Marc Phillips suffers from Mad BaBoon Disease,
wherein prion-variants have turned his brain to swiss cheese ... well, what
little of it there was to start with.