[George M. Middius[_4_]]

This is a semi-rhetorical question. It doesn't really need an answer, but if
you do choose to answer, it may lead to some mildly interesting discussions.

Q for Scottie: Do you enjoy the feeling that everybody in the room is
jeering at you?


--

"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

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Well, I was wrong.

This is a semi-rhetorical question. It doesn't really need an answer, but if
you do choose to answer, it may lead to some mildly interesting discussions.

Q for Scottie: Do you enjoy the feeling that everybody in the room is
jeering at you?

It's mildly amusing to see so many birds of a feather who resort to
the same
tired old boring claims of intellectual prowess while completely
failing to raise a cogent argument.

Point of order: The last 500 times you made the same fatuous claim, the
responses were all along the lines that you're the one who failed to
understand a "cogent argument". Let's review one of those responses:

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Try a cogent response rather than everything being
all about me, if you can.

BWAHAHAHAHA!!!!!! What a joke!!!!!!!

Witless, you retarded imbecilic moron, you have proven yourself utterly
impervious to reasonable explanations. Hundreds, if not thousands, of
attempts to educate you have bounced off your impenetrable skull. It is
IMPOSSIBLE to hammer any trace of reason into your impossibly dense 'mind'.

Your demands for 'cogent' this or 'intelligent' that are ludicrous, albeit
unintentional, parodies of the kind of person you wish you were. You're
utterly unreasonable, unreasoning, and irrational. You resist logic like a
religious zealot. You wallow in an ocean of hypocrisy. You have absolutely
zero awareness of your own behavior.

It's beyond useless trying to have human-style discussions with you. Your
idea of 'discussions' is mindless yapping and rote repetition of idiocies
and arguments that have been destroyed. You are beyond hopeless.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

As I recall, when that exchange took place last summer, you ran and hid in
your doghouse.

Is this what "intellectual prowess" has become to the far left?

Strawborgs, circular 'reasoning', and outright lies .... the stuff of
Witless-style 'discussions'.

I wondered this as NPR interviewed Markos of the daily KOS the other
day in between pleas for contribution.

No, we're not going to indulge your seething resentment of Smart People. You
are what you are, and it's not my fault.

You may now do your usual, woof woof, bark bark to impress Jenn.
She really thinks those doggie sounds are admirable.

Pretending to omniscience too? How Kroogeresque. I'm glad to see your
admiration for Fecesborg hasn't diminished even though he "took it to the
real world".


--

"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 9, 10:53*am, George M. Middius
wrote:
This is a semi-rhetorical question. It doesn't really need an answer, but if
you do choose to answer, it may lead to some mildly interesting discussions.

Q for Scottie: Do you enjoy the feeling that everybody in the room is
jeering at you?

It's mildly amusing to see so many birds of a feather who resort to
the same
tired old boring claims of intellectual prowess while completely
failing to raise a cogent argument.

Like accusing people of lying? Speaking of lying, it's not that the
"birds of a feather" talk up their prowess so much as they note the lack
of yours.

Is this what "intellectual prowess" has become to the far left?
I wondered this as NPR interviewed Markos of the daily KOS the other
day in between pleas for contribution.

You may now do your usual, woof woof, bark bark to impress Jenn.
She really thinks those doggie sounds are admirable.

Troll.

[Jenn[_2_]]

In article ,
MiNe 109 wrote:

In article
,
ScottW wrote:

On Feb 9, 10:53*am, George M. Middius
wrote:
This is a semi-rhetorical question. It doesn't really need an answer, but
if
you do choose to answer, it may lead to some mildly interesting
discussions.

Q for Scottie: Do you enjoy the feeling that everybody in the room is
jeering at you?

It's mildly amusing to see so many birds of a feather who resort to
the same
tired old boring claims of intellectual prowess while completely
failing to raise a cogent argument.

Like accusing people of lying? Speaking of lying, it's not that the
"birds of a feather" talk up their prowess so much as they note the lack
of yours.

Is this what "intellectual prowess" has become to the far left?
I wondered this as NPR interviewed Markos of the daily KOS the other
day in between pleas for contribution.

You may now do your usual, woof woof, bark bark to impress Jenn.
She really thinks those doggie sounds are admirable.

Troll.

Not to mention that it's a lie.

[Jenn[_2_]]

In article
,
ScottW wrote:

On Feb 9, 11:57*am, Jenn wrote:
In article ,
*MiNe 109 * wrote:





In article
,
*ScottW wrote:

On Feb 9, 10:53*am, George M. Middius
wrote:
This is a semi-rhetorical question. It doesn't really need an answer,
but
if
you do choose to answer, it may lead to some mildly interesting
discussions.

Q for Scottie: Do you enjoy the feeling that everybody in the room is
jeering at you?

It's mildly amusing to see so many birds of a feather who resort to
the same
tired old boring claims of intellectual prowess while completely
failing to raise a cogent argument.

Like accusing people of lying? Speaking of lying, it's not that the
"birds of a feather" talk up their prowess so much as they note the lack
of yours.

Is this what "intellectual prowess" has become to the far left?
I wondered this as NPR interviewed Markos of the daily KOS the other
day in between pleas for contribution.

You may now do your usual, woof woof, bark bark to impress Jenn.
She really thinks those doggie sounds are admirable.

Troll.

Not to mention that it's a lie.

George's writing is not admirable?
You two are having a bit of a falling out here today.

ScottW

So you believe that if one is said to write well, that means that the
person always writes well?

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Jenn said:

You may now do your usual, woof woof, bark bark to impress Jenn.
She really thinks those doggie sounds are admirable.

Troll.

Not to mention that it's a lie.

ROWF! BARKETY-BARKETY-BARK!
grrrrr.....

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Jenn said:

Not to mention that it's a lie.

George's writing is not admirable?
You two are having a bit of a falling out here today.

So you believe that if one is said to write well, that means that the
person always writes well?

Jenns always on a rag or else. To bad she can not, meet her own standard's.

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Scottie needs a nap.

failing to raise a cogent argument.

Point of order: The last 500 times you made the same fatuous claim, the
responses were all along the lines that you're the one who failed to
understand a "cogent argument". Let's review one of those responses:

* ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** **

*Try a cogent response rather than everything being
all about me, if you can.

BWAHAHAHAHA!!!!!! *What a joke!!!!!!!

Witless, you retarded imbecilic moron, you have proven yourself utterly
impervious to reasonable explanations. Hundreds, if not thousands, of
attempts to educate you have bounced off your impenetrable skull. It is
IMPOSSIBLE to hammer any trace of reason into your impossibly dense 'mind'.

Your demands for 'cogent' this or 'intelligent' that are ludicrous, albeit
unintentional, parodies of the kind of person you wish you were. You're
utterly unreasonable, unreasoning, and irrational. You resist logic like a
religious zealot. You wallow in an ocean of hypocrisy. You have absolutely
zero awareness of your own behavior.

It's beyond useless trying to have human-style discussions with you. Your
idea of 'discussions' is mindless yapping and rote repetition of idiocies
and arguments that have been destroyed. You are beyond hopeless.


I rest my case.

You mean the empty case that God built for your brain?

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Well, I was wrong.

This is a semi-rhetorical question. It doesn't really need an answer, but if
you do choose to answer, it may lead to some mildly interesting discussions.

Q for Scottie: Do you enjoy the feeling that everybody in the room is
jeering at you?

It's mildly amusing to see so many birds of a feather who resort to
the same
tired old boring claims of intellectual prowess while completely
failing to raise a cogent argument.

Point of order: The last 500 times you made the same fatuous claim, the
responses were all along the lines that you're the one who failed to
understand a "cogent argument". Let's review one of those responses:

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Try a cogent response rather than everything being
all about me, if you can.

BWAHAHAHAHA!!!!!! What a joke!!!!!!!

Witless, you retarded imbecilic moron, you have proven yourself utterly
impervious to reasonable explanations. Hundreds, if not thousands, of
attempts to educate you have bounced off your impenetrable skull. It is
IMPOSSIBLE to hammer any trace of reason into your impossibly dense 'mind'.

Your demands for 'cogent' this or 'intelligent' that are ludicrous, albeit
unintentional, parodies of the kind of person you wish you were. You're
utterly unreasonable, unreasoning, and irrational. You resist logic like a
religious zealot. You wallow in an ocean of hypocrisy. You have absolutely
zero awareness of your own behavior.

It's beyond useless trying to have human-style discussions with you. Your
idea of 'discussions' is mindless yapping and rote repetition of idiocies
and arguments that have been destroyed. You are beyond hopeless.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

As I recall, when that exchange took place last summer, you ran and hid in
your doghouse.

Is this what "intellectual prowess" has become to the far left?

Strawborgs, circular 'reasoning', and outright lies .... the stuff of
Witless-style 'discussions'.

I wondered this as NPR interviewed Markos of the daily KOS the other
day in between pleas for contribution.

No, we're not going to indulge your seething resentment of Smart People. You
are what you are, and it's not my fault.

You may now do your usual, woof woof, bark bark to impress Jenn.
She really thinks those doggie sounds are admirable.

Pretending to omniscience too? How Kroogeresque. I'm glad to see your
admiration for Fecesborg hasn't diminished even though he "took it to the
real world".


--

"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

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Feb 9, 2:37*pm, ScottW wrote:

It's mildly amusing to see so many birds of a feather who resort to
the same
tired old boring claims of intellectual prowess while completely
failing to raise a cogent argument.

LoL.

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Shhhh! said:

It's mildly amusing to see so many birds of a feather who resort to
the same
tired old boring claims of intellectual prowess while completely
failing to raise a cogent argument.

LoL.

Stephen thinks Scottie knows how ironic that kind of claim is, and he just
says it to be annoying. I have to admit it's hard to accept anybody could be
stupid enough to actually believe it at face value.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Feb 14, 12:14*pm, George M. Middius
wrote:
Shhhh! said:

It's mildly amusing to see so many birds of a feather who resort to
the same
tired old boring claims of intellectual prowess while completely
failing to raise a cogent argument.

LoL.

Stephen thinks Scottie knows how ironic that kind of claim is, and he just
says it to be annoying. I have to admit it's hard to accept anybody could be
stupid enough to actually believe it at face value.

2pid being annoying for the sake of being annoying makes as much sense
as anything else he does.

Since that's now clearly and obviously the case, one has to wonder why
Clyde doesn't see 2pid for the pimply 14-year-old that he must be.

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Shhhh! said:

Stephen thinks Scottie knows how ironic that kind of claim is, and he just
says it to be annoying. I have to admit it's hard to accept anybody could be
stupid enough to actually believe it at face value.

2pid being annoying for the sake of being annoying makes as much sense
as anything else he does.

Since that's now clearly and obviously the case, one has to wonder why
Clyde doesn't see 2pid for the pimply 14-year-old that he must be.

Even Sacky is down with the doggie metaphor.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Feb 14, 4:08*pm, George M. Middius
wrote:
Shhhh! said:

Stephen thinks Scottie knows how ironic that kind of claim is, and he just
says it to be annoying. I have to admit it's hard to accept anybody could be
stupid enough to actually believe it at face value.

2pid being annoying for the sake of being annoying makes as much sense
as anything else he does.

Since that's now clearly and obviously the case, one has to wonder why
Clyde doesn't see 2pid for the pimply 14-year-old that he must be.

Even Sacky is down with the doggie metaphor.

One wonders if 2pid's lover appreciated the Valentine's Day card and
the MilkBone.

[Clyde Slick]

On 14 Feb, 15:52, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote:


Since that's now clearly and obviously the case, one has to wonder why
Clyde doesn't see 2pid for the pimply 14-year-old that he must be.

I know who he is and I have met him.

When I meet you, if I happen to see an adult and not a pimply fourteen
boy, I will let everyone know it.

[Clyde Slick]

On 14 Feb, 16:08, George M. Middius wrote:
Shhhh! said:

Stephen thinks Scottie knows how ironic that kind of claim is, and he just
says it to be annoying. I have to admit it's hard to accept anybody could be
stupid enough to actually believe it at face value.

2pid being annoying for the sake of being annoying makes as much sense
as anything else he does.

Since that's now clearly and obviously the case, one has to wonder why
Clyde doesn't see 2pid for the pimply 14-year-old that he must be.

Even Sacky is down with the doggie metaphor.

I see you as an overly perfumed French Poodle with a purple
bow on your tail.

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Clyde Slick said:

Even Sacky is down with the doggie metaphor.

I see you as an overly perfumed French Poodle with a purple
bow on your tail.

Are you trying to diminish the doggie metaphor by pretending Witless is just
one member of the pack? We're not buying it.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Feb 15, 8:27*am, Clyde Slick wrote:
On 14 Feb, 15:52, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"

wrote:

Since that's now clearly and obviously the case, one has to wonder why
Clyde doesn't see 2pid for the pimply 14-year-old that he must be.

I know who he is and I have met him.

When I meet you,

You won't.

if I happen to see an adult and not a pimply fourteen
boy, I will let everyone know it.

If I happen to end up caring I'll let you know.