NoCalMike Posted May 31, 2006 Report Posted May 31, 2006 Why, I don't know They were sick of being modded, that's why. You mean when the continually hurled personal insults to amp up their arguments? Both aren't innocent. At least at the other place, both sides can do it and it won't matter. Yeah, your right.
Slayer Posted May 31, 2006 Report Posted May 31, 2006 Both sides are funny for their own differing reasons. I will give Mike, Eric and Jobber credit for actually going over there and engaging in (ever circular) discussion with them rather than just talking about them over here, especially snuff's comical performance which evokes an image in my head of a 50's greaser with his sleeves rolled up and a switchblade in his hand going "Come on! Come on!"
Guest Posted June 1, 2006 Report Posted June 1, 2006 how Americans should have killed more towelheads or something. It was definitly pretty funny. Maybe it was the folks from the other messageboard that voted their support for this administration here at TSM as guests or something. Clearly, whoever voted in the affirmative here doesn't feel like being bothered with a simple question like 'why?' Im sure it has something to do with killing the dang sand-people. How about you go over there and find out for yourself instead of talking about it and not doing it. Actions speak loudly. I'm sure you'd get flamed like a motherfucker, but you're a big boy.
snuffbox Posted June 1, 2006 Report Posted June 1, 2006 Im pretty sure there is already a thread there where people explained why they support this administration...they also pointed out aspects that they in fact did not find too appealing. Here, though, the interest in explaining one's support does not appear to be somthing people care to partake in.
Guest Posted June 1, 2006 Report Posted June 1, 2006 That's because the people that think that way don't post here, and if they do, not in this folder.
Big Ol' Smitty Posted June 1, 2006 Report Posted June 1, 2006 How about you go over there and find out for yourself instead of talking about it and not doing it. Actions speak loudly. I'm sure you'd get flamed like a motherfucker, but you're a big boy. Plus, you can get a designated GI Joe character.
SuperJerk Posted June 1, 2006 Report Posted June 1, 2006 Deja vu. Someone please post this same poll at the Pit. Giimick posters like neocon are funny because ya' know they're being goofy and over-the-top. Even conservatives like kkk are at least reasonable in their Bushhitletism. :-) But then their are psychopathic fucks like Marney... But our economy is absolutely fantastic, we're at full employment, gold is soaring, and the stock markets are at record highs. We have the President's tax cuts to thank for all of that. Do I wish we'd had a constitutional amendment banning gay "marriage?" Do I wish the death tax had been repealed already? Do I wish we'd militarized the border, renamed the Department of Defense to the Department of War and increased its funding another 200%, shut down the IRS and instituted a flat tax? Of course. As for the war, do I wish we had bombed Mecca? Do I wish we were killing a lot more Moslems a lot more quickly? Do I wish we'd annihilate Tehran, stage a coup in Saudi Arabia, assassinate Assad, and exterminate the Palestinians? Of course, of course, of course. Now let's compare this genocidal rant to MikeSC's ability to argue for 10 pages against any "liberal" point no matter how much empirical evidence there is to the contrary. Why not discuss that genocidal rant, you know- over at the Pit. I've already paid my dues trying to argue with Marney. She knows what I think of her. And, in addition, let me ask the following... Is anyone here familiar with Andrew Sullivan? Sullivan is a columnist and frequent guest on Bill Maher's HBO show. Sullivan frequently hands out satirical "awards" for statements made he thinks are bullshit, and names the awards after people who are famous for making bullshit statements. For example, he has one called the "Michelle Malkin Award" for which nominated statements must "be entirely devised to insult; it should be completely devoid of originality; it must have at least two hoary, dead-as-a-Norwegian-parrot cliches; and it must assume that readers already agree with the writer. Arbitrary mean-spiritedness wins extra points." That's what the Pit is all about.
snuffbox Posted June 1, 2006 Report Posted June 1, 2006 I think kingofthe909 wants more proof that this question was posed at the Pit.
Slayer Posted June 1, 2006 Report Posted June 1, 2006 I've already paid my dues trying to argue with Marney. Oh, how did I miss this gem before.
EricMM Posted June 1, 2006 Report Posted June 1, 2006 Paid your dues? You took your ball, and you went home ...
snuffbox Posted June 1, 2006 Report Posted June 1, 2006 I like how the Pit has less people that support this admin than TSM does...and they spent several pages at least saying why they support it, or why not...here though, its 19 people clicking 'yes' and hiding and justpassinby giving it the old college try. Slayer...dont be such a soc.
Slayer Posted June 1, 2006 Report Posted June 1, 2006 A what? Sorry, I'm not down with your hip slang or made-up words or whatever
snuffbox Posted June 1, 2006 Report Posted June 1, 2006 It was my late comeback to your greaser reference...you know, 'soc', pronounced 'sosh'...from the Outsiders....yea...
Slayer Posted June 1, 2006 Report Posted June 1, 2006 Never read the book or watched the movie, so, yes that was lost on me
Guest Posted June 1, 2006 Report Posted June 1, 2006 I think kingofthe909 wants more proof that this question was posed at the Pit. What the fuck are you talking about? I hope to God that you know that there's nowhere near the number of people that post there that post here, not that I care either way. You're easily one of the stupider posters on either board. I don't know whether or not to take that as sarcasm, because almost everything you say is too goddamn asinine to be real. Jerk said that he took his ball and went home, or at least that's the way I interpreted it when he left. I don't think there's anything wrong with that, but don't say that you paid your dues. I know when I come back to this class later in the day, I'll be reading something as equally retarded as your quote above.
NoCalMike Posted June 1, 2006 Report Posted June 1, 2006 And, in addition, let me ask the following... Is anyone here familiar with Andrew Sullivan? Sullivan is a columnist and frequent guest on Bill Maher's HBO show. Sullivan frequently hands out satirical "awards" for statements made he thinks are bullshit, and names the awards after people who are famous for making bullshit statements. For example, he has one called the "Michelle Malkin Award" for which nominated statements must "be entirely devised to insult; it should be completely devoid of originality; it must have at least two hoary, dead-as-a-Norwegian-parrot cliches; and it must assume that readers already agree with the writer. Arbitrary mean-spiritedness wins extra points." That's what the Pit is all about. Yes I am familiar with Sullivan. I was not aware of his "awards" though. Where can I read up on that, on his website? Oh and LOL at him naming it the "Michelle Malkin" award as the description of the award fits her perfectly.
snuffbox Posted June 1, 2006 Report Posted June 1, 2006 I doubt the folks at the Pit really need you to come to their defense, kingofthe909. Considering I asked if anyone that clicked 'yes' here would explain themselves...but it seems to be a real chore. You went on a rant about how I should bring this up at the Pit...where it already has been discussed, for six pages...y2jerk explained this for a second time, you still dont get the point that I asked people HERE (appears to be 20 of 'em) to say a few words as to why they support this current Big Republican Govt. I dont care about why y2jerk doesnt post at the Pit anymore. I sure do feel sad being labeled 'stupider' by a dude that cant find the exact same thread already discussed at the Pit. Maybe I should bump that thread and ask if the people there can explain why TSM members support this admin?
Guest Posted June 1, 2006 Report Posted June 1, 2006 I already know there's a thread at the Pit. I can read. My point was that you should go over there and post that "redneck/truckdriver Republican" type of rant there instead of doing it here where nobody posts. Most people don't want to discuss anything politically related here. For the record, I didn't vote in the poll. I don't know at this point. Yes, you should bump that thread, that's exactly what I was trying to say.
snuffbox Posted June 1, 2006 Report Posted June 1, 2006 Again..theyve already explained themselves. One certain fellow (who really likes GWB, etc) actually expressed disdain at the current Big Govt style of the Republican admin. At the Pit, it was 50/50 for support...and those who do support, all seemed to say why. Why should they repeat themselves? Here, 20 people voted 'yes'...4 more than at the Pit...yet, only justpassinby tried saying why he supports the admin and didnt fare too well doing it. The fact that 20 people voted but wont say why leads me to believe that their reasoning embarrasses them.
SuperJerk Posted June 4, 2006 Report Posted June 4, 2006 I've already paid my dues trying to argue with Marney. Oh, how did I miss this gem before. Paid your dues? You took your ball, and you went home ... That's because I'm smart enough to know when to say enough is enough. I'd say I paid my dues the first time she came after me, let alone the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, or 6th times. Just being on the same planet as that fucking psycho should be considered paying your dues.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now