Happy New Year

Postby ochre » Thu Jan 18, 2007 7:26 pm

Umm... No, thank you -- keep the ice. Unless you have a spare drink you could drop it in before passing me the glass?

It's pretty normal cold for the season here, it's just that the snow seems to have forgotten to pop by. We did have a snowstorm a few days ago, but a hurricane tagged along behind it so the snow vanished almost as soon as it hit the ground.

Oh well... We can always hope for February, eh?
ochre
On A Quest for Reality
On A Quest for Reality
 
Posts: 100
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 3:36 am
Location: Greater Scandinavia


Postby cartoonsyndicate » Thu Mar 15, 2007 8:17 pm

cartoonsyndicate
Member


Joined: 17 May 2006
Posts: 785
Location: The Borg

PostPosted: Thu Mar 15, 2007 7:54 am Post subject: emotion Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post

Ray:
Quote:

By conceding that the premise of this debate was formulated from an emotional state of mind, Ryan has introduced a fact which will make his defense of this premise a significantly uphill battle.


You're arguing from the principle of an undefined term. Please define 'emotion.'

_________________
Arbusto: la raíz de toda mal
Back to top View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
ryguy
1 of the RU3


Joined: 22 Feb 2006
Posts: 1700
Location: Another Dimension

PostPosted: Thu Mar 15, 2007 8:09 am Post subject: Re: emotion Reply with quote

cartoonsyndicate wrote:

Ray:
Quote:

By conceding that the premise of this debate was formulated from an emotional state of mind, Ryan has introduced a fact which will make his defense of this premise a significantly uphill battle.


You're arguing from the principle of an undefined term. Please define 'emotion.'


He accurately pointed out that I failed to initially define the term. That was actually an excellent point made by Ray. He's a formidable debater and I'm enjoying the discussion.

_________________
"There’s battle lines being drawn
Nobody’s right if everybody’s wrong "
For What It’s Worth - Stephen Stills, 1966
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
cartoonsyndicate
Member


Joined: 17 May 2006
Posts: 785
Location: The Borg

PostPosted: Thu Mar 15, 2007 8:41 am Post subject: Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post

Then you define it for us.

_________________
Arbusto: la raíz de toda mal
Back to top View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
ryguy
1 of the RU3


Joined: 22 Feb 2006
Posts: 1700
Location: Another Dimension

PostPosted: Thu Mar 15, 2007 8:55 am Post subject: Reply with quote

cartoonsyndicate wrote:

Then you define it for us.


Just did - read the debate.

_________________
"There’s battle lines being drawn
Nobody’s right if everybody’s wrong "
For What It’s Worth - Stephen Stills, 1966
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
cartoonsyndicate
Member


Joined: 17 May 2006
Posts: 785
Location: The Borg

PostPosted: Thu Mar 15, 2007 9:08 am Post subject: Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post

ryguy wrote:

cartoonsyndicate wrote:

Then you define it for us.


Just did - read the debate.


While you justified your emotional response to Dumbya the term remains undefined in the debate.

I'll let Webster do it for us:

Quote:

the affective aspect of consciousness : FEELING b : a state of feeling c : a conscious mental reaction (as anger or fear) subjectively experienced as strong feeling usually directed toward a specific object and typically accompanied by physiological and behavioral changes in the body
synonym see FEELING


So if we accept this definition- the operative function being "a conscious mental reaction," your emotional response to the Bush Crime Family is a well founded and necessary 'reaction' to this freakish cabal's amoral and thoroughly unethical behaviour.

Ten points for Ry.

_________________
Arbusto: la raíz de toda mal
Back to top View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
ryguy
1 of the RU3


Joined: 22 Feb 2006
Posts: 1700
Location: Another Dimension

PostPosted: Thu Mar 15, 2007 9:20 am Post subject: Reply with quote

cartoonsyndicate wrote:

So if we accept this definition- ...


LOL...

Definitions in a debate are about as useful as condoms on prom night. Everyone knows what they are for but no one really cares.

-Ry

_________________
"There’s battle lines being drawn
Nobody’s right if everybody’s wrong "
For What It’s Worth - Stephen Stills, 1966
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
cartoonsyndicate
Member


Joined: 17 May 2006
Posts: 785
Location: The Borg

PostPosted: Thu Mar 15, 2007 11:36 am Post subject: Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post

Can any reaction to this amoral, mendacious gaggle of mobsters and usurpers be anything other than ‘emotional’? Just the fact that the Dumster saw fit to appoint a pair vapid family retainers to the Supreme Court (Harriet) and the Justice Department (Speedy Gonzales) provokes disgust( and shock and awe) in the hearts of all true Americans. That he has said that the Bill of Rights is ‘just a piece of paper’ causes us deep despair in the state of the Union. That he claims that Jesus is his most influential philosopher while at the same time, by his own acts, he defiles His every pronouncement… . Well, you see my point. It’s visceral. It’s emotional. And I make no apology. Bush is the ant-Christ for crissakes. And if our own neocon contingent (Ray and Pad) don't react to the advent of the anti-Christ on an emotional level, I’d have to conclude that they are either as evil as him- or brain-dead. -My emotional take for what it’s worth.

Toon

PS

I'll toss this item from Wayne Madsen into the pit for your edification:

Quote:

March 13, 2007 --Our White House Press Corps sources report further disturbing news about President George W. Bush. Our sources have witnessed a clearly inebriated Bush approaching members of the press corps and making rude comments, including one particularly crude remark about First Lady Laura Bush. In that case, Bush, nodding toward Laura, called her a "c**t." While Bush's drinking is no secret to the White House press contingent, that particular comment was reportedly the worst they have heard uttered by Bush. Our sources also report that Laura Bush's stays at the White House are less frequent and that her overnight trips to the Mayflower Hotel often coincide with the president's drunken binges.

Note: Some of our female readers were shocked to see the "C" word in the above news item. This editor wants to make it clear that word was used by George W. Bush to denigrate his wife. It was his word, not mine. It is important that the public knows what kind of person Mr. Bush is by the offensive words he uses. The editor also wants to make clear that the President chose a public press gaggle to use this word -- that is not a private moment between him and his wife. If Mrs. Bush feels her privacy has been violated, she must understand that it is her responsibility to herself, her children, and the nation to end this abusive relationship by legally separating from the President and becoming a role model for other women around the country and the world who find themselves locked into similar abusive marriages.

Nevertheless, we have "asterisked" the word in question. However, Mr. Bush cannot asterisk his own vile words.



Bush gets real ugly with Laura.


_________________
Arbusto: la raíz de toda mal
Back to top View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
ryguy
1 of the RU3


Joined: 22 Feb 2006
Posts: 1700
Location: Another Dimension

PostPosted: Thu Mar 15, 2007 12:06 pm Post subject: Reply with quote

cartoonsyndicate wrote:

Bush is the ant-Christ for crissakes. And if our own neocon contingent (Ray and Pad) don't react to the advent of the anti-Christ on an emotional level, I’d have to conclude that they are either as evil as him- or brain-dead. -My emotional take for what it’s worth.


That crosses the line of being emotional over into inappropriate, rude, obnoxious and just plain inconsiderate. Breaking for the 16th, or 17...whatever times our rules of etiquette. I have no idea why I keep giving you so many freakin' warnings. You're intelligent enough to know where the line is and understand not to cross it. You're either unwilling to follow the rules of etiquette or want to see how far you can push it. I'm reaching the end of my patience (which I hope has been shown to be a fairly deep well).

-Ry

_________________
"There’s battle lines being drawn
Nobody’s right if everybody’s wrong "
For What It’s Worth - Stephen Stills, 1966
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
cartoonsyndicate
Member


Joined: 17 May 2006
Posts: 785
Location: The Borg

PostPosted: Thu Mar 15, 2007 12:09 pm Post subject: Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post

ryguy wrote:

cartoonsyndicate wrote:

Bush is the ant-Christ for crissakes. And if our own neocon contingent (Ray and Pad) don't react to the advent of the anti-Christ on an emotional level, I’d have to conclude that they are either as evil as him- or brain-dead. -My emotional take for what it’s worth.


That crosses the line of being emotional over into inappropriate, rude, obnoxious and just plain inconsiderate. Breaking for the 16th, or 17...whatever times our rules of etiquette. I have no idea why I keep giving you so many freakin' warnings. You're intelligent enough to know where the line is and understand not to cross it. You're either unwilling to follow the rules of etiquette or want to see how far you can push it. I'm reaching the end of my patience (which I hope has been shown to be a fairly deep well).

-Ry


Just your own take- in my words. Tell me what you disagree with. My poetry? Pad and Ray are big boys. Let them respond.

CS


Last edited by cartoonsyndicate on Thu Mar 15, 2007 12:11 pm; edited 1 time in total

_________________
Arbusto: la raíz de toda mal
Back to top View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
You Can Call Me Ray



Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 47


PostPosted: Thu Mar 15, 2007 12:10 pm Post subject: Reply with quote

cartoonsyndicate wrote:

So if we accept this definition- the operative function being "a conscious mental reaction," your emotional response to the Bush Crime Family is a well founded and necessary 'reaction' to this freakish cabal's amoral and thoroughly unethical behaviour.

Ten points for Ry.


As a manipulative fool is want to do, he only focuses his attention on those words which serve his manipulative agenda. As he has shown us in past childish postings, he ignores that which does not serve him. Towhit:

"subjectively experienced" and

"accompanied by physiological and behavioral changes "

We further note how the emotion of this sad individual controls his life, and allows him to set out for others what they should believe to be the "operative function". More childish tactics (as opposed to logical debate) intended to get people to ignore what does not serve his tantrums.

From your past treatment of me, I have resolved that I no longer need to treat you as I would other people deserving of my respect. Your pseudo-intellectualism wrapped inside a cloak of childish name-calling clearly shows that you are more interested in shaming your fellow man than you are helping them or seeking common ground with them.

Now why don't you adopt your own sagely wisdom and go fish on your own side?

Ray

_________________
...But you don't have to call me Mr. Hudson! Wink
Back to top View user's profile Send private message
cartoonsyndicate
Member


Joined: 17 May 2006
Posts: 785
Location: The Borg

PostPosted: Thu Mar 15, 2007 12:13 pm Post subject: Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post

This is my side. The subjective didactical side. Full of life and emotion and poetry.

In a sense- human.

What side are you on?

Quote:

As a manipulative fool is want to do
Did you mean 'wont'? Clarity is still importtant, no?

Best,

Toon

_________________
Arbusto: la raíz de toda mal
Back to top View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
ryguy
1 of the RU3


Joined: 22 Feb 2006
Posts: 1700
Location: Another Dimension

PostPosted: Thu Mar 15, 2007 12:54 pm Post subject: Reply with quote

Thread locked until further notice.

_________________
"There’s battle lines being drawn
Nobody’s right if everybody’s wrong "
For What It’s Worth - Stephen Stills, 1966
amidst the growing ripples and wiry bamboos, broken in youth like the teeth of a mutant.. Afterburn, ca 1978
User avatar
cartoonsyndicate
Suspended
 
Posts: 851
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 12:10 pm
Location: The Borg

Postby I.P.Freely » Fri Mar 16, 2007 4:15 am

I think this is a new record of how long toon could go without blowing a fuse.
"You can either trust people or not. I choose to trust what people say and sometimes I get lied to. If I were to trust no one I would never hear the truth." - James (IPF) Martell
I.P.Freely
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 611
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2006 8:48 pm

Postby cartoonsyndicate » Fri Mar 16, 2007 12:02 pm

I.P.Freely wrote:I think this is a new record of how long toon could go without blowing a fuse.


when the creepy-crawlies under the rock are exposed to light- reality is uncovered.

fiat lux

genteel polity or truth- choose your paradigm.
amidst the growing ripples and wiry bamboos, broken in youth like the teeth of a mutant.. Afterburn, ca 1978
User avatar
cartoonsyndicate
Suspended
 
Posts: 851
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 12:10 pm
Location: The Borg

Postby ryguy » Fri Mar 16, 2007 12:39 pm

cartoonsyndicate wrote:genteel polity or truth- choose your paradigm.


I propose we can expose the creepy crawlies and trap them in glass containers for examination - to help prevent the future reproduction of creepy crawlies - rather than take a hammer and start jumping around pounding both the creepy crawlies as well as injuring those who are only there to assist with the examination.

Walk softly - carry a big stick. You've got your stick - you've got to learn to walk softly.

And when you start swinging - use control and constraint so you don't smack all the good folks around you who are trying to help.

-Ry
---
"Only a fool of a scientist would dismiss the evidence and reports in front of him and substitute his own beliefs in their place." - Paul Kurtz

The RU Blog
Top Secret Writers
User avatar
ryguy
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 4920
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 3:49 am
Location: Another Dimension

Postby cartoonsyndicate » Fri Mar 16, 2007 1:28 pm

ryguy wrote:
cartoonsyndicate wrote:genteel polity or truth- choose your paradigm.


I propose we can expose the creepy crawlies and trap them in glass containers for examination - to help prevent the future reproduction of creepy crawlies - rather than take a hammer and start jumping around pounding both the creepy crawlies as well as injuring those who are only there to assist with the examination.

Walk softly - carry a big stick. You've got your stick - you've got to learn to walk softly.

And when you start swinging - use control and constraint so you don't smack all the good folks around you who are trying to help.

-Ry


I've responded to this in a PM. Feel free to post it along with your comments if you wish.
amidst the growing ripples and wiry bamboos, broken in youth like the teeth of a mutant.. Afterburn, ca 1978
User avatar
cartoonsyndicate
Suspended
 
Posts: 851
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 12:10 pm
Location: The Borg

Postby ryguy » Fri Mar 16, 2007 2:30 pm

From CS:

I suppose that I need to make it clear that I have nothing against conservatives. My objection is to neo-conservatives- who are neither 'neo' nor 'conservative.' Conservatism is a necessary element of the political dialectic. I admire Russel Kirk, Pat Buchanan. Dwight Eisenhower, Barry Goldwater, Jerry Ford, Bob Barr... and all true conservatives. The conservative movement has been hijacked by the neo-conservative movement which has more in common with fascism than true conservative philosophy. I do not respect the 'ideas' of this aberrant and nihilistic movement and will not suffer the pronouncements of their factotums. I realize the radical nature of such a rejection. But that's just me. What can I say?



My response:

The problem, Kim, is that there are those who object to Paleoliberalism. They would probably claim that liberalism has been hijacked by the extremists as well - and is just as negative and aberrant as fascism. Now if you say you will not suffer the pronouncements of their factotums...and they say they will not suffer the pronouncements of your factotums....where the hell does that leave those of us who actually want to discuss the issues?

You're right, that rejection is radical - what you can say is the same you said to me - the golden rule applies, right? If people should tolerate your views, then it's just as acceptable that you should tolerate theirs without ridicule.

Take their views, and logically deconstruct them without insults or rude inuendo. If you stand on the side of truth - the facts and evidence will support your stance. If you're either too lazy to do the research required to disprove their statements, or the evidence doesn't exist to support your opinion, then you either need to reconsider your stance, or keep quiet. It's as simple as that. Because if you're only here to state your opinions and then shout down those who are at the opposite extreme - that radical rejection of other's views won't be tolerated. That's not freedom of speech. What can I say?

-Ry
---
"Only a fool of a scientist would dismiss the evidence and reports in front of him and substitute his own beliefs in their place." - Paul Kurtz

The RU Blog
Top Secret Writers
User avatar
ryguy
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 4920
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 3:49 am
Location: Another Dimension

Postby Max » Fri Mar 16, 2007 5:29 pm

21 WAYS TO BE A GOOD DEMOCRAT
>
> 1. You have to be against capital punishment, but support abortion on
> demand, even for minors.

> 2. You have to believe that businesses create oppression and governments
> create prosperity and jobs.

> 3. You have to believe that guns in the hands of law-abiding Americans
> are more of a threat than nuclear weapons technology
> in the hands of the Iranians and the Chinese and North Korean communists.

> 4. You have to believe that there was no art before Federal funding.

> 5. You have to believe that global temperatures are not affected at by
> cyclical documented changes in the earth's climate and only
> affected by soccer moms driving SUV's.

> 6. You have to believe that gender roles are artificial but being
> homosexual is natural.

> 7. You have to believe that the AIDS virus is spread by a lack of federal
> funding.

> 8. You have to believe that the same teacher who can't teach 4th-graders
> how to read is somehow qualified to teach those same kids about
> sex.

> 9. You have to believe that hunters don't care about nature, but loony
> activists who have never been outside of San Francisco do.

> 10. You have to believe that self- esteem is more important than actually
> doing something to earn it.

> 11. You have to believe that Mel Gibson spent $25 million of his own
> money to make The Passion Of The Christ for financial gain only.

> 12. You have to believe the NRA is bad because it supports certain parts
> of the Constitution, while the ACLU is good because it
> supports certain parts of the Constitution.

> 13. You have to believe that taxes are too low, but ATM fees are too
> high.

> 14. You have to believe that Margaret Sanger and Gloria Steinem are more
> important to American history than Thomas Jefferson, Gen.
> Robert E. Lee, and Ronald Reagan.

> 15. You have to believe that standardized tests are racist, but racial
> quotas and set-asides are not.

> 16. You have to believe that Hillary Clinton is normal and is a very sincere
> person.

> 17. You have to believe that the only reason socialism hasn't worked
> anywhere it's been tried is because the right people
> haven't been in charge.

> 18. You have to believe conservatives telling the truth belong in jail,
> but a liar and a sex offender was the best ever US President and he belonged in the White House


> 19. You have to believe that homosexual parades displaying drag,
> transvestites, and beastiality should be
> constitutionally protected, and manger scenes at Christmas should be
> illegal.

> 20. You have to believe that illegal Democratic Party funding by the
> Chinese Government is somehow in the best interest to the
> United States.

> 21. You have to believe that this message is a part of a vast, right wing
> conspiracy.

A lot of truth said in jest?!?!
View my Blog

You can't photoshop logic.
User avatar
Max
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 495
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 9:45 pm

Postby cartoonsyndicate » Fri Mar 16, 2007 8:29 pm

ryguy wrote:From CS:

I suppose that I need to make it clear that I have nothing against conservatives. My objection is to neo-conservatives- who are neither 'neo' nor 'conservative.' Conservatism is a necessary element of the political dialectic. I admire Russel Kirk, Pat Buchanan. Dwight Eisenhower, Barry Goldwater, Jerry Ford, Bob Barr... and all true conservatives. The conservative movement has been hijacked by the neo-conservative movement which has more in common with fascism than true conservative philosophy. I do not respect the 'ideas' of this aberrant and nihilistic movement and will not suffer the pronouncements of their factotums. I realize the radical nature of such a rejection. But that's just me. What can I say?



My response:

The problem, Kim, is that there are those who object to Paleoliberalism. They would probably claim that liberalism has been hijacked by the extremists as well - and is just as negative and aberrant as fascism. Now if you say you will not suffer the pronouncements of their factotums...and they say they will not suffer the pronouncements of your factotums....where the hell does that leave those of us who actually want to discuss the issues?

You're right, that rejection is radical - what you can say is the same you said to me - the golden rule applies, right? If people should tolerate your views, then it's just as acceptable that you should tolerate theirs without ridicule.

Take their views, and logically deconstruct them without insults or rude inuendo. If you stand on the side of truth - the facts and evidence will support your stance. If you're either too lazy to do the research required to disprove their statements, or the evidence doesn't exist to support your opinion, then you either need to reconsider your stance, or keep quiet. It's as simple as that. Because if you're only here to state your opinions and then shout down those who are at the opposite extreme - that radical rejection of other's views won't be tolerated. That's not freedom of speech. What can I say?

-Ry


The problem, Kim, is that there are those who object to Paleoliberalism. They would probably claim that liberalism has been hijacked by the extremists as well


I agree with you on this. The democratic Party has been hijacked by a ruthless gang of nannies- socio-fascists- which is why I can't support any of the current candidates.

Now if you say you will not suffer the pronouncements of their factotums...and they say they will not suffer the pronouncements of your factotums....where the hell does that leave those of us who actually want to discuss the issues?


The particular 'factotums' that I'm referring to are not the true conservatives but rather the neo-conservatives that this current regime represents. There can indeed be a dialogue between non -nannyist democrats and non neoconservative republicans. It is a dialectic that has gone on since the founding of the Republic and it is essential that it continue. The nanyists and neocons are both unAmerican and must be marginalized as they were throughout the first 200 years of our democratic republic.

There is a basic agreement between true Republicans and true Democrats concerning our sacred writ- The Bill of Rights. You and I both know well that New England Americans, be they Republicans or Democrats are true patriots to the extent that they recognize the transcendent and critical importance of this holy document. That had never been an issue. It was a (Kantian) category of thought. We were raised to believe in America as the 'shining light on the hill.' And through the dialectic- that light shone ever brighter. Until now. My favorite presidents- Washington and Eisenhower were, ironically, both great generals in the army. Both warned us about the advent of the zeitgeist that we've now entered. Washington warned of 'entangling alliances' and Eisenhower warned of the mortal danger of the 'military/ industrial complex'. Now we have both. A true patriot will not be silent.

I love this Republic in a way that defies words. And yet I have been insulted here, by neocon factotums, as a hater of America. Not a word was spoken in my defense.

America is first of all an evolving Idea. The Founders were well aware of the Greeks, basing their concept of a Democratic Republic on the ancient Athenian democracy and the ideas of Plato and Aristotle. It is to the Dialectic that we owe are tripartite system of checks and balances.

They were also aware of 1st century Jewish social ethic. It is no coincidence that the there are 10 articles in the Bill of rights- just as there are 10 commandments in the book of Exodus. The Founders were self-consciously creating a sacred document- and they succeeded. New Englanders who were educated and socialized in the 60's recognize this paradigm. It was taught to us from grade one on. And the smell of it still lingers there.

And then came the neocons.

to be continued....

cs
amidst the growing ripples and wiry bamboos, broken in youth like the teeth of a mutant.. Afterburn, ca 1978
User avatar
cartoonsyndicate
Suspended
 
Posts: 851
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 12:10 pm
Location: The Borg

Postby Max » Fri Mar 16, 2007 8:59 pm

Toon, your pseudo-intellectualism is actually funny.

1. I love this Republic in a way that defies words. And yet I have been insulted here, by neocon factotums, as a hater of America. Not a word was spoken in my defense.

Poor thing, you have been "attacked" by neocon factotums. But by calling some of us those silly names you are not attacking, right?

Always the victims these nannyist liberals?

And let me guess, from reading this, YOU'RE from New England?

"""You and I both know well that New England Americans, be they Republicans or Democrats are true patriots to the extent that they recognize the transcendent and critical importance of this holy document."""

You didn't insult the rest of the country there did you toon? The poor hapless part of the country that isn't as patriotic but whom you want to delegate direct voting on funding the budget?

Like I said: Laughable!!
View my Blog

You can't photoshop logic.
User avatar
Max
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 495
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 9:45 pm

Postby cartoonsyndicate » Fri Mar 16, 2007 9:04 pm

Max wrote:Toon, your pseudo-intellectualism is actually funny.

1. I love this Republic in a way that defies words. And yet I have been insulted here, by neocon factotums, as a hater of America. Not a word was spoken in my defense.

Poor thing, you have been "attacked" by neocon factotums. But by calling some of us those silly names you are not attacking, right?

Always the victims these nannyist liberals?

And let me guess, from reading this, YOU'RE from New England?

"""You and I both know well that New England Americans, be they Republicans or Democrats are true patriots to the extent that they recognize the transcendent and critical importance of this holy document."""

You didn't insult the rest of the country there did you toon? The poor hapless part of the country that isn't as patriotic but whom you want to delegate direct voting on funding the budget?

Like I said: Laughable!!


hahahaha. not worth a response.
amidst the growing ripples and wiry bamboos, broken in youth like the teeth of a mutant.. Afterburn, ca 1978
User avatar
cartoonsyndicate
Suspended
 
Posts: 851
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 12:10 pm
Location: The Borg

Postby Max » Fri Mar 16, 2007 9:06 pm

Were you ever in the military, toon??????
View my Blog

You can't photoshop logic.
User avatar
Max
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 495
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 9:45 pm

Postby cartoonsyndicate » Fri Mar 16, 2007 9:07 pm

Max wrote:Toon, your pseudo-intellectualism is actually funny.

1. I love this Republic in a way that defies words. And yet I have been insulted here, by neocon factotums, as a hater of America. Not a word was spoken in my defense.

Poor thing, you have been "attacked" by neocon factotums. But by calling some of us those silly names you are not attacking, right?

Always the victims these nannyist liberals?

And let me guess, from reading this, YOU'RE from New England?

"""You and I both know well that New England Americans, be they Republicans or Democrats are true patriots to the extent that they recognize the transcendent and critical importance of this holy document."""

You didn't insult the rest of the country there did you toon? The poor hapless part of the country that isn't as patriotic but whom you want to delegate direct voting on funding the budget?

Like I said: Laughable!!


so why aren't you laughing?
amidst the growing ripples and wiry bamboos, broken in youth like the teeth of a mutant.. Afterburn, ca 1978
User avatar
cartoonsyndicate
Suspended
 
Posts: 851
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 12:10 pm
Location: The Borg

Postby cartoonsyndicate » Fri Mar 16, 2007 9:09 pm

Max wrote:Were you ever in the military, toon??????


no
amidst the growing ripples and wiry bamboos, broken in youth like the teeth of a mutant.. Afterburn, ca 1978
User avatar
cartoonsyndicate
Suspended
 
Posts: 851
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 12:10 pm
Location: The Borg

Postby Max » Fri Mar 16, 2007 9:09 pm

I'm laughing at you quite often these days.
View my Blog

You can't photoshop logic.
User avatar
Max
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 495
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 9:45 pm

PreviousNext

Google

Return to The Latrine - Anything Else

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests

cron