Zappa.com

The Official Frank Zappa Messageboards
It is currently Sun Aug 09, 2020 4:07 am

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 20137 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132 ... 806  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Jun 06, 2011 6:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 5:48 pm
Posts: 36789
Location: Somewhere in time
Huck_Phlem wrote:
How do you figure a vote for nader is a vote for palin? If nader isn't running I'm not voting or if I do it won't be for any main stream candidate. so how do you figure this? I vote for who ever the fuck I want to!



That is right, but remember if you do vote and you do not vote for the candidate that can keep a nut job like Palin out, you will be and feel responsible for her being elected...sometimes you have to jump on the gernade for the greater good...

:smoke:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 06, 2011 7:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2005 2:56 pm
Posts: 4716
Plook wrote:
Huck_Phlem wrote:
How do you figure a vote for nader is a vote for palin? If nader isn't running I'm not voting or if I do it won't be for any main stream candidate. so how do you figure this? I vote for who ever the fuck I want to!



That is right, but remember if you do vote and you do not vote for the candidate that can keep a nut job like Palin out, you will be and feel responsible for her being elected...sometimes you have to jump on the gernade for the greater good...

:smoke:



Or perhaps all the lesser evil cunts just want someone to blame so they go after someone who isn't the opposition per se.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 06, 2011 7:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2006 4:04 pm
Posts: 4050
Location: Chicago, sort of.
Huck_Phlem wrote:
Plook wrote:
Huck_Phlem wrote:
How do you figure a vote for nader is a vote for palin? If nader isn't running I'm not voting or if I do it won't be for any main stream candidate. so how do you figure this? I vote for who ever the fuck I want to!



That is right, but remember if you do vote and you do not vote for the candidate that can keep a nut job like Palin out, you will be and feel responsible for her being elected...sometimes you have to jump on the gernade for the greater good...

:smoke:



Or perhaps all the lesser evil cunts just want someone to blame so they go after someone who isn't the opposition per se.

Or, perhaps, we remember that anyone can and should run, but that it is supremely selfish and arrogant to stay in the race when it's clear his votes are probably gonna result in the country having to suffer a dangerous dolt like Bush 2. A different decision could have been made for the good of the country, if that was important to him, which it obviously wasn't.

It's not about looking to blame someone. It' about fact. Hell, there's plenty of blame to go around, including us (the voters), hanging chads, and the supreme court.

But I'm just a lesser evil cunt; what do I know? :roll:

_________________
Everytime we picked a booger we'd flip it on this one winduh. Every night we'd contribute, 2, 3, 4 boogers. We had to use a putty knife, man, to get them damn things off the winduh. There was some goober ones that weren't even hard...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2011 4:09 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2005 10:19 am
Posts: 7046
Location: Eastern CT coast
SPACEBROTHER wrote:
It is shortly after baddy called me "fucking lame" for having the audacity to blame multi-national corporate profiteering and those who do business with them for most wars.
Gotta keep chasing after you as you twist what I said.

I did not "call you fucking lame" I called your ARGUMENT of blaming the war on Coke and McDonalds fucking lame.

Why do you have to keep twisting what I said to bullshit your fellow forumers? Do you think they like being bullshitted by you?

I'm trying to get people to stop voting for your Democrat war mongers who are invading countrys on their own whims, killing people and running us into debt...and you're posting pictures of Ronald McDonald to defray the blame off Obama.

They wouldn't sell Coke hamburgers to American soldiers in Iraq if American soldiers weren't commanded to go to Iraq (or Afghanistan, or Lybia), BY OBAMA.

McDonalds didn't command them to go there, OBOMBA did.

Besides...you this means you want the troops to have only rations? You don't want out troops to have any little piece of home while they're serving MULTIPLE tours of duty in far off lands you voted to send them to? Go there and fight and deny them a hamburger?

You recommend voting for Obama and his war troop escalations in Afghanastan, his civillian harsh drones and bombing in Afghanastan, Pakistan, and and now his illegal war in Lybia...and you try to blame it on McDonalds...that IS lame.

BESIDES, on the next page I said my choice of words CALLING YOUR ARGUMENT fucking lame was a poor choice of words, that I should have called it just plain lame...I posted in my very next post:
Quote:
I shouldn't have said SPACEBROTHER's argument was "fucking lame," I just should have said it was lame.
But you're not very gratious at accepting things like that. Though you know I wrote that, you still keep posting it that I called you lame.

I called your ARGUMENT fucking lame and I retractedthe word 'fucking'.

I didn't call YOU lame as you are wrongly telling everyone now and you KNOW it. I called your arguument fucking lame and I retracted the word "fucking." Big FUCKING deal.

Jeeesh...the crap we have to put up with around here when SPACEBROTHER needs to back up his war voting advice. Sorry to put everyone through this, but it is important to not let him get away with trying to turn others against me for saying crap I did not say.

If you were trying to manipulate your fellow forumers SB by giving them misleading information, how would it be any different?

_________________
Lesser-evilism is war.


Last edited by baddy on Tue Jun 07, 2011 4:36 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2011 4:34 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2005 10:19 am
Posts: 7046
Location: Eastern CT coast
Hi all...just to let you know, school started and I'm buried again, (fucking calculus...oh shit, I called it fucking, lol).

Yesterday I mentioned I was going to post some of the history of "the question" I keep trying to get SPACEBROTHER to answer about his voting advice for his democrat bomber...."what of the kids" his vote is bombing now in three (make that 5), countries.

I didn't realize that he evaded the question so many times, it must be like 50 or 100, in that range. I'm putting together a succint post to show a shitload of these evasions but it will take me longer than expected, (there is a lot of attacks and Ron Paul snow to sift through to get to just the question and the evasions to the question).

Sooo it wil be a while before I post it. It will be of the form, "repost question #61", "evasion #61," this way people can see all the evasions to the same question WITHOUT HAVING TO read through all the evasions.

It is worth posting as it's rather remarkable to see the lengths SPACEBROTHER has gone to to evade answering to the question of his wanting us to vote for his democrat bomber, and what of the troops and innocent people who are being injured and dying as a result of his voting advice...

...but it has to be sone succinctly so it can be seen in 15 seconds...so it's going to take me a while to get it together.

_________________
Lesser-evilism is war.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2011 5:41 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 5:48 pm
Posts: 36789
Location: Somewhere in time
Huck_Phlem wrote:
Plook wrote:
Huck_Phlem wrote:
How do you figure a vote for nader is a vote for palin? If nader isn't running I'm not voting or if I do it won't be for any main stream candidate. so how do you figure this? I vote for who ever the fuck I want to!



That is right, but remember if you do vote and you do not vote for the candidate that can keep a nut job like Palin out, you will be and feel responsible for her being elected...sometimes you have to jump on the gernade for the greater good...

:smoke:



Or perhaps all the lesser evil cunts just want someone to blame so they go after someone who isn't the opposition per se.



I don't know from no lesser evil cunt...I don't vote at all because like George Carlin said..."if your not involved in the bulshit process, you can't be blamed when it fucks up...and it fucks up a lot"... :mrgreen:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2011 6:16 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2005 2:56 pm
Posts: 4716
Quote:


I don't know from no lesser evil cunt...I don't vote at all because like George Carlin said..."if your not involved in the bulshit process, you can't be blamed when it fucks up...and it fucks up a lot"... :mrgreen:



Yep I guess so!

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2011 6:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 10:27 pm
Posts: 7918
Location: echoing through the canyons of your mind
baddy wrote:
SPACEBROTHER wrote:
It is shortly after baddy called me "fucking lame" for having the audacity to blame multi-national corporate profiteering and those who do business with them for most wars.
Gotta keep chasing after you as you twist what I said.

I did not "call you fucking lame" I called your ARGUMENT of blaming the war on Coke and McDonalds fucking lame.


Either you are completely retarded, have serious OCD, live in denial, are a dense fuckwit or all of the above.

For more than two years, you have conveniently glossed over the basic point I made that the real players behind virtually all wars are multi-national corporations, whether they are in the agriculture business, the oil/energy business, tech business, mining, comunications, construction, banks ect ect ect. Are you really that dense? Furthermore, everyone who does business with these corporations share in much of the blame for all of the unnecessary killing in wars. The moment you turned on your computer to spew your wad, you just contributed to someones death in a war, because you handed them money for their services and products.

In regards to your OCD question, in which I answered NO to over two years ago, you just can't handle being called out and selectively ignore/deny.

Who's bullshitting who baddy? Your bullshitting yourself. I don't even need to do that for you.


.....................................................

But the real 3000 pound gorilla in the room is this.....


SPACEBROTHER wrote:
A brief flashback..............

Lumpy Gravy wrote:
just plain doug wrote:
At least Baddy admitted that his actions during the election only served to make him feel better about himself, and didn't have any effect on any actual, happening events/problems in his own "neighbourhood".

yeah, I guess that's a perfect position to be in.
vote for a candidate who hasn't got a chance in hell to get in, and then you can sit comfortably back, feel good about yourself, and say that it's everybody else's fault that things are the way they are...



Mij wrote:
............Baddy and you want the best really, but I stopped reading you a long time ago.
No offenses.
In my own view, you're too dogmatic. And it leads nowhere, except keeping your own slate clean, so we can't throw stones.


calvin2hikers wrote:
This isn't the Breaking News thread anymore - it's the Argue With Baddy thread.


More than 2 years and over 120 pages later just in this thread alone of baddy being called out by many people. Go figure.

Too bad "jimmie d killed the forum" isn't around to rename this thread to "Hi, My Name Is Baddy and I Have OCD".

Out of 129 pages, who wants to do an official count of how many people baddy has been called out by and/or has argued with?

...............................................................

Incidently, the question in question that baddy with his OCD keeps refering to, in which I asked of myself and had answered over two years ago, is on or about page 20 for anybody who is looking for some cheap entertainment. It is shortly after baddy called me "fucking lame" for having the audacity to point out the basic reality that multi-national corporate & war profiteering and those who do business with them are the cause of and effect almost all wars. Put down the calculus book and learn history.


................................................................


Because it's already a new page, a repost from the previous page......

SPACEBROTHER wrote:
baddy wrote:
..........I did not call SPACEBROTHER a murderer..........


Then what the fuck is this?

baddy wrote:
And if SPACEBROTHERS going to renig on his statement above............. and how many thousands he's willing to kill to get it.


Don't even try to weasel out of what you posted. You know you posted this and you are caught red-handed. To make matters even worse, you tried to equate a recently passed relative of mine to your phoney crusade. WTF?

As I said....

SPACEBROTHER wrote:
There aren't enough FUCK YOUs in the world to adequetly respond to your obsessive compulsory accusation SPAM.


I can't speak for Ronnie, but you also accused him of being a murderer by calling him a "baby killer". I'll let him quote you on that. This is your typical over reaction whenever anybody challenges you on your posts.

You could clear this up and put an end to it all by coming clean with the forum and admitting that you overstepped by calling us murderers, instead of making more and more and more and more excuses for yourself. A simple one sentence admission, instead of an overly wordy Trendmongerianesque/Isaac-I-never-said-that excuse fest.



Will baddy come clean and admit that he overstepped by accusing me and others on the forum of being murderers?



Well?.....We're all waiting......


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2011 6:55 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 10:27 pm
Posts: 7918
Location: echoing through the canyons of your mind
Why do I believe baddy is really a Republican posing as an independant who is bullshitting everybody about being Nader supporter?........

GOP donors funding Nader

http://articles.sfgate.com/2004-07-09/n ... alph-nader

Independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader -- still not on the ballot in a single state -- has received a recent windfall of contributions from deep-pocketed Republicans with a history of big contributions to the party, an analysis of federal records show.

Nearly one in 10 of Nader's major donors -- those writing checks of $1, 000 or more -- have given in recent months to the Bush-Cheney campaign, the latest documents show. GOP fund-raisers also have "bundled" contributions -- gathering hefty donations for maximum effect to help Nader, who has criticized the practice in the past.

The donations from wealthy Republicans -- combined with increasingly vocal Democratic charges that they represent a stealth GOP effort to wound Democrat John Kerry -- prompted Nader's vice presidential running mate, Green Party member Peter Camejo, to suggest the consumer advocate reject the money that doesn't come from loyal Nader voters.

"If there has been a wave of these (donations), then that's something Ralph and I will have to talk about -- and about returning their money," he said Thursday in an interview with The Chronicle. "If you oppose the war, if you're against the Patriot Act, your money is welcome.

"But if your purpose is because you think this is going to have an electoral effect, we don't want that money. I take no money from people who disagree with us," Camejo said. "We're not interested in that."

But Camejo's views differ with Nader's recent defense of the contributions.

"We have no indication that the Republicans are trying to maneuver support for us," he said at a recent press conference. "There are three or four major Republican donors who have contributed to my campaign. But that's because I worked with them on a number of issues. ... It's all very small, relatively small, contributions. And we like it that way."

But the financial records show that $23,000 in checks of $1,000 or more have come from loyal Republicans. Among those who have given recently to Nader are Houston businessman Nijad Fares, who donated $200,000 to President Bush's 2000 inaugural committee; Richard J. Egan, the former ambassador to Ireland, and his wife, Pamela, who have raised more than $300,000 for Bush; Michigan developer Ghassan Saab, who has given $30,000 to the RNC since 2001; and frozen food magnate Jeno Paulucci, and his wife, Lois, who have donated $150, 000 to GOP causes since 2000 alone.

All have donated the maximum $2,000 to Nader's campaign since April, records show.

Asked about the money from GOP backers, Nader campaign spokesman Kevin Zeese countered that many of Kerry's donors also had given to Republicans, including Bush in the past.

"(Kerry) should renounce those donations and give them all back," he said. Pressed if Nader would do the same, Zeese said that wouldn't even be discussed "until (the parties) start to change the rules."

With just under four months left to the election, Nader has yet to qualify for a single state ballot.

A statewide poll by the Survey and Policy Research Institute at San Jose State University released Wednesday indicates that if Nader qualifies as a presidential candidate on the California ballot, the former consumer advocate would steal support from the Democratic ticket almost exclusively.

support, almost all of it from Democrats, while having a negligible impact on Bush's vote or his support among Republicans," according to Institute director Phil Trounstine.

Democrats are worried about Nader's influence because they believe as a Green Party candidate in 2000, he pulled votes that would have gone to Democratic Vice President Al Gore in key states, thus helping Bush win the election.

Chris Lehane, a Democratic strategist who was a spokesman for Gore's 2000 presidential campaign, said the check-writing was not "a merely serendipitous confluence of events," adding that "folks supporting Bush because they want fewer environmental protections and less corporate regulations don't have a lot in common with the Ralph Nader agenda. The only thing they have in common with Nader is they want to take votes from Kerry."

But Christine Iverson, spokeswoman for the Republican National Committee, calls such charges ridiculous, adding: "It's unfortunate that Democrats seem determined to disenfranchise voters who want an opportunity to cast votes for Ralph Nader."

Still, other Republicans acknowledge that many in the party have mentioned that a donation to Nader may boost Bush, particularly in states where the vote is expected to be close.

"Republicans have no problem with it, if the goal is to keep President Bush in office," said Hoover Institution research fellow Bill Whalen, a veteran GOP strategist. "It's not pretty. But putting a guy (in the White House) you don't like is not pretty either."

Whalen said the Republican National Committee or the Bush-Cheney campaign can't technically condone such donations, but "you absolutely want your activists to get out there and help Ralph run" because of the effects he had on the 2000 election.

"Do the math," Whalen said.

Nader, who has decried the influence of corporations in the political arena, also has received more than $20,000 in "bundled" contributions since March from GOP fund-raisers, according to the Federal Elections Commission documents that tally donations through May 31.

Bundling is the practice of gathering contributions together for maximum influence.

Records show Nader raised just more than $1 million for his presidential effort through May 31. Most of the money came from small, individual donors.

But Zeese said the Republican donors were "people whom Ralph knows from previous work."

$18,850 in checks collected and submitted to Nader in May by Peter Tanous, president of Washington D.C.- based Lynx Investment Advisories.

"That was a house party," Zeese said of the donations collected by Tanous.

Tanous, who also made a personal $2,000 donation to Nader in May, was traveling and unavailable for comment Thursday, but his wife, Ann, said that her husband raised money for Nader because "he's a good friend."

"My husband's a die-hard Republican who's supporting (Nader) so that there are other voices, other than the ones we're hearing in this election," particularly on issues that include Middle East politics, she said.

She declined to say whether her husband, who also donated $4,000 to the Republican National Committee and $2,000 to the Bush-Cheney campaign this year, would vote for Nader.

Tanous, records show, has also donated in the past to some Democrats, including $500 last year to House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi of San Francisco.

Whalen says that Nader is playing games when he suggests that his donors are merely acting in friendship and that his message will resonate with GOP faithful.

"What's at the heart and soul of the Nader campaign? That corporations are evil and that we need to get out of Iraq," Whalen said. Nader's Republican supporters

$275,249

Total contributions of $1,000 or more to Nader as of May 31

$23,000

Contributions from those who have also given to Republican causes, including the Bush-Cheney re-election campaign.

Among Ralph Nader's top Republican donors:

-- Billionaire corporate executive John Egan of Massachusetts, who has raised at least$200,000 for the president's re-election campaign, donated $2,000 to Nader.

-- Nijad Fares, a Houston businessman, who donated $200,000 to the Bush inaugural committee and who donated $2,000 each to the Nader effort and the Bush campaign this year.

-- David Reed, president of Washington-based Foundation Petroleum Inc., who donated$1,000 to Nader and $2,000 to the Bush-Cheney campaign.

-- Jack and Laura Dangermond, both executives in Redlands-based Environmental SystemsResearch Institute, who each donated $2,000 to Nader's campaign and the Bush- Cheneycampaign and $25,000 to the Republican Congressional Campaign Committee.

...............................................................................................


Nader's New Base: Republicans?

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=121155&page=1

Ralph Nader is perhaps the country's single most successful progressive policy entrepreneur and activist.

On the other side of the conventional Washington divide, the less famous, but perhaps as influential, conservative Grover Norquist holds sway over his famous "Wednesday Meetings," where the capital's most powerful Republican groups wage war, trying to deconstruct nearly every piece of legislation Nader has pushed Congress to pass over the years.

Nader and Norquist are in many ways the yin and yang of America's Beltway ideological battles.

Civility, a sense of irony, and a bit of mischievousness helped convince Norquist to invite Nader to his meeting this week. Nader took full advantage, urging some of those conservatives to rethink their fundamental political beliefs and reclaim the Republican Party from the grip of corporate interests.

Waiting His Turn

Nader arrived at Norquist's downtown Washington offices 10 minutes early and took a seat at the mahogany table around which the weekly activist meetings are held. He shook a few hands. The younger conservatives in the crowd, less inured to Nader's superstardom, just stared.

For an hour and a half, Nader waited as 20 speakers, representing Republican policy staffs, anti-regulation groups, family-policy organizations and political candidates updated each other on their respective contributions to the fight against liberalism, taxes and bureaucracy.

Most proceeded as if an ideological arch-nemesis was not there, listening, nodding, and arching an occasional eyebrow. (One regular meeting-goer, the American Land Rights Association's Mike Hardiman, casually referred to a group Nader founded as "spoiled suburbanites." Nader smiled wanly.)

When it was Nader's turn to speak, he took on the basic assumptions of his audience.

"Some of it is arguable, some of it is not so bad," he said of what he had just heard. "But the thrust is, strengthen the oligarchy, and strengthen the concentration of power."

He did not hold back.

Issuing a Challenge

He immediately challenged "anybody who calls himself a conservative or a libertarian and not a corporatist" to join his crusade against what he called "corporate fraud."

"I think it's time for people who call themselves conservatives and libertarians to address the contradictions in their lives," he said.

The Wednesday Meeting does not usually contain disquisitions on the meaning of liberty. But Nader proceeded to tell those assembled that their version of freedom was narrow and exclusive. True freedom was also "the freedom to participate," he said.

"If you define capitalism, as, number one, giving owners control, well, stockbrokers don't have much control. It's almost a Kremlin-like electoral process in big corporations. If you don't like what's going on, get out. There ought to be another way."

He went on to decry the "sink or swim" ethic of capitalism, and said warned about commercialist culture, which he said had run "roughshod over more important things."

On that last point, there were several conservatives there who agreed. Pro-family conservatives allied with Nader to oppose extending permanent normal trade relations with China on the grounds that the country's one-child policy was barbaric. The belief among some that capitalism is amoral and that free-trade economics undermine sovereignty and living standards helped to persuade protectionist conservatives to oppose free-trade agreements like the North American Free Trade Agreement.

And Phyllis Schlafly, the family-policy activist, told the group: "I agree with the underlying message of Ralph. Do you want the GOP to be a corporate party? Or do we want them to represent traditional Republican values?"

Nader later noted his agreement with Norquist about the corruption of corporate subsidies. In 1992, they worked togther to get state legislatures to pass term limits for state officeholders.

That both Norquist and Nader are somewhat larger than life figures made for some amusing moments, as well.

A few speakers referenced Nader's 2000 presidential run, in which his nearly 3 million votes caused Democrat Al Gore's loss in the Electoral College.

At one point, the room cheered Nader for his "help" in that election. Nader responded by pointing to his favorite political cartoon, in which a George W. Bush figure, upon hearing that "A Vote for Nader Is a Vote for Bush," announces his intention to "Vote for Nader."

And Nader began his presentation by poking fun at his audience and at its reputation as the fulcrum of a right-wing conspiracy.

He thanked them for inviting him, and then said of the atmosphere, "It feels like a coldblooded, ideological Marine barracks."

"I notice that nobody seems to be smoking," he said, and then took credit for the regulation that banned smoking in common work areas.

Of the group's reflexive dislike for regulation, he then said, "Some of you may even have been saved by seat belts, and had your freedom limited by going through the windshield."

That got a belly laugh.

Activists Can Agree to Disagree

Norquist said he invited Nader because he respects him as an activist.

"Neither he nor we are under any delusions that we now agree," Norquist said. "But on corporate governance [and] government transparency questions … we do."

After the meeting, Norquist said Nader proposed a plan to publish on a Web site all the details of government contracts worth more than $100,000. Norquist offered his help with the project.

"The press will go, 'Ooh, this is weird,' when it happens. That's OK. Nader and I, we [agree] sometimes. This happens all this time on the civil liberties questions."

Norquist noted that representatives from the American Civil Liberties Union had attended at least four Wednesday Meetings.

"Conservatives and liberals are both concerned with the government getting too big," he said.

...................................................................


For everybody who truly is Independant leaning, it's all good and cool with me.

Baddy's no Independant. He's bullshitting everybody here. Regardless of his phoney anti-war posts where, a tiny miniscule handful are aimed towards Bush/Cheney compared to the massive overwhelming majority that are pointed at Clinton and Obama by way more than 200 to 1. There lies the truth about baddy. If anybody really wants to see who's bullshitting who, just read through this thread. It's all here in black and white. He's trying his darndest to make himself look legit, rather poorly I will add, but that, he ain't.


I hate to keep calling baddy out, like so many of us on the forum has, but the fact that he went as far as to accuse me of being a murderer, well I obviously ruffled his feathers to the point, that I must have hit the nail on the head with him. Why else would he so adamantly be on the defensive, still, after more than two years. baddy's only bullshitting himself. Living a lie.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2011 9:26 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2005 2:56 pm
Posts: 4716
grasping at straws there? you are so full of shit!

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2011 9:42 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 9:19 am
Posts: 7804
Location: in deepest, darkest Germany
SPACEBROTHER wrote:
I hate to keep calling baddy out, like so many of us on the forum has, but the fact that he went as far as to accuse me of being a murderer, well I obviously ruffled his feathers to the point, that I must have hit the nail on the head with him. Why else would he so adamantly be on the defensive, still, after more than two years. baddy's only bullshitting himself. Living a lie.


For something you hate doing, you've been doing it at least as much as Baddy has. If you hate it so much, then surely it would be easy to stop doing it? You do put in the dots in your "murderers" quote, which enables people to go back and see that Baddy wasn't really directly calling you a murderer. However, you've repeated the accusation a) that Baddy called you a murderer b) that he is secretly a Republican (of which there is ample evidence to the contrary) so often now that I can't believe I'm alone in finding it a bit tedious.
I enjoy your political commentary and some of your articles much more - honestly.

_________________
"I have learned from my mistakes, and I am sure I can repeat them exactly."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2011 2:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2006 4:04 pm
Posts: 4050
Location: Chicago, sort of.
Caputh wrote:
.... Baddy wasn't really directly calling you a murderer.

But that's baddy's way of working though, isn't it? He never actually says it in the exact wording. But he says it in dozens of ways that come this close to actually saying it directly. His cumulative accusation is obvious, but he always leaves it so he can deny he ever said it. It's a crappy tactic in my opinion. The worse thing is that it absolutely stifles discussion about the real merits of his, and our, beliefs.

_________________
Everytime we picked a booger we'd flip it on this one winduh. Every night we'd contribute, 2, 3, 4 boogers. We had to use a putty knife, man, to get them damn things off the winduh. There was some goober ones that weren't even hard...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2011 3:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2005 2:56 pm
Posts: 4716
Ahhhhh nothing like a pissing contest!

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2011 4:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 10:27 pm
Posts: 7918
Location: echoing through the canyons of your mind
Ronny's Noomies wrote:
Caputh wrote:
.... Baddy wasn't really directly calling you a murderer.

But that's baddy's way of working though, isn't it? He never actually says it in the exact wording. But he says it in dozens of ways that come this close to actually saying it directly. His cumulative accusation is obvious, but he always leaves it so he can deny he ever said it. It's a crappy tactic in my opinion. The worse thing is that it absolutely stifles discussion about the real merits of his, and our, beliefs.



Ok. Here is the full original quote........

baddy wrote:
And if SPACEBROTHERS going to renig on his statement above and support the war and the thousands of troops and multi-thousands of innocent civillians that will be killed as we pass 2014, maybe he could tell us what it is they are dying for, and how many thousands he's willing to kill to get it.



There is only one way to read that. He directly accused me of being a murderer. No "if's, and's or but's" about it. What exactly does he mean by "how many people he's willing to kill to get it"? It's Self-explanatory.

The word "if" only applies to me reniging in baddy's statement, the murder accusation is not part of the "if". This doesn't require any deep analysis or interpretation to see baddy's true intent, which in this case was to accuse me of being a murderer.

That wasn't even the worst part of it. baddy went even further with it as to use my recently deceased father shortly after that to further slam me to make a point. I'm sorry, but, thats the fucking lowest of lows that anybody could go.

Of course he went back and edited this post 3 times in regards to that after the fact.....
viewtopic.php?p=482519#p482519

I quoted him before he further edited himself.

then he went back and again edited this next post where he really showed his ass......
viewtopic.php?p=482727#p482727\

...and then even did more editing on his next post after that....
viewtopic.php?p=482775#p482775

Why all the edits? Why does he have to change his posts to cover his ass after the fact? Why does he have hide from the forum?


Last edited by SPACEBROTHER on Tue Jun 07, 2011 5:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2011 5:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2005 2:56 pm
Posts: 4716
I am so tellin Mom! :smurf:

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2011 5:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 10:27 pm
Posts: 7918
Location: echoing through the canyons of your mind
Huck_Phlem wrote:
grasping at straws there? you are so full of shit!



Coming from some weirdo who sent a scan to Aspy of himself jacking off in a PM, like I'm gonna take you seriously.. :roll: (whoops-cats out of the bag) A bunch of us from the forum are fully aware of this incident. I just wish I had been spared the imagary. :P


Last edited by SPACEBROTHER on Tue Jun 07, 2011 5:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2011 5:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2005 2:56 pm
Posts: 4716
still grasping at straws cock munch. funny how she didn't say anything about it till a year later. and didn't really mind either. you are a piece of shit just like her. you little fucking pussy!

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2011 5:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 10:27 pm
Posts: 7918
Location: echoing through the canyons of your mind
Huck_Phlem wrote:
still grasping at straws cock munch. funny how she didn't say anything about it till a year later. and didn't really mind either. you are a piece of shit just like her. you little fucking pussy!


So it's true. lol sicko


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2011 5:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 10:27 pm
Posts: 7918
Location: echoing through the canyons of your mind
Someones been grasping at something, and it ain't straws.. bwahahahahahaha


Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2011 5:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2005 2:56 pm
Posts: 4716
Get your facts straight if you are gonna spread slander dickless wonder. just shows what a little boy you are punk! yea hide behind your screen you little fucking pussy!
this is such a little faggot. where you there? just shows what a little bitch you are.

You better hide little boy!

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2011 5:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 10:27 pm
Posts: 7918
Location: echoing through the canyons of your mind
Why? What are you going to do? Show me your dick? bwahahahahahaha


The funniest part is when you said, "and didn't really mind either"....OMG, that is the funniest and most pathetic admission I've read in ages. Maybe ever. You just came out and admitted that you are a deviant who could technically be put on a sex offenders list. WOW!

This thread just got interesting.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2011 6:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 10:27 pm
Posts: 7918
Location: echoing through the canyons of your mind
Just so I have this straight. You sent a picture of your dick in a PM to Aspy, a year later she said something about it, and now you say she didn't mind? bwahahahahahahahahahaha

DOUBLE WOW!!!!

Incredible.

Weirdo.... :P


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2011 6:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2006 4:04 pm
Posts: 4050
Location: Chicago, sort of.
I need to pay more attention. I've always thought Huck was a pretty cool guy. But he surprised me with his "lesser evil cunts" comment. And now this new revelation..... Depressing.

_________________
Everytime we picked a booger we'd flip it on this one winduh. Every night we'd contribute, 2, 3, 4 boogers. We had to use a putty knife, man, to get them damn things off the winduh. There was some goober ones that weren't even hard...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2011 6:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2005 2:56 pm
Posts: 4716
How is it possible to send a picture in a pm dipshit?
Funny how she isn't here and you pull up bullshit like that.
????

typical Jr. high mentality. all you do is stir up shit on and one of the main reasons why most people are no longer here. I'll bet your a total meek little pussy in real life. come over here and say it to my face motherfucker. I dare you!

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 07, 2011 6:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 5:48 pm
Posts: 36789
Location: Somewhere in time
That's why they always tell you to never talk politics, it makes everyone crazy... :smoke:


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 20137 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132 ... 806  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group