quote:

ORIGINAL: SternSkipper

quote:

Neither party came out of Clinton's escapades smelling like roses. Democrats came across as sleazy and Republicans as petty and anal. There was no huge rush away from Clinton among voters though, not that I saw anyway

Oh please, if anything I was very clearly pointing to how minute and ludicrous the walk-aways from Clinton were. Perhaps I should have framed it with some colorful memory I have of those individuals... like how in the wee hours of graduation day they were and the bottom of the 4 story auditorium facing commencement field as  I scaled it with a 55 Gallon Drum painted as an exact replica as a can of Miller Highlife in tow. They were the guy at the bottom who were supposed to hoist up the bags of cement and jugs of water, saying "It's awfully high, you sure we won't get hurt?".

That put it in perspective for ya?

The SALIENT POINT is that it was PISS POOR political science to even invoke the Clinton Presidency. The rest was anecdotal.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SternSkipper

if this was Columbia, we'd be exploding each other's vehicles for laughs.

I presumed that's the spirit you originally posted the thread in.

quote:

Their impressions and interpretations could easily differ from my own.

quote:

The SALIENT point as you like to call it wasn't related to your view on whether including Clinton was intelligent or not. It occurred a few lines down, and points to an issue you're squirming around now - as in "indicator of just how ugly the Obama '12 campaign is going to be".

quote:

ORIGINAL: SternSkipper

Course you could be like me and not really give a fuck what you have to say

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

"higher standard" lmao.

If the standards for booting this clown were any lower than where things are then we could be in 4 wars, owe $20 trillion, have real unemployment in the 30% range and inflation in the teens. Would it be racist then?

fucking idiot.

Which fucking idiot got us into two of those wars Mr. Economic Genius?

And did I miss something here? Where is the fourth war?

For that matter where is the third? We have a limited involvement in Libya and haven't lost a single American life.

And explain to me Mr. Economic Genius how we have "real" unemployment in the 30% range and inflation in the low teens.

Real economists who actually are credentialed don't seem to agree with you.

But I'll give you a chance to save face Willbeur, post some proof.

But you never do that, so I won't hold my breath. You just spit out nonsense constantly with nothing to back it.

What part of "IF.....COULD BE" dont you understand?

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

"higher standard" lmao.

If the standards for booting this clown were any lower than where things are then we could be in 4 wars, owe $20 trillion, have real unemployment in the 30% range and inflation in the teens. Would it be racist then?

fucking idiot.

Which fucking idiot got us into two of those wars Mr. Economic Genius?

And did I miss something here? Where is the fourth war?

For that matter where is the third? We have a limited involvement in Libya and haven't lost a single American life.

And explain to me Mr. Economic Genius how we have "real" unemployment in the 30% range and inflation in the low teens.

Real economists who actually are credentialed don't seem to agree with you.

But I'll give you a chance to save face Willbeur, post some proof.

But you never do that, so I won't hold my breath. You just spit out nonsense constantly with nothing to back it.

What part of "IF.....COULD BE" dont you understand?

I pretty much don't understand anything you say because almost all of your posts consist of one line.

If you are going to bother to post maybe you should take the time to elaborate.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

In the past, RML could be counted upon to fire back with comments that whanged off at 90 degrees from the content of the post he was replying to. I mean, you'd sit there with your mouth open wondering how the hell he got there. It was as if he was responding to -- who knows, something in his head -- instead of what the poster actually wrote.

...

In doing this, he addressed what you actually wrote -- the points you listed -- almost perfectly (with only one hallucinatory intrusion, the word "low"). Granting that he missed the conditional context, that's still fucking spectacular. I'm impressed. If this is a trend, I need to ease off him.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SternSkipper

quote:

The SALIENT point as you like to call it wasn't related to your view on whether including Clinton was intelligent or not. It occurred a few lines down, and points to an issue you're squirming around now - as in "indicator of just how ugly the Obama '12 campaign is going to be".

I'm sorry, that was my point perhaps I should have said "the SALIENT POINT o what I was saying in my earlier remarks TO LUCY..." See when characterizing my own remarks to another person, there's a FUCKIN CRAZY idea in play... _I_ get to pick what's sailient about my own thoughts and words... Which is why I used a word that apparently bothered you. My apologies again.
  Following the context of the ongoing conversation before declaring what we are or 'should' be talking about, is probably a better policy.
Course you could be like me and not really give a fuck what you have to say

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

In the past, RML could be counted upon to fire back with comments that whanged off at 90 degrees from the content of the post he was replying to. I mean, you'd sit there with your mouth open wondering how the hell he got there. It was as if he was responding to -- who knows, something in his head -- instead of what the poster actually wrote.

...

In doing this, he addressed what you actually wrote -- the points you listed -- almost perfectly (with only one hallucinatory intrusion, the word "low"). Granting that he missed the conditional context, that's still fucking spectacular. I'm impressed. If this is a trend, I need to ease off him.

rml's being at 90 degrees most of the time tracks with my observations of him too.  As well, I've also noticed that he has his moments of clarity.  

But he keeps getting offended for some reason, when I tell him that he "has potential" and that I've "not given up on him yet." 

Firm

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

In the past, RML could be counted upon to fire back with comments that whanged off at 90 degrees from the content of the post he was replying to. I mean, you'd sit there with your mouth open wondering how the hell he got there. It was as if he was responding to -- who knows, something in his head -- instead of what the poster actually wrote.

...

In doing this, he addressed what you actually wrote -- the points you listed -- almost perfectly (with only one hallucinatory intrusion, the word "low"). Granting that he missed the conditional context, that's still fucking spectacular. I'm impressed. If this is a trend, I need to ease off him.

rml's being at 90 degrees most of the time tracks with my observations of him too.  As well, I've also noticed that he has his moments of clarity.  

But he keeps getting offended for some reason, when I tell him that he "has potential" and that I've "not given up on him yet." 

Firm

quote:

ORIGINAL: StrangerThan

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

In the past, RML could be counted upon to fire back with comments that whanged off at 90 degrees from the content of the post he was replying to. I mean, you'd sit there with your mouth open wondering how the hell he got there. It was as if he was responding to -- who knows, something in his head -- instead of what the poster actually wrote.

...

In doing this, he addressed what you actually wrote -- the points you listed -- almost perfectly (with only one hallucinatory intrusion, the word "low"). Granting that he missed the conditional context, that's still fucking spectacular. I'm impressed. If this is a trend, I need to ease off him.

rml's being at 90 degrees most of the time tracks with my observations of him too.  As well, I've also noticed that he has his moments of clarity.  

But he keeps getting offended for some reason, when I tell him that he "has potential" and that I've "not given up on him yet." 

Firm

Ah, guys, I think we have two problems. One is that 90 degrees is a right turn. I always look at what rml has to say because as you noted, sometimes he does have his moments of clarity. I can't say I've ever seen them wander off to the right though.

The second is that, the tendency to execute jaw-dropping deflections off to some tangent isn't restricted to him. It's almost like there needs to be a club here called the Ricochet Group or Deflections Anonymous or for skippy, Hard Aport. Something because the desire or need to venture off into the straw fields and sometimes stratosphere is too common to relegate to the status of anomaly.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

The most annoying instances of this tendency, at least in my view, arise from an exceedingly peculiar conviction on the part of the usual suspects that they can read minds -- and thereby divine what people "really" mean, even though it isn't what they said. As a name for this special sub-group, I would propose "The Karnak Club."

K.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

I would propose that you try to state yourself more clearly if you are if you are feeling your PMS.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata
Well hold on (or avast, for the skipper), a 90 degree deflection (or change of course, for the skipper) can be either to the right or to the left (or to starboard or port, for the skipper). And even turning (or coming about, for the skipper) to a course of 90 degrees would still only be a right turn if you were heading north. If you were heading south it would be a left turn. So I think we're alright there.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

I would propose that you try to state yourself more clearly if you are if you are feeling your PMS.

quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml

Ahoy!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata
Well hold on (or avast, for the skipper), a 90 degree deflection (or change of course, for the skipper) can be either to the right or to the left (or to starboard or port, for the skipper). And even turning (or coming about, for the skipper) to a course of 90 degrees would still only be a right turn if you were heading north. If you were heading south it would be a left turn. So I think we're alright there.

Turning 90 degrees, for the skipper, could be either gybing or coming about.

Just sayin ;-)