whizbang wrote:
Actions speak louder than words.

And yet, you seem to be.

I'm going to be away from the net for the next 5 days. Please try to
contain your sadness. Maybe talk to the wizard who posted that sad, sick
paragraph above.

Pastorio

whizbang wrote:
Right. It was CB. Hard to tell the clones apart, sometimes. When they
trot along in such philosophical lockstep, unless you can see the lips
move, they all sound alike and can't readily be distinguished.

Distinguished. Bwahahahahah

Sometimes I kill myself.

Still CB.

Nah. Just too exuberant and excited about being alive. Just too filled
with the joy of such a rich target field. When it doesn't matter much
who gets hit, just spray the field, you know?

Have a lovely time for the next few days. I'm offline. PLay nicely
amongst yourself and try not to devour each other. If you do, an antacid
should help dispel the bad taste.

Pastorio

Bob Pastorio <pastorio@rica.net> wrote in message news:<3EFB9CC9.80E9B7FC@rica.net>...

....Could be wrong

Democratic republic, representative democracy, pretty much the same
thing. Which term you prefer doubtless depends on your political
persuasion. If I need to brush up on my civics, I will consult a good
book, not listen to you. However, my somewhat rusty command of the
facts trumps your assured misunderstanding every time.



Of course I don't think the general population is stupid. I know they
are.



That your neighbors are

In some ways, of course. Aren't yours? My, you must live in a
rarified place.



That you and the other wackos that sing the same tired songs are


I am not "a wacko" so I can't respond appropriately to that remark.
As for clarity of vision, it comes and goes. Frankly, you have yet to
demonstrate any of it, but I am a bit off my game so maybe you are as
well.





You really are very insecure, aren't you, the way you are always
belittling the intelligence of your adversary. You seem like a
reasonably intelligent person to me, albeit naive, but this way you
have of putting people down (even considering the lowbrow nature of
this forum) is most unbecoming. It makes you look very unsure of your
self worth.



some of the

I couldn't care less what "everybody thinks," particularly most of the
rather stupid people on this forum who are of your political
persuasion and age group. What makes you think that in my 52 years, I
haven't been exposed to nearly everything you have and many many
things you haven't? You really should try to grow up a bit, that is,
if you want the men to take you seriously. Your sort of shit only
impresses the punks.




No thanks, I am quite secure in the knowledge that I have much more
sophistication than you do. I don't need you to assure me that the
world has always been a tawdry place.



"Collective desires?" Hmmm, what does that sound like? So, I'm a
lightweight, am I? Gee, and to think the criticism is coming from
one, who ought to know. Disabuse yourself of the notion that I am
anything like you, son. The only people in my life who have
considered me a lightweight are very stupid people, indeed. Unlike
you, I've lived long enough to know what I am and what I'm not. A
lightweight? Nope, not guilty, boy. Perhaps you don't stimulate my
intellect sufficiently to rouse half of what I might delve into were
you not so ephemeral and misinformed yourself.



Nope, it's YOU who can't do THAT. Fuck off, troll. You've wasted
enough of our time.

"creosote" wrote:

The fact that so many would vote for Gore (vastly under qualified and not
too tightly wrapped in my opinion) is hard to believe, but here is the
citation.
http://www.ipl.org/div/potus/gwbush.html
I'm sure others can be found.
Fortunately, wisdom prevailed and Bush was elected, much to the chagrin of
the left. There is comfort in that thought.

All one need do is peruse my posts to understand that I am as far from left
as one can get (without being one of the white trash extremists), but those
are the figures I found. I refuse to ignore the facts even if not in my
favor. I would welcome any disputing figures you could provide.
It makes little difference to me, however. The important point is that we
dodged the Gore bullet, which in my opinion, would have been a disaster. The
system worked the way it was supposed to. Gore received more of the popular
vote because he won the more populated states. Bush, however, won more
states than Gore (I can't cite figures on that one. Maybe someone else
can.).
Although, as you say, this may fuel the arguments of those like Bob, it is
short lived. Most here seem to understand the reason the Electoral College
was instituted and why it works toward the best interest of all. Those who
don't are welcome to their delusions. Not only is it not my job to disabuse
them, but I have no desire to waste my time doing so.

creosote wrote:
Um, no. They're different things. Which term you like actually depends
on how bad your education is.


This demonstrates your intelligence? Your way with words? Your logical
ability? What? It's lame, weak stuff.

You mistake contempt for shallowness for that silly observation you make
here. I merely detail your failings as they appear. Or some, anyway.
Otherwise it's a full-time job.

You know, Sparky, your weak insults are right up at funny. Let me offer
you some information that the grownups know. For an insult to have any
presence, it has to bear some relationship to reality. Sadly, not much
about you here has had much to do with the real world. You're merely
trying to score points and, well, it won't look good on your permanent
record.

I'm a decade older than you and I'm just dazzled by how you try to use
your age as some sort of index about something.

Right. Got it at Sophistication "R" Us.

It sounds like a way to talk about the opinion of millions of people.
You know, like the ones whop all vote for the same thing.

I bet you were trying to oil your way into getting people to think
"collective..." Hmmm. Commietalk. Gasbag.

Absolutely.

I guarantee you're nothing like me. For example, I didn't move my lips
while reading your post.

I'm older than you. And I, too, know what you are. And what you're not.
You're a lightweight.

It's good to have a thesaurus close to hand. That way you can misuse
*big* words instead of only little ones. You don't mean that I'm
ephemeral. I love the image of "to rouse half of what I might delve
into" as though it means something.

You didn't get it then and you obviously don't now. It's illegal in many
venues to do what you want to do.

Gee. I'm hurt by your mean words. And you're so old and wise and shit
like that.

I'm so sorry to waste your time. Perhaps you could save time by not
responding.

Pastorio

Bob wrote:
Good idea. Perhaps you'll follow your own advice. After all, this really was
just a pecker contest anyway.

On Thu, 26 Jun 2003 19:12:46 -0400, creosote wrote
(in message <e9d4fd66.0306261512.64212ad1@posting.google.com>) :

[responding to the posting which stated that Al Gore received 50,996,064
votes and that George Bush received 50,456,167, a margin somewhat in excess
of a half million votes]

Substantiating figures are commonly cited in such as the Encyclopedia
Brittanica.

-- James L. Ryan -- TaliesinSoft