Frank Apisa wrote:Ticomaya wrote:It's clear the mentality that Frank's postings most appeal to. Certainly in stark contrast to Asherman's.
I agree with you here, Ti.
My postings appeal to the intelligent, discerning, open-minded folks in A2K...while Asherman's appeals mostly to the retards of the extreme right.
Your postings appeal to F4F.
Quote:Quote:Hey Frank, if you write something to disparage the jews right now, I'll bet you a dollar F4F will bend down and worship you properly.
I do not ever disparage the Jews...(obviously you do not have enough respect for them to capitalize the word)
Nah, not a sign of disrespect ... It just shows I'm not perfect and all anal about my writing all the time.
Usually, but obviously not
all the time. I slipped and failed to capitalize the letter "J." I shall endeavor to do better in the future.
But hey, it's not like I was typing up a letter to the editor or something important like that.
Quote:...and in fact, have offered the opinion that most of the anti-Jewish sentiment arises from begrudging admiration gone apeshyt in the form of jealously out of control.
Jews are achievers.
That bothers some people.
Yes ... it bothers your cheerleader, F4F.
Frank Apisa wrote:
My postings appeal to the intelligent, discerning, open-minded folks in A2K...while Asherman's appeals mostly to the retards of the extreme right.
Frank, what did you say about the arrogance of Asherman?
Not long ago, I said that the country is in trouble due to the rising deficits and the massive liabilities facing the country. The right was somewhat dismissive of this, mentioning our large GDP. Please consider:
NATIONAL BANKRUPTCY
by Byron King
The word 'bankruptcy' is often misused. It is not uncommon to hear someone
say, "So-and-So is bankrupt" when what they really mean is that "So-and-So
cannot pay his bills." In this latter situation, if So-and-So cannot pay
his bills, then he or she is technically "insolvent." Insolvency means
that you cannot pay your bills as they fall due in the ordinary course of
business. Insolvency can also reflect a situation in which someone's total
assets, if made immediately available, would not serve to pay off all of
the liabilities. It is an important distinction.
What prompts me to write about bankruptcy is a recent report by economist
Laurence J. Kotlikoff, professor of economics at Boston University.
Kotliloff wrote of his conclusion that the U.S. government is "bankrupt"
insofar as it will be unable to pay its creditors, who, in his use of the
term, "are current and future generations to whom [the U.S. government]
has explicitly or implicitly promised future net payments of various
kinds." Later, Kotlikoff notes: "Unless the United States moves quickly to
fundamentally change and restrain its fiscal behavior, its bankruptcy will
become a foregone conclusion:
"The proper way to consider a country's solvency is to examine the
lifetime fiscal burdens facing current and future generations. If these
burdens exceed the resources of those generations, get close to doing so,
or simply get so high as to preclude their full collection, the country's
policy will be unsustainable and can constitute or lead to national
bankruptcy.
"Does the United States fit this bill? No one knows for sure, but there
are strong reasons to believe the United States may be going broke."
Kotlikoff takes note of what he calls a total net "fiscal gap" that looms
in the future of the nation. This fiscal gap is the present value of the
difference between the federal government's future income and expenses, as
calculated using relatively optimistic assumptions, not including any
contingent liabilities such as natural disasters or wars.
The basic numbers in Kotlikoff's thesis are just a summing up of accounts
that are standard in the life of the nation: interest payments, government
operations, social security, national defense and other elements of the
federal budget that will persist for as long as there is a U.S.
government. Kotlikoff adds up the national liabilities to the astounding
sum of $65.9 trillion, or about 500% of the nation's gross domestic
product.
--Excerpted from dailyreckoning.com
Meanwhile, Bush is going down as the worst piece of sh!t to occupy the White House in recent memory.
Quite a feat. Interesting, though, that there are those who continue to support him while simultaneously attempting to claim the high intellectual ground.
The ultimate paradox, if you will...
okie wrote:freedom4free wrote:
The difference between Asherman and Frank.
20 lines v 2 words, and Frank expresses himself much better.
If thats the type of expression you believe in, to each his own. Asherman, thanks for calling out Frank. I think Frank has shown everyone here of which he is made. Frank's vacuous name calling vs the substantive and well reasoned Asherman. Thanks Asherman.
Talk about ass-kissing!!!
okie wrote:Frank Apisa wrote:
My postings appeal to the intelligent, discerning, open-minded folks in A2K...while Asherman's appeals mostly to the retards of the extreme right.
Frank, what did you say about the arrogance of Asherman?
Not sure...
...but if I didn't say it was inappropriate, allow me to do so now.
He has absolutely nothing to be arrogant about.
He is a bore...and seldom says anything of value.
Frank Apisa wrote:okie wrote:Frank Apisa wrote:
My postings appeal to the intelligent, discerning, open-minded folks in A2K...while Asherman's appeals mostly to the retards of the extreme right.
Frank, what did you say about the arrogance of Asherman?
Not sure...
...but if I didn't say it was inappropriate, allow me to do so now.
He has absolutely nothing to be arrogant about.
He is a bore...and seldom says anything of value.
My apologies, it was cicerone that said this a couple pages back:
"The only arrogance is your writing, ashman. Get over yourself."
However, I think you should be elated if you simply accused Asherman of arrogance, as you have obviously taken the rhetoric to the next level. Calling it "rhetoric" is being kind.
If the rules of this forum were truly enforced, you would have been banned several times over, if thats possible.
I would like to see at least one well reasoned post, for just once. Even Parados, who is about 180 degrees out of phase with mine, at least offers some explanation for his beliefs. Is it too much to ask to quit the name calling and simply state your opinions and some facts as to why you have them? To simply tell us you are smarter and intellectually superior to all conservatives doesn't fly, Frank. It actually tells us more about your lack upstairs than it does about ours.
okie wrote:
I would like to see at least one well reasoned post, for just once.
There are hundreds of them here, Okie. You wouldn't recognize them if you opened your eyes and mind...and you are not likely to do that.
Quote:Even Parados, who is about 180 degrees out of phase with mine, at least offers some explanation for his beliefs.
I do not have beliefs...and I never offer any beleifs.
Quote: Is it too much to ask to quit the name calling and simply state your opinions and some facts as to why you have them?
Yes.
Quote:To simply tell us you are smarter and intellectually superior to all conservatives doesn't fly, Frank. It actually tells us more about your lack upstairs than it does about ours.
Why not give us all a citation of me saying that, Okie....since you are such a fan of facts.
Go to a post where I've said that...and post a link.
cicerone imposter wrote:The only arrogance is your writing, ashman. Get over yourself.
Frank's disciple comes out of the shadows. Well, kind of. Nothing much to say, but he has Frank to do his talking for him.
Asherman writes with substance and thought. Must be a real jump for C.I. to do that.
I've bumped heads with both Asherman and Frank, once upon a time. Truth be told, I'd miss the contributions of either.
It'd be nice if you guys could manage a truce, & refocus off of each other's shortcomings.
Naw, Ashman offers mostly insults of other people's writing skills and thought processes. He thinks he's the smartest contributor on a2k. Actually, he's an arse.
He claims to be a buddhist. I have lived amongst buddhists all my life; he's no buddhist by any stretch of the imagination. He may talk a big game, but that's where his understanding of buddhism ends.
These fora wud have greater value
if their posters applied more energy to analyses
of the subject matter sub judice,
rather than to the ideosyncratic minutia
of the messengers thereof.
A personal popularity contest,
based upon one 's distance from the poster
on the ideological spectrum is of little worth,
judging one man to be an angel and a genius,
whereas another is a bum, and a dum bum, at that.
I cannot claim to have been entirely innocent
of taunting those who 've propagated lesser love
of personal freedom than I favor.
Its as if posters labored under the silent, subconscious delusion
that if thay denounce other posters who have adverse points of vu,
with a sufficient degree of acrimony and personal invective,
then their targets will repudiate their former vu
and vote the way favored by their tormentors in November,
in an effort to gain the favor of the abusers.
I don 't believe that will work.
David
The "I'm so much smarter than everybody else" prose just doesn't cut it.
Yeah, it has cut me too at one time or another, CI - but what's the point of continuing to fire volleys back and forth?
I think of David as the jolly green giant because he has jolly green giant writing.
Frank Apisa wrote:okie wrote:
I would like to see at least one well reasoned post, for just once.
There are hundreds of them here, Okie. You wouldn't recognize them if you opened your eyes and mind...and you are not likely to do that.
Quote:Even Parados, who is about 180 degrees out of phase with mine, at least offers some explanation for his beliefs.
I do not have beliefs...and I never offer any beleifs.
Quote: Is it too much to ask to quit the name calling and simply state your opinions and some facts as to why you have them?
Yes.
Quote:To simply tell us you are smarter and intellectually superior to all conservatives doesn't fly, Frank. It actually tells us more about your lack upstairs than it does about ours.
Why not give us all a citation of me saying that, Okie....since you are such a fan of facts.
Go to a post where I've said that...and post a link.
I haven't read all your posts to be honest, but I haven't seen much reasoned opinion lately besides name calling.
As far as quotes, how about this:
My postings appeal to the intelligent, discerning, open-minded folks in A2K...while Asherman's appeals mostly to the retards of the extreme right.
Okie- You don't understand. You see, Mr. Apisa is a fine writer. Why he has been published in some of our finest US venues. If you don't beleive me ask him.
He probably does not wish to cast his pearls before swine.
Why should he give his talents away for "nothing"
What he does not know, Okie, is despite all of the publications he tells us about( I am sure he has published as he says) his obscenities and ridiculous answers he gives without any references and/or documentation, make it much more likely that some of us just will not believe what he says about his "hidden" talents.
He writes so well on these threads- The other day, he saluted me with an absolutely original comment that should go into Bartlett's Quotations when he said--
quote
Hey, you dumb Motherfu....
end of quote
Such brilliance can not go unnoticed, Okie!!!
okie wrote:Frank Apisa wrote:okie wrote:
I would like to see at least one well reasoned post, for just once.
There are hundreds of them here, Okie. You wouldn't recognize them if you opened your eyes and mind...and you are not likely to do that.
Quote:Even Parados, who is about 180 degrees out of phase with mine, at least offers some explanation for his beliefs.
I do not have beliefs...and I never offer any beleifs.
Quote: Is it too much to ask to quit the name calling and simply state your opinions and some facts as to why you have them?
Yes.
Quote:To simply tell us you are smarter and intellectually superior to all conservatives doesn't fly, Frank. It actually tells us more about your lack upstairs than it does about ours.
Why not give us all a citation of me saying that, Okie....since you are such a fan of facts.
Go to a post where I've said that...and post a link.
I haven't read all your posts to be honest, but I haven't seen much reasoned opinion lately besides name calling.
As far as quotes, how about this:
My postings appeal to the intelligent, discerning, open-minded folks in A2K...while Asherman's appeals mostly to the retards of the extreme right.
Like I said, Okie...when you find a citation that has me saying "I am smarter and intellectually superior to all conservatives"...post it and we'll talk. Otherwise, I will consider this just another of the strawmen people like you build because you are unable to argue successfully against what is actually said.
BernardR wrote:Okie- You don't understand. You see, Mr. Apisa is a fine writer. Why he has been published in some of our finest US venues. If you don't beleive me ask him.
He probably does not wish to cast his pearls before swine.
Why should he give his talents away for "nothing"
What he does not know, Okie, is despite all of the publications he tells us about( I am sure he has published as he says) his obscenities and ridiculous answers he gives without any references and/or documentation, make it much more likely that some of us just will not believe what he says about his "hidden" talents.
He writes so well on these threads- The other day, he saluted me with an absolutely original comment that should go into Bartlett's Quotations when he said--
quote
Hey, you dumb Motherfu....
end of quote
Such brilliance can not go unnoticed, Okie!!!
Hi, Bernie.
How are ya? Hope all is well!
I see that you are trying out some sarcasm here.
Jeez...I hate to be the one to break this to ya...but...
...your sarcasm is about on a level with your abilities as a writer...and I've already called attention to how lacking you are in that area, Bernie.
You stink as a writer, Bernie. You are trite and predictable. And your penchant for "It was a dark and stormy night..." is so laughably amateurish...one would think you would shy away from criticizing anyone else's writing so as not to convulse people with laughter who are witness to the irony of such folly.
But...you are not the sharpest tack in the box...and it looks at though you will continue.
I thank you for that.
Mocking your stupidity for doing so is actually quite exhilarating.
Ahhhh...like this morning. I get to laugh at you...and then go play golf.
Life is great!
