kuvasz wrote:Oh poor little Billikums, I warned you about thinking before posting, but you come right back like a Punch and Judy puppet for more pummeling.
Do you have any idea how idiotic you look when you write this sh!t?
Really? Then you know nothing vis-a-vis Punch and Judy, and I'm casting my pearls to swine.
btw, I'm Punch, on the left, Bill. You're wearing the dress.
You are a legend only in your own mind (what's left of it). It's only that this site is dominated by like-minded lefties that your senile ass wasn't laughed off long ago. I can hardly wait for your next flash of brilliance about pants pooping, anal rape or whatever else you recall from the days of being picked on at the schoolyard.
So sorry bub, first, like minded lefties still laugh at my senile ass (generally for engaging you idiots on the Right), so consider how they laugh at yours. But seriously, I was a big, tall, and athletic jock who stopped other jocks from picking on girls and dwebs like you in the school yard. You know how liberals are.
kuvasz wrote:Oh and about your time machine, can you tell the rest of the class how else you could proclaimQuote:that Bill Clinton, Nancy Pelosi etc's 1998 statements were really the product of Bush's war desires several years later..
Because being a "product" of something that happens later is impossible.
You're even thicker than I thought. Any damn fool could tell you that is in parody of your idiotic blaming of Bush for what was played on the video clip from 1998.
Are you really that stupid? Or do you think you're fooling some one by pretending that began as my error?
First, I did not "blame" Bush for what was played on the video. You just made that up.
and finally, an admission of error on your part. Well, its a start. Lets see, is 1998 actually the same as October of 2002? Nope, sorry Bill, you don't get to create your own reality, unless you are living in a NULL-A world, where anything can equal something else because you want it to.
Your desire to pretend anyone argued against your vote data is denied.
Nor should they.
No one did.
Ops, only you did by attempting to use Clinton's and Pelosi's remarks as indicative of, get this, the actual title of the thread..."Democrats BEFORE the invasion of Iraq."
However, just because your delusional mind got stuck on that, and that alone, doesn't make any intelligent person believe that video taped pronouncements cease to exist or be relevantÂ… especially when they are the catalyst for the thread you're responding to.)
So, your idea of delusional is rejecting a thesis which uses only arbitrary, non-inclusive, cherry-picking of data to support itself? This again leads one to consider the evidence, are Clinton's and Pelosi's remarks representative to the stance taken by the majority of congressional Democrats who voted on the ATUF? No, they are not. Which was my antithetical statement (based upon the numbers of the recorded ATUF votes) to the implicit thesis binding the thread title to the linked footage.
The funniest part is; you seem to think you're doing a superior job, while you make a total fool of yourself... as usual.
Bill, you don't have to tell me what you yourself have done in your last several posts. Unlike you, I actually know how to read, think, and do arithmetic.
and seem to know a bit more about Punch and Judy too.
What are you two smoking? Cyclops; you quoted me saying attempts at blameshifting are idiotic; why blast that rancor my way? Of course decision makers and people who voted for the bill bear more responsibility for it; who said otherwise? I really am getting this **** from both sides.
And Dookie; what the hell are you talking about? I can't stop posting ad nauseum everything that a Dem said way back when... because I've yet to do so even once.
That being said; Reverend HellH0und did fortify the video's point that Bush was not alone in believing Iraq a threat. Nothing wrong with that. Anyone truly interested in picking good leaders in the future, should certainly want to know who said what when. Again; way too many of these people from both parties are trying to distance themselves, from their own words, and they all need to be re-categorized as liars when they lie.
What are you two smoking? Cyclops; you quoted me saying attempts at blameshifting are idiotic; why blast that rancor my way? Of course decision makers and people who voted for the bill bear more responsibility for it; who said otherwise? I really am getting this **** from both sides.
And Dookie; what the hell are you talking about? I can't stop posting ad nauseum everything that a Dem said way back when... because I've yet to do so even once.
That being said; Reverend HellH0und did fortify the video's point that Bush was not alone in believing Iraq a threat. Nothing wrong with that. Anyone truly interested in picking good leaders in the future, should certainly want to know who said what when. Again; way too many of these people from both parties are trying to distance themselves, from their own words, and they all need to be re-categorized as liars when they lie.
You can understand that after hearing these intellectually unsound arguments over and over from Republicans, people tend to jump the gun a bit when they hear it from someone who claims not to be. It's the reverse of what you are experiencing in the immigration thread from the other side.
OCCOM BILL wrote:kuvasz wrote:Oh poor little Billikums, I warned you about thinking before posting, but you come right back like a Punch and Judy puppet for more pummeling.
Do you have any idea how idiotic you look when you write this sh!t?
Really? Then you know nothing vis-a-vis Punch and Judy, and I'm casting my pearls to swine.
btw, I'm Punch, on the left, Bill. You're wearing the dress.
You are a legend only in your own mind (what's left of it). It's only that this site is dominated by like-minded lefties that your senile ass wasn't laughed off long ago. I can hardly wait for your next flash of brilliance about pants pooping, anal rape or whatever else you recall from the days of being picked on at the schoolyard.
So sorry bub, first, like minded lefties still laugh at my senile ass (generally for engaging you idiots on the Right), so consider how they laugh at yours. But seriously, I was a big, tall, and athletic jock who stopped other jocks from picking on girls and dwebs like you in the school yard. You know how liberals are.
kuvasz wrote:Oh and about your time machine, can you tell the rest of the class how else you could proclaimQuote:that Bill Clinton, Nancy Pelosi etc's 1998 statements were really the product of Bush's war desires several years later..
Because being a "product" of something that happens later is impossible.
You're even thicker than I thought. Any damn fool could tell you that is in parody of your idiotic blaming of Bush for what was played on the video clip from 1998.
Are you really that stupid? Or do you think you're fooling some one by pretending that began as my error?
First, I did not "blame" Bush for what was played on the video. You just made that up.
and finally, an admission of error on your part. Well, its a start. Lets see, is 1998 actually the same as October of 2002? Nope, sorry Bill, you don't get to create your own reality, unless you are living in a NULL-A world, where anything can equal something else because you want it to.
Your desire to pretend anyone argued against your vote data is denied.
Nor should they.
No one did.
Ops, only you did by attempting to use Clinton's and Pelosi's remarks as indicative of, get this, the actual title of the thread..."Democrats BEFORE the invasion of Iraq."
However, just because your delusional mind got stuck on that, and that alone, doesn't make any intelligent person believe that video taped pronouncements cease to exist or be relevantÂ… especially when they are the catalyst for the thread you're responding to.
So, your idea of delusional is rejecting a thesis which uses only arbitrary, non-inclusive, cherry-picking of data to support itself? This again leads one to consider the evidence, are Clinton's and Pelosi's remarks representative to the stance taken by the majority of congressional Democrats who voted on the ATUF? No, they are not. Which was my antithetical statement (based upon the numbers of the recorded ATUF votes) to the implicit thesis binding the thread title to the linked footage.
The funniest part is; you seem to think you're doing a superior job, while you make a total fool of yourself... as usual.
Bill, you don't have to tell me what you yourself have done in your last several posts. Unlike you, I actually know how to read, think, and do arithmetic.
and seem to know a bit more about Punch and Judy too.
) there is no discussion being had here beyond an ad hominem exchange. Judging by your last display of indignity, with your "I know you are but what am I mentality"; I guess it's true: The pig really does like it.You really have no clue. IF anyone is trying to blame shift; they are an idiot. However; that doesn't mean Bush was alone in thinking Iraq was a threat, as illustrated by Cjhsa's video and that new fella's extensive list of quotes.
Your manner of writing betrays an intelligence you no longer seem to choose to wield, for whatever reason, and I don't care. Go was just interesting enough to reawaken my love of Chess. I thank you for the suggestion; but I cannot agree it is the better game. As I improved; I found it increasingly annoying that each level I conquered was identical to the one the preceded it in that those higher were near impossible to defeat, and any step below was equally near impossible not to. In Chess; when I'm fortunate enough to find a better game than my own; my own skill jumps in leaps and bounds, and I've found that even those several steps in front of me have weaknesses that can be found and exploited, all the while learning as my opponent learns to close those gaps. Chess continues to fascinate me in that my unorthodoxy from being self taught and that serves me well, evolves more and more into strategies that more closely resemble the recognized, ageless strategies that are taught... or so I'm told. I don't see how you could have traded it in, unless you ran out of quality opponents.Dookiestix wrote:The risk of having a senile idiot not get it AGAIN, is too great, so this time I'll answer directly: Bush's lies had no effect on Clinton or Pelosi's beliefs in 1998. Look at the dates on the list the new fella presented; and abandon that line of reasoning... because it simply doesn't explain all of the agreement about Iraq. Further; NO ONE, INCLUDING BUSH could be terribly well informed, since Bush's predecessor allowed Saddam to go unchecked for years, contrary to his obligations. Enough. I'm not doing this again.That also doesn't mean that those who believed it yet were not privy to all the intel were lying, either.
Good day.
I have always tried to remind myself that the people who bought into the bullsh*t must be deeply, deeply ashamed of their errors, and have a real tough time admitting just how wrong they were. It is damaging to their psyche to do so.
Here we see evidence that senility and idiocy have nothing in common... and a stark reminder of why I long ago chose to ignore a certain someone, long before he crawled back out from under his rock.
