George Carlin

Subject: George Carlin on New Orleans

Wavy G, go suck a dick. You’ve never had an interestiong thread or post. Nobody reads your lame-ass posts and crossposts to begin with, you and your whole fuckin family.

#1. A mandatory evacuation means just that…Get the hell out. Don’t blame the Government after they tell you to go. If they hadn’t said anything, I can see the argument. They said get out… if you didn’t, it’s your fault, not theirs. (We don’t want to hear it, even if you don’t have a car, you can get out.)

#2. If there is an emergency, stock up on water and non-perishables.. If you didn’t do this, it’s not the Government’s fault you’re starving.

#2a. If you run out of food and water, find a store that has some. (Remember, shoes, TV’s, DVD’s and CD’s are not edible. Leave them alone.)

#3. If someone comes in to help you, don’t shoot at them and then complain no one is helping you. I’m not getting shot to help save some dumbass who didn’t leave when told to do so.

#5. My tax money should not pay to rebuild a 2 million dollar house, a sports stadium or a floating casino. Also, my tax money shouldn’t go to rebuild a city that is under sea level. You wouldn’t build your house on quicksand would you? You want to live below sea-level, do your country some good and join the Navy.

#6. Regardless of what the Poverty Pimps Jessie Jackson and Al Sharpton want you to believe, The US Government didn’t create the Hurricane as a way to eradicate the black people of New Orleans; (Neither did Russia as a way to destroy America). The US Government didn’t cause global warming that caused the hurricane (We’ve been coming out of an ice age for over a million years).

#7. The government isn’t responsible for giving you anything.

This is
the land of the free and the home of the brave, but you gotta work for what you want. McDonalds and Wal-Mart are always hiring, get a damn job and stop spooning off the people who are actually working for a living. President Kennedy said it best…"Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country."

Wavy G, go suck a dick. You’ve never had an interestiong thread or post. Nobody reads your lame-ass posts and crossposts to begin with, you and your whole fuckin family.

Wavy G, go suck a dick. You’ve never had an interestiong thread or post. Nobody reads your lame-ass posts and crossposts to begin with, you and your whole fuckin family.

"Its da jackeeettttttt" wrote in
news::

Wavy G, go suck a dick. You’ve never had an interestiong thread or post. Nobody reads your lame-ass posts and crossposts to begin with, you and your whole fuckin family.

I don’t know who Wavy G. is, nor do I care. That doesn’t of course change the fact that he/she is right. Carlin had nothing to do with those "rules". If anything, he’s sitting back and enjoying the show, watching everything fall apart… that’s his hobby; entropy. Yes, no matter your limited scope of knowledge, entropy is a real word, look it up.

Being the Carlin fan that I am,

I’ll leave you with a quote that does come
from him just to retain the sophmoric spirit of your response, "I love you and anybody that looks like you."

Subject: George Carlin on New Orleans

Been sitting here with my ass in a wad, wanting to speak out about the bullshit going on in New Orleans. For the people of New Orleans… First we would like to say, Sorry for your loss. With that said, Let’s go through a few hurricane rules: (Unlike an earthquake, we know it’s coming)

#1. A mandatory evacuation means just that…Get the hell out. Don’t blame the Government after they tell you to go. If they hadn’t said anything, I can see the argument. They said get out… if you didn’t, it’s your fault, not theirs. (We don’t want to hear it, even if you don’t have a car, you can get out.)

#2. If there is an emergency, stock up on water and non-perishables.. If you didn’t do this, it’s not the Government’s fault you’re starving.
#2a. If you run out of food and water, find a store that has some. (Remember, shoes, TV’s, DVD’s and CD’s are not edible. Leave them alone.)

#2b. If the local store has been looted of food or water, leave your neighbor’s TV and stereo alone. (See #2a) They worked hard to get their stuff. Just because they were smart enough to leave during a mandatory evacuation, doesn’t give you the right to take their stuff…it’s theirs, not yours.

#3. If someone comes in to help you, don’t shoot at them and then complain no one is helping you. I’m not getting shot to help save some dumbass who didn’t leave when told to do so.

#4. If you are in your house that is completely under water, your belongings are probably too far gone for anyone to want them. If someone does want them, let them have them and hopefully they’ll die in the filth. Just leave! (It’s New Orleans, find a voodoo warrior and put a curse on them)

#5. My tax money should not pay to rebuild a 2 million dollar house, a sports stadium or a floating casino. Also, my tax money shouldn’t go to rebuild a city that is under sea level. You wouldn’t build your house on quicksand would you? You want to live below sea-level, do your country some good and join the Navy.

#6. Regardless of what the Poverty Pimps Jessie Jackson and Al Sharpton want you to believe, The US Government didn’t create the Hurricane as a way to eradicate the black people of New Orleans; (Neither did Russia as a way to destroy America). The US Government didn’t cause global warming that caused the hurricane (We’ve been coming out of an ice age for over a million years).

#7. The government isn’t responsible for giving you anything. This is the land of the free and the home of the brave, but you gotta work for what you want. McDonalds and Wal-Mart are always hiring, get a damn job and stop spooning off the people who are actually working for a living. President Kennedy said it best…"Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country."

Thank you for allowing me to rant.

On Sun, 16 Oct 2005 02:06:45 GMT,

On Sun, 16 Oct 2005 02:06:45 GMT, ±© Flipper Mike ®³ wrote:

#1. A mandatory evacuation means just that…Get the hell out. Don’t blame the Government after they tell you to go. If they hadn’t said anything, I can see the argument. They said get out… if you didn’t, it’s your fault, not theirs. (We don’t want to hear it, even if you don’t have a car, you can get out.)

Not everyone was in a position to hop in their SUV, throw $100 worth of gas in the gas tank and head out of town. Some had no money, some had no car/truck/SUV/etc., some had no place to go.

#2. If there is an emergency, stock up on water and non-perishables.. If you didn’t do this, it’s not the Government’s fault you’re starving.

The tradional wisdom was to stock up on food to last for 24-48 hours. That would not have been sufficient when it became weeks.

#2a. If you run out of food and water, find a store that has some. (Remember, shoes, TV’s, DVD’s and CD’s are not edible. Leave them alone.)

There were no stores that had food/water. What few did, that supply was gone very quickly.

#3. If someone comes in to help you, don’t shoot at them and then complain no one is helping you. I’m not getting shot to help save some dumbass who didn’t leave when told to do so.

You do realize there were criminal elements who took advantage of the situation to shoot those who helped. Those doing the shooting were not the ordinary residents of New Orleans.

#5. My tax money should not pay to rebuild a 2 million dollar house, a sports stadium or a floating casino. Also, my tax money shouldn’t go to rebuild a city that is under sea level. You wouldn’t build your house on quicksand would you? You want to live below sea-level, do your country some good and join the Navy.

Yeah and if the corporate headquarters for xxx corporation was destroyed the federal goverment would trip over themselves to pay for the rebuiding of their corporate buddies, give them tax breaks, and tax a huge tax loss. The resut: the corporation who donated big time to the Bush reelection effort would make out like a bandit collecting alot more in benefits than they lost in the disaster. By the time you look at the tax breaks, the tax loss declared to the IRS, and the federal aid to rebuid the corporation makes a tidy profit.

#6. Regardless of what the Poverty Pimps Jessie Jackson and Al Sharpton want you to believe, The US Government didn’t create the Hurricane as a way to eradicate the black people of New Orleans; (Neither did Russia as a way to destroy America). The US Government didn’t cause global warming that caused the hurricane (We’ve been coming out of an ice age for over a million years).

But the current administration cut the budget that would have repaired the flaws in the levys that they knew had to be fixed for the next hurricae to hit New Orleans.

#7. The government isn’t responsible for giving you anything.

Except if your a corporation who donated to the Bush campaign in which case they will pay to rebuild your facility, give you huge tax breaks, and allow you to write off the loss on your income tax. So the corporation turns a profit on the hurricane.

This is
the land of the free and the home of the brave, but you gotta work for what you want. McDonalds and Wal-Mart are always hiring, get a damn job and stop spooning off the people who are actually working for a living. President Kennedy said it best…"Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country."

No this is the land of Corporate America where we throw welfare at the huge corporations and step on the little guy in the process.
Nobody compalins when a Haliburton gets $60 million to waste but but they will complain until the cows come home if someone in New Orleans gets a few measly thousands.
——————————————

http://www.barnabascollins.blogspot.com

For those of you who don’t click on links:

Claim: Comedian George Carlin wrote a list of ‘Hurricane Rules.’
Status: False.

#1. A mandatory evacuation means just that…Get the hell out. Don’t blame the Government after they tell you to go. If they hadn’t said anything, I can see the argument. They said get out… if you didn’t, it’s your fault, not theirs. (We don’t want to hear it, even if you don’t have a car, you can get out.)

Not everyone was in a position to hop in their SUV, throw $100 worth of gas in the gas tank and head out of town. Some had no money, some had no car/truck/SUV/etc., some had no place to go.

#2. If there is an emergency, stock up on water and non-perishables.. If you didn’t do this, it’s not the Government’s fault you’re starving.

The tradional wisdom was to stock up on food to last for 24-48 hours. That would not have been sufficient when it became weeks.

Yeah and if the corporate headquarters for xxx corporation was destroyed the federal goverment would trip over themselves to pay for the rebuiding of their corporate buddies, give them tax breaks, and tax a huge tax loss. The resut: the corporation who donated big time to the Bush reelection effort would make out like a bandit collecting alot more in benefits than they lost in the disaster. By the time you look at the tax breaks, the tax loss declared to the IRS, and the federal aid to rebuid the corporation makes a tidy profit.

Wavy G, go suck a dick. You’ve never had an interestiong thread or post. Nobody reads your lame-ass posts and crossposts to begin with, you and your whole fuckin family.

While I see how your responses are slanted, remember a couple of things. Those "big corporations" usually pay taxes.

They also employ lots & lots of
people who-guess what? Yes, pay taxes.

And what does the government run on? Those tax dollars, the same tax dollars that will be used to rebuild NO.
Now go back to Collinwood & suck the blood out of Willie Loomis’ dick. BTW, who is Rory & why is he in jail?

"Barrnabas Collins" wrote in message

On Sun, 16 Oct 2005 02:06:45 GMT, ±© Flipper Mike ®³ wrote:

While I see how your responses are slanted, remember a couple of things. Those "big corporations" usually pay taxes. They also employ lots & lots of people who-guess what? Yes, pay taxes.
And what does the government run on? Those tax dollars, the same tax dollars that will be used to rebuild NO.
Now go back to Collinwood & suck the blood out of Willie Loomis’ dick. BTW, who is Rory & why is he in jail?

#1. A mandatory evacuation means just that…Get the hell out. Don’t blame the Government after they tell you to go. If they hadn’t said anything, I can see the argument. They said get out… if you didn’t, it’s your fault, not theirs. (We don’t want to hear it, even if you don’t have a car, you can get out.)

Not everyone was in a position to hop in their SUV, throw $100 worth of gas in the gas tank and head out of town. Some had no money, some had no car/truck/SUV/etc., some had no place to go.

#2. If there is an emergency, stock up on water and non-perishables.. If you didn’t do this, it’s not the Government’s fault you’re starving.

The tradional wisdom was to stock up on food to last for 24-48 hours. That would not have been sufficient when it became weeks.

#2a. If you run out of food and water, find a store that has some. (Remember, shoes, TV’s, DVD’s and CD’s are not edible. Leave them alone.)

There were no stores that had food/water. What few did, that supply was gone very quickly.

#3. If someone comes in to help you, don’t shoot at them and then complain no one is helping you. I’m not getting shot to help save some dumbass who didn’t leave when told to do so.

You do realize there were criminal elements who took advantage of the situation to shoot those who helped. Those doing the shooting were not the ordinary residents of New Orleans.

#5. My tax money should not pay to rebuild a 2 million dollar house, a sports stadium or a floating casino. Also, my tax money shouldn’t go to rebuild a city that is under sea level. You wouldn’t build your house on quicksand would you? You want to live below sea-level, do your country some good and join the Navy.

Yeah and if the corporate headquarters for xxx corporation was destroyed the federal goverment would trip over themselves to pay for the rebuiding of their corporate buddies, give them tax breaks, and tax a huge tax loss. The resut: the corporation who donated big time to the Bush reelection effort would make out like a bandit collecting alot more in benefits than they lost in the disaster. By the time you look at the tax breaks, the tax loss declared to the IRS, and the federal aid to rebuid the corporation makes a tidy profit.

#6. Regardless of what the Poverty Pimps Jessie Jackson and Al Sharpton want you to believe, The US Government didn’t create the Hurricane as a way to eradicate the black people of New Orleans; (Neither did Russia as a way to destroy America). The US Government didn’t cause global warming that caused the hurricane (We’ve been coming out of an ice age for over a million years).

But the current administration cut the budget that would have repaired the flaws in the levys that they knew had to be fixed for the next hurricae to hit New Orleans.

#7. The government isn’t responsible for giving you anything.

Except if your a corporation who donated to the Bush campaign in which case they will pay to rebuild your facility, give you huge tax breaks, and allow you to write off the loss on your income tax. So the corporation turns a profit on the hurricane.

This is
the land of the free and the home of the brave, but you gotta work for what you want. McDonalds and Wal-Mart are always hiring, get a damn job and stop spooning off the people who are actually working for a living. President Kennedy said it best…"Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country."

No this is the land of Corporate America where we throw welfare at the huge corporations and step on the little guy in the process.
Nobody compalins when a Haliburton gets $60 million to waste but but they will complain until the cows come home if someone in New Orleans gets a few measly thousands.
——————————————

http://www.barnabascollins.blogspot.com

—-== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com – Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==—-
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
—-= East and West-Coast Server Farms – Total Privacy via Encryption =—-

"Its da jackeeettttttt" wrote in message

Wavy G, go suck a dick. You’ve never had an interestiong thread or post. Nobody reads your lame-ass posts and crossposts to begin with, you and your whole fuckin family.

Obviously YOU read them and crosspost to boot…

°¿°
^

On Sat, 15 Oct 2005 22:20:27 -0400, Wavy G
wrote:

For those of you who don’t click on links:

Claim: Comedian George Carlin wrote a list of ‘Hurricane Rules.’
Status: False.

Thank you, Wavy, for being a good steward of the Truth.

On Sun, 16 Oct 2005 00:39:05 -0400, Barrnabas Collins
wrote:

#1. A mandatory evacuation means just that…Get the hell out. Don’t blame the Government after they tell you to go. If they hadn’t said anything, I can see the argument. They said get out… if you didn’t, it’s your fault, not theirs. (We don’t want to hear it, even if you don’t have a car, you can get out.)

Not everyone was in a position to hop in their SUV, throw $100 worth of gas in the gas tank and head out of town. Some had no money, some had no car/truck/SUV/etc., some had no place to go.

They had enough time to walk.

Of all the

Of all the

±© Flipper Mike ®³ wrote:

Subject: George Carlin on New Orleans

[snip]

Thank you for allowing me to rant.

Others have pointed out that Carlin did not write this using Snopes. I didn’t need Snopes. Carlin is a huge liberal. Chances are thoughts like this are the furthest thing from his mind and if not, he would never say them in public.

Subject: George Carlin on New Orleans

Thank you for allowing me to rant.

Not everyone was in a position to hop in their SUV, throw $100 worth of gas in the gas tank and head out of town. Some had no money, some had no car/truck/SUV/etc., some had no place to go.

Yeah and if the corporate headquarters for xxx corporation was destroyed the federal goverment would trip over themselves to pay for the rebuiding of their corporate buddies, give them tax breaks, and tax a huge tax loss. The resut: the corporation who donated big time to the Bush reelection effort would make out like a bandit collecting alot more in benefits than they lost in the disaster. By the time you look at the tax breaks, the tax loss declared to the IRS, and the federal aid to rebuid the corporation makes a tidy profit.

But the current administration cut the budget that would have repaired the flaws in the levys that they knew had to be fixed for the next hurricae to hit New Orleans.

No this is the land of Corporate America where we throw welfare at the huge corporations and step on the little guy in the process.

Nobody compalins when a Haliburton gets $60 million to waste but but they will complain until the cows come home if someone in New Orleans gets a few measly thousands.

The Shoeleather Express has regular departures and always leaves on time.

Not the Federal government. It is local governments who give out money to corporations because they bring jobs to the area.

As did the previous administration, and the one before that, and the one before that. Face it, nobody wanted to spend the money to protect against something they couldn’t fathom.

No, this is where we use our tax dollars to promote business and economic development and provide a minimal "safety net" for the poor.

Nobody compalins when a Haliburton gets $60 million to waste but but they will complain until the cows come home if someone in New Orleans gets a few measly thousands.

Oh please. When Halliburton got the contract in Iraq, the howls were deafening. Yeah, nobody complains.

Of all the DAVIDHEROs I’ve known, "DAVIDHERO" is the DAVIDHEROiest.

On Sat, 15 Oct 2005 22:20:27 -0400, Wavy G
wrote:

For those of you who don’t click on links:

Claim: Comedian George Carlin wrote a list of ‘Hurricane Rules.’
Status: False.

Thank you, Wavy, for being a good steward of the Truth.

I’ve never heard of an airline called "Truth," lol?
(PS: email me if you don’t get that, and I will explain it.)

Of all the DAVIDHEROs I’ve known, "DAVIDHERO" is the DAVIDHEROiest.

On Sun, 16 Oct 2005 00:39:05 -0400, Barrnabas Collins
wrote:

#1. A mandatory evacuation means just that…Get the hell out. Don’t blame the Government after they tell you to go. If they hadn’t said anything, I can see the argument. They said get out… if you didn’t, it’s your fault, not theirs. (We don’t want to hear it, even if you don’t have a car, you can get out.)

Not everyone was in a position to hop in their SUV, throw $100 worth of gas in the gas tank and head out of town. Some had no money, some had no car/truck/SUV/etc., some had no place to go.

They had enough time to walk.

Yeah, and then swim, lol.

On Sun, 16 Oct 2005 16:10:03 -0400, Wavy G
wrote:

Of all the DAVIDHEROs I’ve known, "DAVIDHERO" is the DAVIDHEROiest.

On Sat, 15 Oct 2005 22:20:27 -0400, Wavy G
wrote:

For those of you who don’t click on links:

Claim: Comedian George Carlin wrote a list of ‘Hurricane Rules.’
Status: False.

Thank you, Wavy, for being a good steward of the Truth.

I’ve never heard of an airline called "Truth," lol?
(PS: email me if you don’t get that, and I will explain it.)

Didn’t Truth just file for bankruptcy, lol?

Wavy G wrote:

You, sir, are an IDIOT.

That was really uncalled for.

You, sir, are an IDIOT.

Oh yeah, like your "I could figure that out on my own" comment wasn’t? Now you’re digging yourself a hole.

Wavy G wrote:

Oh yeah, like your "I could figure that out on my own" comment wasn’t? Now you’re digging yourself a hole.

It wasn’t meant as a slam against people who used Snopes to discover the hoax. I was telling the OP that it couldn’t have been Carlin based only on his politics.

Of all the DAVIDHEROs I’ve known, "DAVIDHERO" is the DAVIDHEROiest.

On Sun, 16 Oct 2005 16:10:03 -0400, Wavy G
wrote:

Of all the DAVIDHEROs I’ve known, "DAVIDHERO" is the DAVIDHEROiest.

On Sat, 15 Oct 2005 22:20:27 -0400, Wavy G
wrote:

For those of you who don’t click on links:

Claim: Comedian George Carlin wrote a list of ‘Hurricane Rules.’
Status: False.

Thank you, Wavy, for being a good steward of the Truth.

I’ve never heard of an airline called "Truth," lol?
(PS: email me if you don’t get that, and I will explain it.)

Didn’t Truth just file for bankruptcy, lol?

Truth hurts, lol?

…Which I already did with my post. I merely took the extra step to prove it by citing the "Snopes" article. Your post, (which was basically a slam against me; let’s not kid ourselves), was unnecessary and mean. Keep digging.

Of all the Gerald Meazells I’ve known, "Gerald Meazell" is the Gerald Meazelliest.

Wavy G wrote:

Oh yeah, like your "I could figure that out on my own" comment wasn’t? Now you’re digging yourself a hole.

It wasn’t meant as a slam against people who used Snopes to discover the hoax. I was telling the OP that it couldn’t have been Carlin based only on his politics.

…Which I already did with my post. I merely took the extra step to prove it by citing the "Snopes" article. Your post, (which was basically a slam against me; let’s not kid ourselves), was unnecessary and mean. Keep digging.

He’s also wrong about Carlin being a "huge liberal." Carlin is neither huge (indeed, he’s almost frighteningly skinny), nor is he a liberal (he’s far too misanthropic for that). But I guess we’re supposed to ignore these clear instances of Gerald Meazell being wrong, because he’s such an "intelligent" guy.

Russell B wrote:

He’s also wrong about Carlin being a "huge liberal." Carlin is neither huge (indeed, he’s almost frighteningly skinny), nor is he a liberal (he’s far too misanthropic for that). But I guess we’re supposed to ignore these clear instances of Gerald Meazell being wrong, because he’s such an "intelligent" guy.

Here’s a bit of intelligence that is more your speed: Fuck Off.

You’re mad, because you’re wrong. How…tiresome, really.

Russell B wrote:

You’re mad, because you’re wrong. How…tiresome, really.

I’m not mad. You’re just an asshole. You’re right, I don’t really know what Carlin’s politics are. I’ve only seen him express them a few times and those times they have always been leftist positions so I was making a leap. However, the problem is that you don’t have to point out my error with a tacky, insulting reply. You could be civil but you choose not to. That makes you a jackass and deserving of "fuck off" type responses. What’s really tiresome is when people like me get on her to have give-and-take, back-and-forth, point/counterpoint type discussions and someone like you jumps in and can only offer sarcasm, insults, and ad hominem attacks. I guess that’s why they make killfiles.

Russell B wrote:

You’re mad, because you’re wrong. How…tiresome, really.

I’m not mad. You’re just an asshole. You’re right, I don’t really know what Carlin’s politics are. I’ve only seen him express them a few times and those times they have always been leftist positions so I was making a leap. However, the problem is that you don’t have to point out my error with a tacky, insulting reply. You could be civil but you choose not to. That makes you a jackass and deserving of "fuck off" type responses. What’s really tiresome is when people like me get on her to have give-and-take, back-and-forth, point/counterpoint type discussions and someone like you jumps in and can only offer sarcasm, insults, and ad hominem attacks. I guess that’s why they make killfiles.

You’re right, I don’t really know
what Carlin’s politics are.

Let me rephraase: You’re mad, because you’re wrong, and I called you on it.

What makes "Wavy G" so straight, and me so bent?

Of all the Gerald Meazells I’ve known, "Gerald Meazell" is the Gerald Meazelliest.

Wavy G wrote:

Oh yeah, like your "I could figure that out on my own" comment wasn’t? Now you’re digging yourself a hole.

It wasn’t meant as a slam against people who used Snopes to discover the hoax. I was telling the OP that it couldn’t have been Carlin based only on his politics.

…Which I already did with my post. I merely took the extra step to prove it by citing the "Snopes" article. Your post, (which was basically a slam against me; let’s not kid ourselves), was unnecessary and mean. Keep digging.

He’s also wrong about Carlin being a "huge liberal." Carlin is neither huge (indeed, he’s almost frighteningly skinny),

nor is he a liberal (he’s
far too misanthropic for that). But I guess we’re supposed to ignore these clear instances of Gerald Meazell being wrong, because he’s such an "intelligent" guy.

Russell B wrote:

You’re right, I don’t really know
what Carlin’s politics are.

Let me rephraase: You’re mad, because you’re wrong, and I called you on it.

You have got to be the densest person on the planet.

Of all the Gerald Meazells I’ve known, "Gerald Meazell" is the Gerald Meazelliest.

…Says the man who boldly proclaims, "I guess that’s why they make killfiles," in a public forum, and then continues to respond to the very person who supposably eventuated the "killfile" comment in the first place. Would you like a longer shovel?

Russell B wrote:

You’re right, I don’t really know
what Carlin’s politics are.

Let me rephraase: You’re mad, because you’re wrong, and I called you on it.

You have got to be the densest person on the planet. When I’m wrong, I admit it as I did right there, see? The point is that you’re rude. If I’m angry about anything, it’s because I have been insulted by you, not because I was wrong.

Of all the Gerald Meazells I’ve known, "Gerald Meazell" is the Gerald Meazelliest.

Russell B wrote:

You’re right, I don’t really know
what Carlin’s politics are.

Let me rephraase: You’re mad, because you’re wrong, and I called you on it.

You have got to be the densest person on the planet.

…Says the man who boldly proclaims, "I guess that’s why they make killfiles," in a public forum, and then continues to respond to the very person who supposably eventuated the "killfile" comment in the first place. Would you like a longer shovel?

On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 14:44:43 GMT, Gerald Meazell wrote:

Russell B wrote:

You’re right, I don’t really know
what Carlin’s politics are.

Let me rephraase: You’re mad, because you’re wrong, and I called you on it.

You have got to be the densest person on the planet. When I’m wrong, I admit it as I did right there, see? The point is that you’re rude. If I’m angry about anything, it’s because I have been insulted by you, not because I was wrong.

I see. So, while you seem to think it’s perfectly all right for you to be rude when correcting what you imagine to be others’ mistakes, you fly off the handle and start talking about "killfiles" when somebody does the exact same thing to you. Could you possibly dig a bigger hole for yourself, here?

Of all the Russell Bs I’ve known, "Russell B" is the Russell Biest.

On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 14:44:43 GMT, Gerald Meazell wrote:

Russell B wrote:

You’re right, I don’t really know
what Carlin’s politics are.

Let me rephraase: You’re mad, because you’re wrong, and I called you on it.

You have got to be the densest person on the planet. When I’m wrong, I admit it as I did right there, see? The point is that you’re rude. If I’m angry about anything, it’s because I have been insulted by you, not because I was wrong.

I see. So, while you seem to think it’s perfectly all right for you to be rude when correcting what you imagine to be others’ mistakes, you fly off the handle and start talking about "killfiles" when somebody does the exact same thing to you. Could you possibly dig a bigger hole for yourself, here?

Interesting…he got really quiet, all of a sudden.

Somebody better send a rescue crew down there, lol.

On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 23:46:04 -0400, Wavy G
wrote:

Of all the Russell Bs I’ve known, "Russell B" is the Russell Biest.

On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 14:44:43 GMT, Gerald Meazell wrote:

Russell B wrote:

You’re right, I don’t really know
what Carlin’s politics are.

Let me rephraase: You’re mad, because you’re wrong, and I called you on it.

You have got to be the densest person on the planet. When I’m wrong, I admit it as I did right there, see? The point is that you’re rude. If I’m angry about anything, it’s because I have been insulted by you, not because I was wrong.

I see. So, while you seem to think it’s perfectly all right for you to be rude when correcting what you imagine to be others’ mistakes, you fly off the handle and start talking about "killfiles" when somebody does the exact same thing to you. Could you possibly dig a bigger hole for yourself, here?

Interesting…he got really quiet, all of a sudden.

LOL. That’s just what I was thinking about someone else just last week.

Somebody better send a rescue crew down there, lol.

Tell ’em they better bring their own cots.

Of all the Pisanos I’ve known, "Pisano" is the Pisanoiest.

On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 23:46:04 -0400, Wavy G
wrote:

Of all the Russell Bs I’ve known, "Russell B" is the Russell Biest.

On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 14:44:43 GMT, Gerald Meazell wrote:

Russell B wrote:

You’re right, I don’t really know
what Carlin’s politics are.

Let me rephraase: You’re mad, because you’re wrong, and I called you on it.

You have got to be the densest person on the planet. When I’m wrong, I admit it as I did right there, see? The point is that you’re rude. If I’m angry about anything, it’s because I have been insulted by you, not because I was wrong.

I see. So, while you seem to think it’s perfectly all right for you to be rude when correcting what you imagine to be others’ mistakes, you fly off the handle and start talking about "killfiles" when somebody does the exact same thing to you. Could you possibly dig a bigger hole for yourself, here?

Interesting…he got really quiet, all of a sudden.

LOL. That’s just what I was thinking about someone else just last week.

Oh really? That’s cool. So, would you care to tell us who it was that you were thinking this about, or are you just going to leave this anecdote hanging?

Somebody better send a rescue crew down there, lol.

Tell ’em they better bring their own cots.

I see. So, while you seem to think it’s perfectly all right for you to be rude when correcting what you imagine to be others’ mistakes, you fly off the handle and start talking about "killfiles" when somebody does the exact same thing to you. Could you possibly dig a bigger hole for yourself, here?

Russell B wrote:

I see. So, while you seem to think it’s perfectly all right for you to be rude when correcting what you imagine to be others’ mistakes, you fly off the handle and start talking about "killfiles" when somebody does the exact same thing to you. Could you possibly dig a bigger hole for yourself, here?

Where was I rude (that wasn’t a response to rudeness)?

Your "correction" of the original poster was condescending and nasty. When I corrected your "correction," you flew off the handle and began attacking every newsgroup member in sight. Judging by your highly emotional reaction, you feel that rudeness and condescension are options that are only legitimately available to you.

In a sense, you’re digging a hole within a hole.

Russell B wrote:

Your "correction" of the original poster was condescending and nasty. When I corrected your "correction," you flew off the handle and began attacking every newsgroup member in sight. Judging by your highly emotional reaction, you feel that rudeness and condescension are options that are only legitimately available to you.

In a sense, you’re digging a hole within a hole.

Wow, you’re really reading a lot of things into this that just aren’t there. I never corrected the OP and while I meant no condescension, I can see where someone might see it. However, I find it interesting that the OP was not offended or at least not enough to respond.
Your first post in this thread was a sarcastic insult to me. Wavy G’s first response to me was to call me an idiot. When I found out Wavy G was insulted by what I said, I apologized. The only newsgroup member I have attacked is you and you started it with your insults. Hardly "flying off the handle" if you ask me.

The only reason this hole is getting deeper is because you can’t admit that you jumped into the middle of a conversation with sarcastic attacks and have not yet apologized.

Russell B wrote:

Your "correction" of the original poster was condescending and nasty. When
I corrected your "correction," you flew off the handle and began attacking
every newsgroup member in sight. Judging by your highly emotional reaction, you feel that rudeness and condescension are options that are only legitimately available to you.

In a sense, you’re digging a hole within a hole.

Wow, you’re really reading a lot of things into this that just aren’t there. I never corrected the OP and while I meant no condescension, I can see where someone might see it. However, I find it interesting that the OP was not offended or at least not enough to respond.

Your first post in this thread was a sarcastic insult to me. Wavy G’s first response to me was to call me an idiot. When I found out Wavy G was insulted by what I said, I apologized. The only newsgroup member I have attacked is you and you started it with your insults. Hardly "flying off the handle" if you ask me.

The only reason this hole is getting deeper is because you can’t admit that you jumped into the middle of a conversation with sarcastic attacks and have not yet apologized.

—
Gerald

I find it very telling that you should consider my first post in this thread an insult. All I did was point out that you were wrong. If that to you is an insult, it certainly explains your subsequent temper tantrums–you cannot stand to be corrected, and when it happens you fly off the handle just like a little kid.

As far as my "jump[ing] into the middle of a conversation," may I remind you that I was not addressing *you* in my first post, but rather Wavy G, a chat acquaintance of long standing. It was you who jumped into a conversation that neither included nor concerned you. Now you’re digging a hole within a hole within a hole.

Russell B wrote:

I find it very telling that you should consider my first post in this thread an insult. All I did was point out that you were wrong. If that

you is an insult, it certainly explains your subsequent temper tantrums–you cannot stand to be corrected, and when it happens you fly

the handle just like a little kid.

Yes, you did point out that I was wrong, but in a very flip and somewhat sarcastic manner. Then, you described me as intelligent, but put that word in quotes and we all know what you meant by that. There was the insult. You’re not even attempting to climb out of the hole you’ve dug for yourself. Hell, you’re in denial that there *is* a hole.

As far as my "jump[ing] into the middle of a conversation," may I remind you that I was not addressing *you* in my first post, but rather Wavy G,

chat acquaintance of long standing. It was you who jumped into a conversation that neither included nor concerned you. Now you’re

hole within a hole within a hole.

It is true that you were responding to someone else, however, it was a thread I was participating in and you chose to talk about me and therefore it concerned me. Did you not think I would respond to that? By those rules, Wavy G had no business responding to me because my original post in this thread was to the OP, not him. If that’s what you truly believe, then you need to tell your "chat acquaintance of long standing" that he’s in the wrong and should apologize. Your hole just got a little deeper.

—
Gerald

Russell B wrote:

I find it very telling that you should consider my first post in this thread an insult. All I did was point out that you were wrong. If that to you is an insult, it certainly explains your subsequent temper tantrums–you cannot stand to be corrected, and when it happens you fly off the handle just like a little kid.

Yes, you did point out that I was wrong, but in a very flip and somewhat sarcastic manner. Then, you described me as intelligent, but put that word in quotes and we all know what you meant by that. There was the insult. You’re not even attempting to climb out of the hole you’ve dug for yourself. Hell, you’re in denial that there *is* a hole.

As far as my "jump[ing] into the middle of a conversation," may I remind you that I was not addressing *you* in my first post, but rather Wavy G, a chat acquaintance of long standing. It was you who jumped into a conversation that neither included nor concerned you. Now you’re digging a hole within a hole within a hole.

It is true that you were responding to someone else, however, it was a thread I was participating in and you chose to talk about me and therefore it concerned me. Did you not think I would respond to that? By those rules, Wavy G had no business responding to me because my original post in this thread was to the OP, not him. If that’s what you truly believe, then you need to tell your "chat acquaintance of long standing" that he’s in the wrong and should apologize. Your hole just got a little deeper.

On Thu, 27 Oct 2005 16:17:38 GMT, Gerald Meazell wrote:

Russell B wrote:

I find it very telling that you should consider my first post in this thread an insult. All I did was point out that you were wrong. If

you is an insult, it certainly explains your subsequent temper tantrums–you cannot stand to be corrected, and when it happens you fly

the handle just like a little kid.

Yes, you did point out that I was wrong, but in a very flip and somewhat sarcastic manner. Then, you described me as intelligent, but put that word in quotes and we all know what you meant by that. There was the insult. You’re not even attempting to climb out of the hole you’ve dug for yourself. Hell, you’re in denial that there *is* a hole.

As far as my "jump[ing] into the middle of a conversation," may I

you that I was not addressing *you* in my first post, but rather Wavy

chat acquaintance of long standing. It was you who jumped into a conversation that neither included nor concerned you. Now you’re

hole within a hole within a hole.

It is true that you were responding to someone else, however, it was a thread I was participating in and you chose to talk about me and therefore it concerned me. Did you not think I would respond to that? By those rules, Wavy G had no business responding to me because my original post in this thread was to the OP, not him. If that’s what you truly believe, then you need to tell your "chat acquaintance of long standing" that he’s in the wrong and should apologize. Your hole just got a little deeper.

What a petulant, and wrong, child you are. The "take away" lesson here

you is that being corrected is not the tragedy it may seem, and it never justifies flying off the handle. It’s up to you to learn that lesson, though. I don’t have high hopes for you, frankly.

Either way, I’m through with you.

"Russell B" wrote in message

On Thu, 27 Oct 2005 16:17:38 GMT, Gerald Meazell wrote:

Russell B wrote:

I find it very telling that you should consider my first post in this thread an insult. All I did was point out that you were wrong. If

that to

you is an insult, it certainly explains your subsequent temper tantrums–you cannot stand to be corrected, and when it happens you fly

off

the handle just like a little kid.

Yes, you did point out that I was wrong, but in a very flip and somewhat sarcastic manner. Then, you described me as intelligent, but put that word in quotes and we all know what you meant by that. There was the insult. You’re not even attempting to climb out of the hole you’ve dug for yourself. Hell, you’re in denial that there *is* a hole.

As far as my "jump[ing] into the middle of a conversation," may I

remind

you that I was not addressing *you* in my first post, but rather Wavy

G, a

chat acquaintance of long standing. It was you who jumped into a conversation that neither included nor concerned you. Now you’re

digging a

hole within a hole within a hole.

It is true that you were responding to someone else, however, it was a thread I was participating in and you chose to talk about me and therefore it concerned me. Did you not think I would respond to that? By those rules, Wavy G had no business responding to me because my original post in this thread was to the OP, not him. If that’s what you truly believe, then you need to tell your "chat acquaintance of long standing" that he’s in the wrong and should apologize. Your hole just got a little deeper.

What a petulant, and wrong, child you are. The "take away" lesson here

for

you is that being corrected is not the tragedy it may seem, and it never justifies flying off the handle. It’s up to you to learn that lesson, though. I don’t have high hopes for you, frankly.

Either way, I’m through with you.

You spent way too much time with that troll!

What a petulant, and wrong, child you are. The "take away" lesson here for you is that being corrected is not the tragedy it may seem, and it never justifies flying off the handle. It’s up to you to learn that lesson, though. I don’t have high hopes for you, frankly.

Either way, I’m through with you.

Russell B wrote:

What a petulant, and wrong, child you are. The "take away" lesson here for you is that being corrected is not the tragedy it may seem, and it never justifies flying off the handle. It’s up to you to learn that lesson, though. I don’t have high hopes for you, frankly.

Wrong again. You cannot even respond to my points. Every reply you’ve made has been the same: "You’re wrong, you don’t like it, your mad, you fly off the handle." You are the child, the one who cannot have a reasoned discussion about an issue. Perhaps my first response to you was over the top and perhaps for that I should apologize, but not while I’m dealing with someone who refuses to see how his own actions may have contributed to the situation.

Either way, I’m through with you.

Good. This was going to be my last post on the subject anyway because I was tired of hearing you repeat yourself.

I’ve asked you nicely to stop your responses to me. I’ve had enough of you flying off the handle at everything I say. I sincerely hope that you can work through your maturity issues. Goodbye, and good luck.

P.S. It’s "you’re," not "your."

Russell B wrote:

I’ve asked you nicely to stop your responses to me. I’ve had enough of you flying off the handle at everything I say. I sincerely hope that you can work through your maturity issues. Goodbye, and good luck.

No, you said you would stop responding to me. You never asked me to stop responding to you. Second, if I flew off the handle at any time, it was with your first, might I remind you, very insulting post about me. After that, I believe I have been quite calm and collected. As for maturity, I have admitted the things I have done wrong here, you’re still in denial about what you did and continue to do.

P.S. It’s "you’re," not "your."

How do you know that wasn’t intentional?

On Sat, 29 Oct 2005 05:26:34 GMT, Gerald Meazell wrote:

Russell B wrote:

I’ve asked you nicely to stop your responses to me. I’ve had enough of you flying off the handle at everything I say. I sincerely hope that you can work through your maturity issues. Goodbye, and good luck.

No, you said you would stop responding to me. You never asked me to stop responding to you. Second, if I flew off the handle at any time, it was with your first, might I remind you, very insulting post about me. After that, I believe I have been quite calm and collected. As for maturity, I have admitted the things I have done wrong here, you’re still in denial about what you did and continue to do.

P.S. It’s "you’re," not "your."

How do you know that wasn’t intentional?

You’re not smart enough to make a mistake like that on purpose.
Now, for the third time, please do not send me any further responses. This conversation is finished. You’ve flown off the handle at me for the last time.

While I see how your responses are slanted, remember a couple of things. Those "big corporations" usually pay taxes. They also employ lots & lots of people who-guess what? Yes, pay taxes.

You’re not smart enough to make a mistake like that on purpose.

Now, for the third time, please do not send me any further responses. This conversation is finished. You’ve flown off the handle at me for the last time.

Russell B wrote:

You’re not smart enough to make a mistake like that on purpose.

Yet another insult. How fitting since you have been insulting me since you starting responding in this thread. For you, it seems, insults are what passes for conversation and/or debate.

Now, for the third time, please do not send me any further responses. This conversation is finished. You’ve flown off the handle at me for the last time.

The easy way to stop me from responding is to stop sending responses yourself. As long as you continue this conversation, I will.

How infantile of you, not that this is surprising. I’m sure you fly off the handle like this in real life, too. For the last time, I’m asking you to be an adult–if this is possible for you–and stop sending your responses to my account. We are done talking. Understand?

Russell B wrote:

How infantile of you, not that this is surprising. I’m sure you fly off the handle like this in real life, too. For the last time, I’m asking you to be an adult–if this is possible for you–and stop sending your responses to my account. We are done talking. Understand?

More insults. Man, you’re addicted aren’t you? I guess that there are some people for whom insults are a way of life. They can’t have a conversation without them. You seem to fit this pattern. I guess I am wasting my time trying to get you to admit you began this by insulting me because you don’t even know you’re doing it.

I do not send responses to your account. I only post to the group. If you have something set up that routes responses to your account then I would suggest you turn it off.

As I pointed out before, I did not "begin this" by insulting you. You took my correction of your mistake as an insult.

But I guess we’re supposed to ignore these
clear instances of Gerald Meazell being wrong, because he’s such an "intelligent" guy.

wash my hands of this. And I’ll conclude by asking you again to stop sending your responses to my account–and please don’t deny that you are doing so. I log into my account every day, and there are new responses from you.

Russell B wrote:

As I pointed out before, I did not "begin this" by insulting you. You took my correction of your mistake as an insult.

Yes, your first post did correct me, though I must reiterate that it was not in a matter of fact manner but a flip and sarcastic one. Then, you threw in this:

But I guess we’re supposed to ignore these
clear instances of Gerald Meazell being wrong, because he’s such an "intelligent" guy.

Therein lies the insult. You may not consider it an insult, but it is. At the very least, if you didn’t mean it as an insult, I took it that way, much the way Wavy G took my Snopes comment as an insult when that was not my intention. I was man enough to apologize to him for that. You, however, have not.

wash my hands of this. And I’ll conclude by asking you again to stop sending your responses to my account–and please don’t deny that you are doing so. I log into my account every day, and there are new responses from you.

Your responses to me do not come to my account. I honestly do not know why you would be receiving my responses to your account. I’ve checked every setting in my newsreader (Mozilla) to see if there is something that forces responses to be sent to both. I cannot find such a setting and I am not doing it intentionally.

Russell B wrote:

As I pointed out before, I did not "begin this" by insulting you. You took my correction of your mistake as an insult.

Yes, your first post did correct me, though I must reiterate that it was not in a matter of fact manner but a flip and sarcastic one. Then, you threw in this:

But I guess we’re supposed to ignore these
clear instances of Gerald Meazell being wrong, because he’s such an "intelligent" guy.

Therein lies the insult. You may not consider it an insult, but it is. At the very least, if you didn’t mean it as an insult, I took it that way, much the way Wavy G took my Snopes comment as an insult when that was not my intention. I was man enough to apologize to him for that. You, however, have not.

wash my hands of this. And I’ll conclude by asking you again to stop sending your responses to my account–and please don’t deny that you are doing so. I log into my account every day, and there are new responses from you.

Your responses to me do not come to my account. I honestly do not know why you would be receiving my responses to your account. I’ve checked every setting in my newsreader (Mozilla) to see if there is something that forces responses to be sent to both. I cannot find such a setting and I am not doing it intentionally.

—
Gerald

Russell B wrote:

As I pointed out before, I did not "begin this" by insulting you. You

my correction of your mistake as an insult.

Yes, your first post did correct me, though I must reiterate that it was not in a matter of fact manner but a flip and sarcastic one. Then, you threw in this:

But I guess we’re supposed to ignore these
clear instances of Gerald Meazell being wrong, because he’s such an "intelligent" guy.

Therein lies the insult. You may not consider it an insult, but it is. At the very least, if you didn’t mean it as an insult, I took it that way, much the way Wavy G took my Snopes comment as an insult when that was not my intention. I was man enough to apologize to him for that. You, however, have not.

wash my hands of this. And I’ll conclude by asking you again to stop sending your responses to my account–and please don’t deny that you are doing so. I log into my account every day, and there are new responses from you.

Your responses to me do not come to my account. I honestly do not know why you would be receiving my responses to your account. I’ve checked every setting in my newsreader (Mozilla) to see if there is something that forces responses to be sent to both. I cannot find such a setting and I am not doing it intentionally.

—
Gerald

OH DO FUCK OFF YOU PAIR OF CUNTS

Russell B wrote:

As I pointed out before, I did not "begin this" by insulting you. You took my correction of your mistake as an insult.

Yes, your first post did correct me, though I must reiterate that it was not in a matter of fact manner but a flip and sarcastic one.

Then, you
threw in this:

But I guess we’re supposed to ignore these
clear instances of Gerald Meazell being wrong, because he’s such an "intelligent" guy.

Therein lies the insult. You may not consider it an insult, but it is.

At the very least, if you didn’t mean it as an insult, I took it that way, much the way Wavy G took my Snopes comment as an insult when that was not my intention. I was man enough to apologize to him for that. You, however, have not.

wash my hands of this. And I’ll conclude by asking you again to stop sending your responses to my account–and please don’t deny that you are doing so. I log into my account every day, and there are new responses from you.

Your responses to me do not come to my account. I honestly do not know why you would be receiving my responses to your account. I’ve checked every setting in my newsreader (Mozilla) to see if there is something that forces responses to be sent to both. I cannot find such a setting and I am not doing it intentionally.