Kitt:

Strange

"you little boy."-bucky1

I don't get your attempts at insults. You don't make sense to me.

Why should his insults make any more sense than anything else he says?

Now, if they actually made sense--that would require explanation.

question

What is the average amount of pages of comments before the inevitable infighting over libertarianism or some semantical tangent?

Any guesses/theories?

After we bury (bangs shoe on table)* the GOP we'll have to quibble with some of them anyway. It's inevitable.

*Cue Shooter and his incessant and hollow comparisons of Democrats to commies, Stalinists and totalitarians...

Then I point that out to you and about you and you call me a liar (and a little boy) for pointing that out. The exasperation factor is off the charts.

I was asked. I was cussed and discussed as some freak; then the few (your cabal) refused to pick a canidate. I knew why, no one is without flaw.

Why the fear? I took a guess and it looks more probable each day.

LWM: Not that I have anything against taking discussions wherever they naturally go - I'm just bitter that by the time I can actually comment at this blog, the conversation has already moved beyond the original subject into something I usually find much less interesting.

DCLaw1... now that's quite an image.

One of the reasons I like this blog is similar to my liking The McLaughlin Group.

There aren't that many places where the issues get wrestled fully to the ground. Granted, McLaughlin makes his pundits express their opinions, but that is their job, after all. Here there are people with such diverse backgrounds that it's hard not to learn something...

EXCEPT WHEN THE LIBERTARIAN WARS SURGE AND RAGE AGAIN.

I have to skim some of them... but sometimes they get caught in the threads of the other discussions, and are unavoidable. [sigh]

Nothing makes me madder than being told I am incapable of forming my own opinion about something, with the implication being that some man will do it for me. That is my age showing. It used to be like that. Back in the day.

And that some little punk thinks he can get away with it here used to be as annoying as gnats, but is rapidly becoming more like yellow jackets. And he calls himself a libertarian! And still wonders why I think Paul might have a "woman" problem.

(Wow, there was just a TV commercial for RAID, and how good it is at killing yellow jackets!)

Now, if they actually made sense--that would require explanation.

I see you are looking in a mirror today. Perhaps you should take a long look. Who wrote the first derogatory post today attacking the man and not the position? Who makes snide little remakes in the safety of his posse's warm embrace?

Yes, it is a fool named Paul pretending to be a sophisticate and intellectual. If only you mother could see you now in all your glory, eh?

I understand. I couldn't help it. I'm a left libertarian myself but I have no illusions about utopian ideologies. That's for kool-aid drinkers. I should have kept my mouth shut.

Bucky1,

I will support whoever the party nominates. I will write in my dream ticket of Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez, as usual.

being told I am incapable of forming my own opinion about something, with the implication being that some man will do it for me. That is my age showing. It used to be like that. Back in the day.

---

So prove you can think, and give even even tentative support to someone. Here in public with your buddies looking on. You can withdraw support tomorrow and say it was a joke.

Just prove that you can do it.

If only you mother could see you now in all your glory, eh?-Bucky1

Another one of those weird insults you come up with. Truly strange.

I understand your frustration. Just keep in mind that some people get a sick satisfaction from playing the unfairly-treated-and-misunderstood-blog-victim, and they feed off others' responses.

Just deprive them of the air they need to keep burning like little brushfires. Really, who cares if they get the "last word."

DCLaw1:

Karen

And then he proceeded, immediately, to ascribe a "motive" to me-- and everyone else here-- for waiting until Glenn endorses a candidate before we will too.

I think it's laughable that anyone would think of Glenn's blog in that kind of sense. I've never known him to endorse a politician (correct me if I'm wrong)....

A large part of the reason I come to this blog is because it's (thankfully) devoid of the typical, bloviating election discussions. I don't know about anyone else, but Glenn's endorsing a candidate at this point would be like seeing Maya Angelou in a gangster rap video.

Precisely.

It's what I mean by quoting Wolfgang Pauli, "Not even wrong."

Or the metaphor of skew lines. For any line in a 3-D world, a skew line is as far off as you can get. There are lines in the same plane that are either parallel or that intersect--and an infinite number of lines in an infinite number of planes are available. And then there are skew lines, that just shoot off to infinity on their own merry way, having nothing whatsoever in common with line they are skew to.

As I said before:

You see, while the actual content of what trolls have to say is boring beyond tears, the functional analysis of how they unconsciously figure within the semantic universe is always good for an ironic smile, if not an outright chuckle.

Askew?

Who asked you?

Would you please stop being pathetic? To think, I actually defended you in previous threads.

The biggest problem with the internet is it has a longer memory than the average brain. You said what you said, you were called on it, you denied saying it, then you said it again and now you're daring us to prove that what you denied saying isn't true.