Monday, March 03, 2008

Because the stupid just never ends, does it?


Shorter Patsy Ross: "Mike Brock and Don Beemer and the Liberal Party of Canada; therefore, Wanda Watkins and Canadian Cynic."

Drop by tomorrow when we can read Patsy huffing, "Solar cycles and climate change and global warming; therefore, Wanda Watkins and Canadian Cynic."

If only I were joking.

WHAT RT SAYS
: Why, yes, Red Tory makes a good point:

How interesting…

“This isn’t about playing nice with people who won't play by the same rules — it’s about forcing them to, whether they like it or not.

We’ve already revealed a few of them. And if others don’t clean up their act, more will follow.”

Well goody then. I’m sure we’ll soon be seeing the full identities of many right-wing bloggers such as “Joanne” at “Blue Like You” and Fred over at “Gay and Right,” along with “Canadian Sentinel,” and the infamous “Neo” at the “Halls of Macademia,” not to mention a whole pile of others revealed for all to see and publicly scrutinize for whatever purpose seen to be fit, right?

There you go, Patsy -- I'm thinking you have your work cut out for you, exposing secret identities from both sides of the blogosphere in a Fox News, fair and balanced kind of way. Um ... that was what you were proposing, right? I mean, you weren't going to play favourites and pick only on those bloggers with whom you disagree, were you? Please tell me that's not what you had in mind.

And, no, we're not done here.

12 comments:

Red Tory said...

Don't hold your breath...

Patrick Ross said...

Awwwwwwwwwww, Muffin.

Do you need your crying towel?

By the way, your bosom buddy McClelland is actually threatening Mike Brock with guns. Any comment on that, el douche?

liberal supporter said...

By the way, your bosom buddy McClelland is actually threatening Mike Brock with guns. Any comment on that, el douche?
Why would anyone believe a proven liar like you? Why not quote the said passage here?

CC said...

Patrick:

You're lying. As LS suggests, why don't you quote Robert's actual statement in the proper context?

Patrick Ross said...

ROTFL

Hoo boy. What a couple of maroons.

Yeah, a statement like "I hope that type of sentiment comforts you the day you find yourself staring down the barrel of a 12 gauge shotgun, Mike," isn't meant to be threatening at all.

I think you're right, Cynic. The stupid just doesn't end.

CC said...

You're still lying, Patsy, and at this point, I really have no patience left. You were explicitly asked to supply the context for Robert's words, and you refused, choosing instead to cherry pick.

So you can simply bugger off back to your own blog and lie to your readers over there. When you finally decide to blog honestly, feel free to drop by here again sometime, and we can chat.

Patrick Ross said...

ROTFL

That's the entire comment, dummy.

In what context do you think this is actually going to be any different?

Your buddy got busted, dimwit. Live with it.

liberal supporter said...

So the entire thread has only one comment in it?

Would this comment make any sense if you didn't see the seven before?

In what context do you think this is actually going to be any different?
Um, if the context was like this:

[START OF CONTEXT EXAMPLE]
PR: I like to shoot people with no provocation and ask questions later.
Me: I hope that type of sentiment comforts you the day you find yourself staring down the barrel of a 12 gauge shotgun, PR
[END OF CONTEXT EXAMPLE]

Or if the context was someone being kind enough to give an example of context to a willfully obtuse troll like yourself.

It's the context, stupid.

CC said...

It's not clear that anything will ever get through to anyone as stupid as Patsy, so let's let Mike Brock himself supply the clarification:

"Update: McClelland clarifies: "We live in a world where people go postal. If the Brocks of the world continue on their present course they will one day run into someone who goes postal on them. When that happens I seriously doubt they'll be able to save themselves with the type of gibberish Brock is spouting to justify going after Beemer's job."

See? Even the supposed recipient of the threat Mike Brock posted a clarification of McClelland's alleged "threat." That means that Brock isn't stupid, while Patsy is.

See how that works? Now fuck off, Patsy. Seriously.

KEvron said...

check me if i'm wrong, folks, but seeing as context doesn't matter, i'm pretty that twatrick threatened mike brock at 2:26....

KEvron

KEvron said...

er, "....i'm pretty sure"

KEvron

KEvron said...

"That means that Brock isn't stupid"

at first, brock did pretend that he had been threatened, but it didn't take him too long to realize that dog wouldn't hunt. still, props to brock for seizing on another opportunity to lie, if only for a moment. he is a rightie, afterall....

KEvron