Wankery, explained at a level so that even wankers can understand it:
(Pilfered shamelessly from Tim Lambert.)
AFTERSNARK: I think we need a Canadian version of the above. Go wild. Where's that Zorpheous guy when you need him?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
27 comments:
I think we need a Canadian version of the above.
I think we need to seal the border.
The stupid factory?
Oooh! I know where that is!
Here's a link.
Omigod, omigod, omigod, Patsy ... I bet you've been waiting forevah to use that !!!!
Assclown.
Peter: "Hey, Brian. If cops are pigs, does that make you a snausage?"
Brian: "Good one, Peter. Did you stay up all night thinking of that one?"
Peter: "Naw, I got to bed around 2, 2:30."
PR: For the fourteenth time:
Do you or do you not support or condone the killing of abortion doctors?
Yes or no?
Just ban the lousy douche. I did. What a useless oxygen thief.
Anyway... check it out.
"Do you or do you not support or condone the killing of abortion doctors?
Yes or no?"
For upteen gazillionth time, ls -- I already answered that question long, long ago, and I will not answer it again.
I found no answer in extensive research, therefore I treat it as you refuse to answer.
So then we can assume you do condone the killing of abortion doctors.
You also said on various occasions that you would ignore anything I say.
Just another lie from PR.
I'm left with two questions.
1) What's the cost of tuition per semester for U of A sociology?
2) Has it been money well spent?
1) $ USD 4,484 (from here
2) from the U of A point of view, yes. From the PR point of view, no. They did not teach target shooting, so how useful is all this edumacation for killing abortion doctors, which he supports and condones? He supports tracking down and harassing bloggers, does he also support assaulting them? Does he support killing them? Based on his support for killing abortion doctors, I suspect so.
"I found no answer in extensive research, therefore I treat it as you refuse to answer.
So then we can assume you do condone the killing of abortion doctors."
Considering that what you've said here is a lie, and you know it to be a lie, I'd advise you to retract those comments immediately.
PR: I can make whatever assumptions I wish, in the absence of any clear answer from you.
For the fifteenth time:
Do you or do you not support or condone the killing of abortion doctors?
Yes or no?
Yeah, LS. Better retract or he'll.. he'll... stamp his feet?
You forgot to say he'll stamp his fat little feet, Frank.
I ask for a one word answer and receive 15 to 25 words, not providing an answer, but refusing to answer. He keeps shrieking about "not letting CC and his sycophants off the hook" over whatever. I am doing the same to him. Every time he appears here, I will ask this question, and make whatever extrapolations from non-answers I choose, until he answers.
It's become very strange in my view. How hard is it to give a simple answer? Or a longer one, even if it has equivocations? But just saying "I already did"? No, I keep thinking about Frank when the discussion is about Berniergate and he cryptically says "more to come".
If memory serves, Patrick said that he does condone the killing of abortion doctors. But to be fair, it was quite a while back.
Patrick, have you changed your position?
" ask for a one word answer and receive 15 to 25 words, not providing an answer, but refusing to answer. He keeps shrieking about "not letting CC and his sycophants off the hook" over whatever. I am doing the same to him. Every time he appears here, I will ask this question, and make whatever extrapolations from non-answers I choose, until he answers."
The question's already been answered. If you want to dishonestly insist it hasn't been, that's your choice.
Now. Some of you need to start understanding a few things about the nature of the comments you're making here in this thread. If you don't start retracting them, I'm simply going to have to do what I'm going to have to do.
If I were you, I sincerely would not push my luck to this end.
Why don't you give an answer, or, since according to you, you have already answered, repeat said answer?
If "doing what you have to do" involves legal action, get some good advice first. You do have a duty to mitigate, and you are absolutely not doing that. Instead you are being combative and refusing to provide a simple response to a simple question. You are escalating instead of trying to resolve anything.
For the sixteenth time:
Do you or do you not support or condone the killing of abortion doctors?
Yes or no?
"If I were you, I sincerely would not push my luck to this end."
or you'll murder another abortion clinician?
KEvron
If anyone's going to the kitchen, I could use another coldie.
Thx.
Actually guys, I think Patrick may be referring to this.
"Actually, no. I regard the murder or attempted murders of clinic workers and patients as crimes at best and terrorist acts at worst."
Maybe not in those exact words, but it does sound like Mr. Ross does not condone the murder of abortion doctors.
Why he has refused to repost this response, or a link to it, or even just the word "no" is beyond me.
Forgive me for that omission, LuLu.
I meant to say, "stamp his corpulent, little, mullet-headed feet".
There, I feel better already.
Now that's more like it, Frank ... LuLu approves.
"it does sound like Mr. Ross does not condone the murder of abortion doctors."
however, twats does essentially equate it with misdemeanor assault, so....
KEvron
btw, his name is twatrick rossshole: "mr. ross" is his mom....
KEvron
And, back on-topic, thanks for the Tim Lambert reference--a handy one to use the next time Shaidle, McMillan and other world-class scientists are going on about the "DDT ban that killed millions."
I've got them covered on my Canadian version. I was kind of hoping CC might link to it. Hint, hint...
Post a Comment