Crap Throwing Monkey Posted February 20, 2006 Posted February 20, 2006 I don't beleive I ever said he was drunk, just that he might have been and no one bothered to figure that out one way or the other. I certainly never attributed that claim to you and then mocked you for having made it. I'd be happy to do so though if you are feeling left out. I know how lonely you fascist geeks can get. Do you want the Kangaroo's phone number? 607344[/snapback] And I quote... Dick had too much to drink and that they delayed a police interview for a day for him to sober up
Mickey Posted February 20, 2006 Author Posted February 20, 2006 That's comforting considering it happens quite a bit around here. 607291[/snapback] Right, I said that after you mocked me as being "bitter" for raising questions over Cheney's choice of the friendly folks at Fox for his interview rather than a press conference or a more adversarial setting. That same post of your was also devoid of any criticism at all of the VP over any apsect of the incident. Gee, based on that I don't know how I could have concluded that you weren't being critical of Cheney (you weren't) and were mocking those that were (you were). I must have been hallucinating. I want to be fair though so let me give you the opportunity to express your criticism of the administration. Maybe you have been and I have just been skipping over your posts in that vein. Here you go, set the record straight: 1. Iraq war: mistake, poorly handled, rousing success, what? 2. Pre-war claims: exagerrated, honestly mistaken, BS, what? 3. Gay marriage/unions: for or against? 4. Alito 5. Myers 6. Roberts 7. NSA wiretaps: illegal, uneccesary, poorly handled, what? 8. Cheney shooting a guy in the face: for or against, etc? 9. Cheney shooting aftermath: well handled, good example of spin, what? 10. Abortion: legal in any circumstances or illegal in all or what combination? 11. Soc. Sec. reform/gutting, etc, Bush plan good, bad, stupid, brilliant, what? 12. Iraq exit strategy, do we have one? What precisely has to be achieved before we can leave and how will those achievements be measured? 13. Iran, support the administration strategy there? For a bonus, what is the strategy? 14. Gitmo: should the executive decision to detain those people be reviewed, ever, by anyon other than the executive? 15. Torture: okie dokie? 16. Budget deficit: should Bush be praised or criticized? 17. Creationism/Intelligent Design: Should this be taught in schools and what is your view of Bush having advocated that they be taught in schools? 18. Tom DeLay? 19. Scooter Libby and Plamegate, if he violated the law, should he go to jail? Should Bush be held to his promise to fire anyone who had anything to do with it as opposed to his later claim after finding our Rove was involved to firing only those convicted of an actual crime? 20. Stem cells: okay to keep tossing out frozen embryos left over from fertility procedures rather than using them for stem cell research? 21. global warming: is it a real problem that we should be addressing? That's a start.
Mickey Posted February 20, 2006 Author Posted February 20, 2006 Clinton lied under oath to a grand jury. Last I checked, there was no "Whoops! That's not relevant!" exception to lying under oath to a grand jury. Which is not to defend anything else about that whole stupid process. Merely to criticize your own stupid "But that's irrelevent" defense of lying under oath in front of a grand jury. 606108[/snapback] Stupid? Well, first off, it wasn't before a grand jury. It was a deposition in a civil case. They don't have grand juries in civil cases. I'll refrain from calling you or your point "stupid" because I am a gentleman. What I did in response to that post was simply to point out mistakes of fact by the poster. I did not defend the lie, just stated the fact that he lied in answer to a question that was ultimately held to be irrelevant. That is in fact what happened.
Mickey Posted February 20, 2006 Author Posted February 20, 2006 And I quote... Dick had too much to drink and that they delayed a police interview for a day for him to sober up 607361[/snapback] Lets try the full quote shall we? "Further, you don't need an elaborate conspiracy theory to explain that maybe Dick had too much to drink and that they delayed a police interview for a day for him to sober up." In the same thread I also said: "Was he drunk? Dunno. Do know that intoxication could have been definitively ruled out easily and it wasn't." and this: "I know it is rank speculation. I'm not saying he was drunk, just that we don't know if he was or he wasn't and a quick interview with a police officer within an hour of the incident would have nailed it one way or the other. " Maybe we should measure you up for a Kangaroo suit?
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted February 20, 2006 Posted February 20, 2006 607361[/snapback] Lets try the full quote shall we? In the same thread I also said: and this: Maybe we should measure you up for a Kangaroo suit? 607381[/snapback] Ooooh...looks like I hit a nerve.
Mickey Posted February 20, 2006 Author Posted February 20, 2006 Lets try the full quote shall we? In the same thread I also said: and this: Maybe we should measure you up for a Kangaroo suit? 607381[/snapback] Ooooh...looks like I hit a nerve. 607389[/snapback] Just the nerve that reacts to being falsely "quoted". Besides, I seem to have you rattled enough to botch up the quote thing-a-ma-bob. Maybe we should settle this like men and go quail hunting together?
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted February 20, 2006 Posted February 20, 2006 Just the nerve that reacts to being falsely "quoted". Besides, I seem to have you rattled enough to botch up the quote thing-a-ma-bob. Maybe we should settle this like men and go quail hunting together? 607392[/snapback] That was not a false quote. That was taken directly from one of your posts. Of course, it was out of context...but seeing as you've never had a problem with quotations taken out of context before, I didn't see why it would bother you now...
SilverNRed Posted February 21, 2006 Posted February 21, 2006 That same post of your was also devoid of any criticism at all of the VP over any apsect of the incident. 607364[/snapback] No kidding. I figured it just goes without saying that accidentally shooting someone in the face is always a bad idea. I didn't know I had to take a page from your playbook and have an internet spaz attack about the whole thing. Gee, based on that I don't know how I could have concluded that you weren't being critical of Cheney (you weren't) and were mocking those that were (you were). Well, in that post, I wasn't being critical of Cheney (I was being critical of you) and I wasn't mocking those critical of Cheney for the accident, but rather those completely flying off the handle about the Hume interview (you and Jack Cafferty). But rather than take what I said at face value, you made up the following: I used to say to myself, "Self, that SilverNRed is so absolutely devoted to the Bush Cult that they could shoot a guy in the face and he would find nothing wrong with it and in fact, would attack and mock anyone who thought maybe such a thing was not exactly their finest hour." 604476[/snapback] And later whined about: There is a word for the kind of post where you simply make up senseless positions for the other guy which he has never taken and then spew all over them. 607250[/snapback] When you're in a hole, maybe the best way out is to stop digging.
KD in CA Posted February 21, 2006 Posted February 21, 2006 No kidding. I figured it just goes without saying that accidentally shooting someone in the face is always a bad idea. I didn't know I had to take a page from your playbook and have an internet spaz attack about the whole thing. Come on now, you know that Mickey likes to be very specific in his criticisms of out of line politicians. Remember a few weeks ago how he insisted on calling out Hillary by name for her plantation remark? Then again, maybe he’d be happy if you just admitted that the shooting was nothing but a 'leadership problem’.
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted February 21, 2006 Posted February 21, 2006 Then again, maybe he’d be happy if you just admitted that the shooting was nothing but a 'leadership problem’. 607481[/snapback] Well...if Cheney led the bird too much, then technically...
KRC Posted February 21, 2006 Posted February 21, 2006 Well, in that post, I wasn't being critical of Cheney (I was being critical of you) and I wasn't mocking those critical of Cheney for the accident, but rather those completely flying off the handle about the Hume interview (you and Jack Cafferty). But rather than take what I said at face value, you made up the following: 607448[/snapback] We are used to seeing Mickey being dishonest. We come to expect it from him.
Mickey Posted February 21, 2006 Author Posted February 21, 2006 That was not a false quote. That was taken directly from one of your posts. Of course, it was out of context...but seeing as you've never had a problem with quotations taken out of context before, I didn't see why it would bother you now... 607420[/snapback] It was a bit more than simply "out of context". For example, if you said: "The punch line to that joke is 'I have a dog with a very short penis'." And I quoted you as saying as: "I have a dog with a short penis". That would be out of context, leaving the reader to think you really have such an unfortunate dog rather than simply explaining a bad joke about such a dog. But, if I quoted you as saying: "I have a short penis". Though perhaps true, I think that would be a little bit more than simply qouting you out of context. Not that this isn't a whole heckuva lot of fun but getting back to the original point that initiated this geek-freak, cheek-to-cheek dance: I believe that AD's post was an example of his mastubatory habit of diddling his own straw man. Agree or disagree? I understand that you think I do the same by quoting people out of context, you've made that clear. What about AD's post though?
IowaBill Posted February 21, 2006 Posted February 21, 2006 Why? Recruiting another lemming for your regular circle jerks? Tom doesn't exactly fit the profile. 607350[/snapback] No, but he certainly fits the profile for your circle jerks
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted February 21, 2006 Posted February 21, 2006 No, but he certainly fits the profile for your circle jerks 607877[/snapback] Ouch! You sure showed us...
Alaska Darin Posted February 21, 2006 Posted February 21, 2006 I believe that AD's post was an example of his mastubatory habit of diddling his own straw man. Agree or disagree? I understand that you think I do the same by quoting people out of context, you've made that clear. What about AD's post though? 607825[/snapback] Please, please, won't someone please agree with Mickey that I'm ridiculously consistant in my stances? He so needs the validation. Don't you have some new link to post about the Cheney shooting? It's been a couple of days since you regurgitated the same crap.
Ghost of BiB Posted February 22, 2006 Posted February 22, 2006 Please, please, won't someone please agree with Mickey that I'm ridiculously consistant in my stances? He so needs the validation. Don't you have some new link to post about the Cheney shooting? It's been a couple of days since you regurgitated the same crap. 608214[/snapback] Yes, you've been consistant. Can I go home now?
Alaska Darin Posted February 22, 2006 Posted February 22, 2006 Yes, you've been consistant. Can I go home now? 608221[/snapback] No. Eat your meat or you can't have any pudding.
Ghost of BiB Posted February 22, 2006 Posted February 22, 2006 No. Eat your meat or you can't have any pudding. 608223[/snapback] Damn...since when did Yoga become an issue?
Alaska Darin Posted February 22, 2006 Posted February 22, 2006 Damn...since when did Yoga become an issue? 608227[/snapback] When Vader turned to the dark side.
KD in CA Posted February 22, 2006 Posted February 22, 2006 When Vader turned to the dark side. 608231[/snapback] There is still good in you Darin....I have sensed it.
Recommended Posts