Having The Same Argument, Again.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

did you mean to make this your sig line?

What I meant was this: Sometimes, a person says something that is so shockingly stupid that merely quoting the statement demonstrates the speaker's staggering idiocy. Thus it is unnecessary -- indeed, counter-productive -- to add my own words, not only because the point is so blatantly revealed by the speaker's own stupidity, but because adding anything might suggest that I was trying to engage the speaker on an intellectual level, which one cannot do with a complete idiot.

In other words, yes. I meant to make this my sig line, but only for when I'm replying to you.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch

What I meant was this: Sometimes, a person says something that is so shockingly stupid that merely quoting the statement demonstrates the speaker's staggering idiocy. Thus it is unnecessary -- indeed, counter-productive -- to add my own words, not only because the point is so blatantly revealed by the speaker's own stupidity, but because adding anything might suggest that I was trying to engage the speaker on an intellectual level, which one cannot do with a complete idiot.

In other words, yes. I meant to make this my sig line, but only for when I'm replying to you.

you seem to be able to quantify levels of stupidity quite accurately. are you aware that evaluating anyone's intelligence requires an intelligence level in the evaluator that is on par? as an example a genius cannot rank a super genius and a super genius would probably be unable to distinguish between a lowlevel genius and a bright person. the evaluator's perspective is too far removed.

but you seem to be able to accurately rank the very stupid. I'll have to ponder this new realization.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

you seem to be able to quantify levels of stupidity quite accurately. are you aware that evaluating anyone's intelligence requires an intelligence level in the evaluator that is on par? as an example a genius cannot rank a super genius and a super genius would probably be unable to distinguish between a lowlevel genius and a bright person. the evaluator's perspective is too far removed.

but you seem to be able to accurately rank the very stupid. I'll have to ponder this new realization.

I have nothing to add.

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

you seem to be able to quantify levels of stupidity quite accurately. are you aware that evaluating anyone's intelligence requires an intelligence level in the evaluator that is on par? as an example a genius cannot rank a super genius and a super genius would probably be unable to distinguish between a lowlevel genius and a bright person. the evaluator's perspective is too far removed.

but you seem to be able to accurately rank the very stupid. I'll have to ponder this new realization.

Translation: why do you hate the Jews?

[Sidd Finch]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

are you aware that evaluating anyone's intelligence requires an intelligence level in the evaluator that is on par?

Finally, someone explains why Spanky wants to continually test elementary school students.

[Gattigap]

An intruiging and sympathetic profile of Alvin Greene, Democratic candidate for Senate.

And funny. Intruiging, sympathetic, and funny. Like this piece of his jobs plan:

"Another thing we can do for jobs is make toys of me, especially for the holidays. Little dolls. Me. Like maybe little action dolls. Me in an army uniform, air force uniform, and me in my suit. They can make toys of me and my vehicle, especially for the holidays and Christmas for the kids. That's something that would create jobs. So you see I think out of the box like that. It's not something a typical person would bring up. That's something that could happen, that makes sense. It's not a joke."

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Judge Tauro says DOMA violates the 10th Amendment.

It'll be fun to see how this plays on both the left and right.

He has a more garden-variety companion case ruling DOMA unconstitutional on equal protection grounds: as having no rational relationship to the benefits at hand. Margie Marshall must be beaming.

[Hank Chinaski]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010...ntral-command/

couple of points- I was of course correct that the main fall out if the military won't talk to the press anymore.

501-23

also, what the fuck are you guys doing appointing a glee-killer? I mean shit, this is like when Atticus came to school in camo the day after we threw him naked outside the locker room.

502-23

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

Judge Tauro says DOMA violates the 10th Amendment.

It'll be fun to see how this plays on both the left and right.

He has a more garden-variety companion case ruling DOMA unconstitutional on equal protection grounds: as having no rational relationship to the benefits at hand. Margie Marshall must be beaming.

somewhere the wise tea party guys are smiling because this gives them votes, but more important shows that finding a biased judge is all that stands between the "big fucking deal" HC and the trash heap.

[Penske 2.0]

Originally Posted by greedy,greedy,greedy

i have nothing to add.

2.0.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

I was of course correct that the main fall out if the military won't talk to the press anymore.

If the press can't accurately report what the military says and does then what good is it for the military to talk to them?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

This is from January 10, 2010:

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

If the press can't accurately report what the military says and does then what good is it for the military to talk to them?

just saying, you guys finally crossed the line. your own defense secretary decided as much.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

just saying, you guys finally crossed the line. your own defense secretary decided as much.

I really don't understand what the fuck you're talking about? "You guys crossed the line"? It might as well be Greek.

eta: "You guys?" If I'm in a doctor's office and the choice is reading Rolling Stone or playing with my iPhone, I play with my iPhone.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

I really don't understand what the fuck you're talking about? "You guys crossed the line"? It might as well be Greek.

olive branch? if I create a blog and start saying i'm a dem will you start accepting my posts?