Pepper sprayed for public safety.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Adder

Yes, your situation is exactly like that of the women of America.

Do you even have even the slightest inkling of how offensive this is?

Yes I do see how offensive your post is. I suppose you believe alcoholism is a lifestyle choice that I can simply change?

[Icky Thump]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

To cope with stress I need scotch every night. My BCBS doesn't cover it Can Obama amend the coverage of HCR?

Or Adder, he needs porn and kleenex to have sex. Should his H.C. be required to cover it?

As a poster here once said "Don't you have a client file you can bill this to?"

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

Yes I do see how offensive your post is. I suppose you believe alcoholism is a lifestyle choice that I can simply change?

Just like being a women at risk of pregnancy!

Testosterone and gender reassignment or all!

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Adder

Yes, your situation is exactly like that of the women of America.

Do you even have even the slightest inkling of how offensive this is?

Pssst... That's why it's funny.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by taxwonk

And fuck you, too. Just because you are almost completely self-absorbed on the interwebs doesn't mean that it's the way everybody feels. And you damn well best not be arguing it's the only right way to be.

I'm not saying it's the right or wrong way to be. A man is free to delude himself in whatever manner he desires. But reality will remain what it is. Human nature will remain what it is.

How you conclude that logically, accurately assessing a situation makes me self-absorbed I can't understand. You hew to notions of what you think things ought to be, and can be. You hold out hope they're better than what the data suggests. I just look at the shit and describe what I see.

FWIW, though it's irrelevant but you asked, IRL, I am not self-absorbed. I am actually quite pleasant, and generous, and more honest than I ought to be. I'm just not fool enough to think those are qualities we should expect from most people. Particularly politicians. And I think when assessing how one should vote, in a broken system, in a deeply flawed society, there is no sensible choice but to be self-serving. The only question is whether to look long or short term. To vote for Romney to keep as much as one can in the short term, in the belief its best to get what you can now because who knows what tomorrow may bring, is credible. To vote for Obama in the belief it will be better for the economy, and by extension, you, over the long term is an equally credible position. To vote for either out of fear of outlying idiots like Todd Akin, or because you think one has a "socialist agenda," is to be ludicrous.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

To cope with stress I need scotch every night. My BCBS doesn't cover it Can Obama amend the coverage of HCR?

Or Adder, he needs porn and kleenex to have sex. Should his H.C. be required to cover it?

Hank, this is ludicrous. You realize that if scotch is covered you'll have to use a generic brand?

[Adder]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

I'm not saying it's the right or wrong way to be. A man is free to delude himself in whatever manner he desires. But reality will remain what it is. Human nature will remain what it is.

.

Once again, before you chalk it all up to human nature you may want to look at some of the science on what the nature of humans is.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

Hank, this is ludicrous. You realize that if scotch is covered you'll have to use a generic brand?

I curse you for suggesting Laphroaig Quarter Cask to me. Yesterday I was sipping Macallan 12, which most people think is about as good a scotch as one can buy at the reasonable price point. It tasted utterly dull to me. I found myself quickly reverting to the QC. I've a cabinet full of different whiskys, and what do I keep having to reload? The QC. I was at a scotch tasting recently and, after sipping a whole bunch of rare shit, what did I order at the bar? QC. I fear I have found the pinnacle of scotch, and so now what? Force myself to become bored with the stuff? This is a serious problem, and I blame you.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

I curse you for suggesting Laphroaig Quarter Cask to me. Yesterday I was sipping Macallan 12, which most people think is about as good a scotch as one can buy at the reasonable price point. It tasted utterly dull to me. I found myself quickly reverting to the QC. I've a cabinet full of different whiskys, and what do I keep having to reload? The QC. I was at a scotch tasting recently and, after sipping a whole bunch of rare shit, what did I order at the bar? QC. I fear I have found the pinnacle of scotch, and so now what? Force myself to become bored with the stuff? This is a serious problem, and I blame you.

Count yourself lucky. The scotch that has been like that for me is the Laphroig 19 year, and they made 231 bottles. I believe I am now on my fourth, but this is probably going to be it. Forever.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

Count yourself lucky. The scotch that has been like that for me is the Laphroig 19 year, and they made 231 bottles. I believe I am now on my fourth, but this is probably going to be it. Forever.

I heard, sadly, the new Laphroaig Triple Wood sucks.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

How you conclude that logically, accurately assessing a situation makes me self-absorbed I can't understand. You hew to notions of what you think things ought to be, and can be. You hold out hope they're better than what the data suggests. I just look at the shit and describe what I see.

This garbage is why people read your bullshit and laugh at you. Your "logic" and "realism" are steeped in your own opinion. You spout off as if you're stating facts and maybe you think you actually are being completely impartial. But you're not. And your statements about how people should think about things, based on your opinion, end up being fucking ridiculous--even if/when I agree with a few of them. You keep finding new and stupid ways of telling everyone you're mainly correct.

If you disagree, with how other people think, that's fine. No one even cares if you think their opinions are stupid. But your opinion is not to be substituted for universal fact.

TM

[taxwonk]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

Hank, this is ludicrous. You realize that if scotch is covered you'll have to use a generic brand?

Really? No more Sterno 18?

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

I heard, sadly, the new Laphroaig Triple Wood sucks.

Failure is the wetnurse of success. Laphroaig tries to make every scotch different, and some of them don't work. As a matter of fact, some of them fail pretty miserably.

But if they didn't screw up now and then, they'd just be another boring old Macallan, a single malt imitating the blendeds. And they wouldn't get these other wildly good and unique ones.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

I curse you for suggesting Laphroaig Quarter Cask to me. Yesterday I was sipping Macallan 12, which most people think is about as good a scotch as one can buy at the reasonable price point. It tasted utterly dull to me. I found myself quickly reverting to the QC. I've a cabinet full of different whiskys, and what do I keep having to reload? The QC. I was at a scotch tasting recently and, after sipping a whole bunch of rare shit, what did I order at the bar? QC. I fear I have found the pinnacle of scotch, and so now what? Force myself to become bored with the stuff? This is a serious problem, and I blame you.

Some asshole let me drink a 40-year old Scotch the other day. I am now ruined for other Scotches for at least a few days.

[Gattigap]

CLIFF'D