Okay, I’m confused. I mean, first I thought “Deep Throat” was Linda Lovelace. Then I found out, no, it’s a guy, and he’s Hal Holbrook. And now it turns out, of all things, that he’s a former FBI bigwig named Mark Felt who is not a woman and doesn’t look a thing like Hal Holbrook (although whenever Hal Holbrook turned up on “West Wing,” I kept wondering if he was later spilling secrets about Bartlet to the Washington Post.)
I find it interesting that he’s felt conflicted all this time, wondering if he was an American hero or an American traitor. Me, I’d say hero. But I can’t help but wonder how the current White House would view him…and, for that matter, if they would prosecute him if they could.
PAD
• 
Say, did somebody say something just now?
Yes! I said, “Funny how this thread died the minute I asked for specifics, isn’t it?”
Is your hearing aid not working?
Is your hearing aid not working?
Guess not. Let me just plug them into my eye sockets…
OK. I’ll wait. But hurry.
I don’t have all day.
On second thought .. yes I do!
Sadly, I believe that.
THe question is, why do you think that’s a positive theng?
“OK. I’ll wait. But hurry.
I don’t have all day.
On second thought .. yes I do!”
Maybe we’ll all get lucky here. Maybe his mom will finally kick him out of the basement, stop letting him leech off of her and force him to get a job. Then he won’t have the time to be such a pest anymore. Hëll, he might even get some friends and become less of a twit then he is now.
Oh, if only we were that lucky.
I’m still waiting …
Here’s an idea: why don’t you hold your breath while you’re waiting?
“Maybe his mom will finally kick him out of the basement.”
Sorry, but I own my own home.
Try again!
“Here’s an idea: why don’t you hold your breath while you’re waiting?”
—–
Only if you promise to update your 5th grade jokebook.
The basement is for the hostages.
Yeah, Mike.
But you missed something very important here. He failed to address having no job and no friends. Now, under the line of logic he uses to claim people are lying, we know as a fact that he has no job and no friends. He didn’t address it after all.
Maybe that explains his constant postings here. Lots of time (no job) and a need for any sort of attention (no friends.) Even negative attention must feel better to him then the usual none at all of his lonely life.
Now, since it’s been pointed out how true those statements were, I’m sure he’ll protest them and try to cover the fact. I’m sure his pride will be hurt and he won’t want to be seen in as much need as he really is. It’s understandable. Few people would want to be seen in such a way.
Maybe we shouldn’t keep being so cruel to such an obvious emotional charity case as X appears to be. Plus, he can’t stick around forever. When the power is turned off and the bank takes the house back he’ll have no net. Maybe the library will let him in but even they won’t let him spend but so much time there.
Poor, tiny minded, friendless little twit.It almost makes you feel sory for him when poking holes in his weak minded rants and opinions.
Almost.
I don’t agree being miserable is anything to harvest gratification from, no matter who it is.
I think it’s enough to say he reserved for himself the privileges of a predator, protecting his inconsistencies behind a hidden agenda from which there is no defense.
At first glance it kind of seemed it, but it isn’t fair to Jerry to say he was harvesting gratification form anyone’s misery.
That should say, “I don’t agree anyone’s misery is anything to hold against them…”
No sense of gratification. Not really holding it against him either. Just working at figuring out the tiny minded little twit.
Perhaps he’s misinterpreting Darwin, and confusing dominance for a virtue. Thus his appetite to dominate without seeing his own neediness.
As predicted, I give out a single bit of personal information, and I am immedaiately attacked with it. God, you liberals are so predictable!
This is the hallmark of today’s liberal: They have no ideas or agenda of their own. They want only to oppose the other side, WHATEVER they do, and their only weapon is personal attacks.
Classic. And funny.
… also exponential.
“As predicted, I give out a single bit of personal information, and I am immedaiately attacked with it. God, you liberals are so predictable!”
Actually, I attacked your weak sense of logic and not you.
I posted a rather sarky bit that, at this point, I knew you would respond to in some way while failing to address it (God, you neo-cons are so predictable.) In the post I made these three statements:
1) You lived in your mom’s basement.
2) You had no job.
3) You had no friends.
I also said you were a twit.
You responded with this:
“Sorry, but I own my own home. Try again!”
Now, the logic you have used with PAD is that he must be a liar and know that he is one since he did not care to address your specific accusations. Using the feeble logic that you yourself have displayed here we can say that you have no job or friends. It must be a fact because, as you pointed out about PAD, you responded to only the first (house) statement and not the second (job) or third (friends) statements. You also failed to point out that you were not a twit. It’s the logic that you have used in a number of posts and acted as though it is the reasoning and thinking of some great intellect by you. But, when the same logic is aimed at you it becomes “personal attacks.”
So you have two choices here:
1) PAD is a liar & you are a lonely, jobless little twit because failure to respond to a statement is proof of its truth. Although, if you are a twit we should discount your statements about PAD since twits rarely say anything of any meaning, content or value.
2) Not responding to something you feel no need to respond to or defend yourself from means only that and nothing more. The lack of a response does not automatically or reasonably display any truth in the accusers statements.
And while I’m at it…….
Let us move on to that other weak bit of garbeage you call logic. You have stated this crap over and over:
“I asked for a SPECIFIC way that YOUR OWN LIFE has been made worse under Bush, as a result of something BUSH did.”
Many have given answers that would make sense to anybody who wasn’t so self centered and serving that only matters that directly impact one’s own wallet seem to count. But you just brush those off because you either can’t understand things like that or just don’t want to deal with an argument that is above the low level you seem to like to keep it. But, let me ask you this:
1) Have you ever been murdered?
2) Have you ever been raped?
3) Have you ever been the victim of ID theft?
4) Have you ever been hit by a drunk driver?
5) Have you ever been the victim of a pedophile priest?
By your logic you would have had to have had those thing happen directly to you to be upset at or hate a murderer, rapist, con man, drunk driver or pedophile. After all, it didn’t happen to you in a SPECIFIC way that YOUR OWN LIFE has been made worse. Hëll, by the logic you have thrown at us about Bush, you must even like all those people.
Let me ask you this. What did Saddam, pre-war, ever do to you in a SPECIFIC way that YOUR OWN LIFE has been made worse? You talk about him as though he were so bad. He must have done something to you.
Or, is the logic of your arguments a one way street only? You can use whatever weak, twisted and second rate logic you wish towards others and call it genius but don’t want the same “personal attacks” pointed back at you?
Neo-Con logic. Neither classic nor funny.
This is the hallmark of today’s so-called conservatives: They have no ideas or agenda of their own. They want only to oppose the other side, WHATEVER they do, and their only weapon is personal attacks
There. I corrected that.
I initially supported the Iraq action. I stopped after I saw how poor the long term strategy was, how much wishful thinking there was in the contingency planning and how poorly prepared the Administration was for anything except military action.
Strategy was acceptable; the execution was execrable.
“This is the hallmark of today’s so-called conservatives: They have no ideas or agenda of their own. They want only to oppose the other side, WHATEVER they do, and their only weapon is personal attacks.”
I don’t know. Conservatives are fine. Republicans can be a bit dense from time to time but aren’t all bad people by any means. Neo-Cons just plain suck though.