tml12 Posted January 31, 2006 Report Posted January 31, 2006 In this case he's claiming that the Ambassador said he was refusing the job because he was "looking for balance". Now he admits a difference between "looking for balance" and looking to avoid an imbalance. Yet he sees no difference. This strongly supports the claim he looks to insult the man. How? "I was unable to find the appropriate balance then, and I wouldn't be able to find it now," McKenna said of his attempts to balance home and public life. -From canoe.ca Quote "Those who stand for nothing fall for anything." -Alexander Hamilton
shoop Posted January 31, 2006 Author Report Posted January 31, 2006 See, I can quote your posts before you think better of them and decide to edit them too! Thought better of your insult and decided to edit shoop? Too late, quoted.I applaud your second thoughts though. Hopefully in future they'll kick in before the need to edit your post arises. Quote
gerryhatrick Posted January 31, 2006 Report Posted January 31, 2006 In this case he's claiming that the Ambassador said he was refusing the job because he was "looking for balance". Now he admits a difference between "looking for balance" and looking to avoid an imbalance. Yet he sees no difference. This strongly supports the claim he looks to insult the man. How? Because one is a negative, and one is a positive. You took the positive comment by the man, and turned it into a negative. Thus the proof that you look to insult the man. If it were not the case, you would gladly admit your interpretation is incorrect. It's not "nuanced" to make the distinction between seeking balance and seeking to retain balance. Quote Conservative Party of Canada taking image advice from US Republican pollster: http://allpoliticsnow.com
shoop Posted January 31, 2006 Author Report Posted January 31, 2006 Are you on medication? I feel like the dolt for arguing with a whackjob like you at all. You win gerry, good luck with the tinfoil hat brigade. Which one was negative and which one positive again? Because one is a negative, and one is a positive. You took the positive comment by the man, and turned it into a negative.Thus the proof that you look to insult the man. If it were not the case, you would gladly admit your interpretation is incorrect. It's not "nuanced" to make the distinction between seeking balance and seeking to retain balance. Quote
gerryhatrick Posted January 31, 2006 Report Posted January 31, 2006 See, I can quote your posts before you think better of them and decide to edit them too! Yes, I made a mistake. I hadn't expected you to be clamouring for an answer within a few minutes of your first post, and assumed that the last one was editted to remove the insult. As it turns out, your insult remains. I assume the moderators here are lax? Quote Conservative Party of Canada taking image advice from US Republican pollster: http://allpoliticsnow.com
shoop Posted January 31, 2006 Author Report Posted January 31, 2006 Are you on medication? I feel like the dolt for arguing with a whackjob like you at all. You win gerry, good luck with the tinfoil hat brigade. Which one was negative and which one positive again? Yes, I made a mistake. I hadn't expected you to be clamouring for an answer within a few minutes of your first post, and assumed that the last one was editted to remove the insult.As it turns out, your insult remains. I assume the moderators here are lax? Quote
gerryhatrick Posted January 31, 2006 Report Posted January 31, 2006 Are you on medication? I feel like the dolt for arguing with a whackjob like you at all.You win gerry, good luck with the tinfoil hat brigade. Which one was negative and which one positive again? I've debated you in good faith and all you produce is insults. It's not neccessary to admit your incorrect about something, but please refrain from insulting me. I'm not going to stoop to it, so why continue? Quote Conservative Party of Canada taking image advice from US Republican pollster: http://allpoliticsnow.com
shoop Posted January 31, 2006 Author Report Posted January 31, 2006 Are you on medication? I feel like the dolt for arguing with a whackjob like you at all. You win gerry, good luck with the tinfoil hat brigade. Which one was negative and which one positive again? I've debated you in good faith and all you produce is insults. It's not neccessary to admit your incorrect about something, but please refrain from insulting me. I'm not going to stoop to it, so why continue? Quote
tml12 Posted January 31, 2006 Report Posted January 31, 2006 Are you on medication? I feel like the dolt for arguing with a whackjob like you at all.You win gerry, good luck with the tinfoil hat brigade. Which one was negative and which one positive again? I've debated you in good faith and all you produce is insults. It's not neccessary to admit your incorrect about something, but please refrain from insulting me. I'm not going to stoop to it, so why continue? Come on Shoop, I haven't seen you this angry since maplysyrup/mockingbird/scaruscof called you "sloopy bully" fifteen times in four different posts. Quote "Those who stand for nothing fall for anything." -Alexander Hamilton
kimmy Posted January 31, 2006 Report Posted January 31, 2006 This is the most pointless argument since "Tastes great/Less filling." I mean, good lord. I feel embarrassed to have even read it... how much worse do you guys feel for having written it? -k Quote (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ Friendly forum facilitator! ┬──┬◡ﾉ(° -°ﾉ)
shoop Posted January 31, 2006 Author Report Posted January 31, 2006 Much worse. I mean, good lord. I feel embarrassed to have even read it... how much worse do you guys feel for having written it? -k Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.