Learn From It

Back and forth, back and forth, between demonstrating virtue and enforcing it. Sadly, it's just more *fun* (and less work) to scold than to teach.

Wow, Gordon, you've left me with a serious conundrum. For only gay men are capable of that kind of absurdist sarcasm.

So, assuming you're not gay (and frankly, we don't really want you to be), then you must believe to be genuine some small fragment, at least, of what you said.

Also quite impossible to believe, given that the dogsnot blog thrives on irresponsible reporting, adolescent name-calling, churlish mishandling of the truth and emotionally-retarded "I know you are but what am I" tactics.

So the conundrum is, what exactly do you mean by "some acceptance", "greater good", and, for that matter, the "common ground" between smaller-govt-with-more-individual-freedoms and the-govt-must-reflect-my-dogmatic-morality ?

Get off the pedestal and lighten up GOB. I'm as familair with your antics as you are mine. Difference is, I'm open about it.

I made a good point, that's all. If you people gathered some sembelence of acceptance for one another it'd be a better place.

Gay people were victimized first, but doing the same years later makes you no better.

I have no issues with gay people any more than I do bible thumpers. It's just political views that get in the way.

The greater good involves some acceptance.

If only the homos and the bible thumpers could make common ground, the rest of us on the sideline would be happeier.

This is the part where you keep repeating a thing hoping to make it more true.

People like you castigate gay people when they celebrate "pride", then castigate when they defend themselves against a rabid anti-gay dogma.

There was no topic shift, gordon. You're just up to your old games.

And one new game: you're speaking out of frustration here because I no longer participate in the septic world of vengeful hatred that is the dog's knot.

I could care less about your pride. That's your issue.

You're the one that has to contend with having become that which you profess to loathe - a hater.

This blog, with exception to a few Mac posts, is purely hateful drivel aimed at people "different" than you.

I don't hate christians. Just like i don't hate hurricanes.

They are what they are. Their numbers make them a force of society, if not a force of nature.

And they're gunning for me and my kind.

Don't you defend yourself, Gordon? Don't you PRIDE yourself on standing up to the bad guys, however loosely you choose to define them?

and why is it, "Gordon", that the comments you make here come from a houston-based ISP routed through San Francisco from Houston from Mexico from Atlanta from San Francisco, and the comments you make on Sam's blog come from FL, where we know you live?

Let's try something. I'll ban the obviously hijacked ip address you've been using, and you can go ahead and post from your home machine on cox.net and verify that you are, in fact, Gordon the Magnificent and not Searcher/Hoody/MaskedAvenger/KingBear, huh?

Because we can post from any country we'd like. That way you can guess all you want, and still be wrong.

Didn't you mean to use the "Gordon" persona, "King Bear"?

To quote Romy White: "You're a deludenoid."

Your antics involve photoshop and sophomoric crap, and playing both ends against the middle.

And "boo-hooing" when rights are taken away and standing up the troops-in-harms-way as a point of brinkmanship.

The tactic is to attack with broad, idiotic statements like what you just said, knowing full well that others will busy themselves correcting the lies you know you're making.

We're nothing alike, gordon. you have no empathy, no respect for differences, place no real value on intellect, integrity and maturity.

Gordon can speak for himself. Unlike most liberals, we stand on our own two feet. I realize that's a new concept for you. Try to wrap your feeble mind around it.

Now that does sound like you, Geoffrey.

Make up your mind, will you? You want me stand on my own two feet and defend myself, while simultaneously not being defensive.

Your whiny attacks of "don't whine!" were old a long time ago, Geoffrey.

(hint: this is where you say something about my age, a handful of yrs older than you, my baldness, a handful of hairs ahead of you, and my weight, a stone ahead of you)

Just like old times, eh, Geoff?

I guess hoping you could wrap your feeble brain around the concept WAS wishful thinking.

Look on the bright side. You'll always be almost twice my age, twice my wait, with zero hair. Things can't get much worse.

You can probably spell "weight" better, though.

Touché, GoB...
The parochial sheep will never accept anything unless their leaders tell them to, which is highly unlikely.
One gets exhausted just trying to be.
=RD=

I'm not suggesting we're alike, at all. I'm not middle aged, bitter, and self-loathing.

I am MOCKING that you set yourself on a pedastel that you don't belong. You've played your ad hom games, you've played fuck fuck with proxies, and posted under several names at my blog. You know it, I know it.

But back to the topic we were discussing before you had your meltdown - I don't understand why christians and homos can't meet at common ground.

Gordon, you're quite simply a liar.

I post with my own name, with links that follow back to me. You and Geoff and the mob of idiots you engender take it upon themselves to use my name. You or Geoff or someone else with access to your installation change my words.

And, ironically, we ARE still on the topic at hand: it's people like you that like to start fights where there are none, and when challenged on that insipid behavior, you say "lighten up".

Gordon, you can't even stand the idea of having limits on the purchase of a gun, yet you want "homos" to compromise on something as fundamental as relationships.

Spin spin spin.

It's not a new tactic of yours to shift the topic when you can't support your own.

Fact is, most homos have become what they loathe. They hate. You hate. This blog itself seethes with hate speech towards christians or religion in general.

You're hypocritical, that's all.

And a bit chunky too.

Right on cue, Geoff.

Apparently, my feeble brain can do better math, too.

You should calculate the limit of x/y, where x = y-7 (or so) as both x and y approach, say, 80? that's a reasonable expected lifespan?

And I've seen the picture, Geoff....hair approaches zero on both of us.

You did jump through that hoop with a certain flourish, though! Pinkies out and everything!

Glad to see some semblance of humor here. Biscuits, I was beginning to despair for your sense of humor.

Otherwise, the Avenger and Searcher said all there is to say.

Hoody, like you are anything except an aper or destroyer in your comments here and elsewhere.

are you using a real email address?

For the record, I am me.

*wink*

Just thought I'd clear that one up for everybody. I am nobody but myself, and if I ever do post under a different name, I'll make sure that the switch is evident.

I don't want words that belong to other people being pinned onto me.

And my suspcious use of several IP addresses just comes from posting from home, school, and a few public use computers. But I'm sure you can see they're all from the same area, at least.

So...still don't kill and/or block me. Thanks!

then email me. all info will be kept private.

Whatever. I send you to the enviro-freakout thread at Bloghogger as an example of and original contribution I have made elsewhere.

Otherwise, I try not to repeat what others have said.

And I was serious about the humor comment. All spiritual/theological/political posturing aside.

And yes, it is a valid e-mail. I sent it out on the tenuous assumption that you would not do mishief with it, as you have assured the Masked Avenger (I think it was him) elsewhere, and I was getting tired of hearing your "cowardly contributor" logic.

It's a pain in the ass to type, though, so I beg your indulgence in providing it only occasionally.

I suggest you go reread, then, hoody.

You seem to sit in wait, ready to pounce on whatever I say, stepping in to derail a discussion to point at me instead of the topic.

You're not constructive, you're a piler-on, just like most of the right-trained polemicists out there.

Pile on? Maybe.

Exclusively? No. Again, check the enviro-freakout thread. If anyone is trying to derail a topic there, my friend, it is you.

A stupid-ass article about environmentalism by Michael Crichton which is all over the map and an obvious fluff piece by the creator of Jurassic Park

Here's the link for any of you interested.

My first comment was asking what the point of the article was, and what the author of the entry was trying to get at, other than accusing all environmentalists of being clinically paranoid.

Now, how does THIS have anything to do with the article here, hoody?

Simply reponding to what you have been saying in these comments.

*finished*