Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(UPI)   Harry lied ...again   (upi.com) divider line 68
    More: Obvious, Harry Reid, George Stephanopoulos, U.S. Capitol  
•       •       •

4600 clicks; posted to Politics » on 07 Feb 2013 at 10:15 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



68 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-02-07 10:13:39 AM  
Like we expect him to tell the truth.
HMMM...where are the Fark libs who should be defending Harry?
 
2013-02-07 10:18:06 AM  
At least his lies didn't kill anyone

yes, I went there
 
2013-02-07 10:19:56 AM  
I'm pretty sure Democrats, at least on Fark, call Reid an idiot fairly consistently.
 
2013-02-07 10:20:37 AM  

jehovahs witness protection: Like we expect him to tell the truth.
HMMM...where are the Fark libs who should be defending Harry?


Don't start. You'd hate to see what happens were Harry Reid to be replaced by a Democrat.
 
2013-02-07 10:20:42 AM  
I'm a Dem, and think Reid is an assclown.
 
2013-02-07 10:20:53 AM  
According to FactCheck.org Reid inflated the $2.6 trillion figure for the show. The senator referred to the same figure as being $100 billion less, three days before.

*yawn*

Uh-huh, aaaaaand?
 
2013-02-07 10:21:21 AM  
Woulda been nice if he hadn't said "from non-defense spending", as now the fact that we have actually cut about that amount from the 10-year projections since 18 months ago will be lost.

// I really hate the pedantry of Politics
// which obviously explains why I haunt this tab...
 
2013-02-07 10:24:41 AM  
History's greatest monster. He'll never get my vote.

Can a Fark Independent please explain the consequences of these egregious fabrications? Also, I'm pretty sure he was under oath on This Week. What's Ken Starr up to?
 
2013-02-07 10:25:45 AM  

quatchi: According to FactCheck.org Reid inflated the $2.6 trillion figure for the show. The senator referred to the same figure as being $100 billion less, three days before.

*yawn*

Uh-huh, aaaaaand?


Well, that's not exactly the "lie" that FactCheck.org pointed out. http://factcheck.org/2013/02/reid-twice-wrong-on-2-6-trillion-cuts/

Reid claimed that there was $2.6 trillion in spending cuts that were slated to be made, when, in reality, it's $2.5 trillion, and technically only $1.4 trillion is in spending cuts. The rest is revenue increases and savings on interest. It also should be noted that "A spokesman for Reid, whom we contacted by email, also conceded that Reid's higher figure includes what he called "tax savings," by which of course he means higher taxes."

/he could have spoken better
//only minorly outraged
 
2013-02-07 10:26:00 AM  

jehovahs witness protection: Like we expect him to tell the truth.
HMMM...where are the Fark libs who should be defending Harry?


Ok, I'll bite. He lied in the same way that shoplifting is like murder. When he starts telling us that Iraq has WMD's, or that the president is a secret Kenyan usurper, I think it'll be safe to start calling him a liar. How about you compare this "lie" to what any of the prominent Republican presidential candidates have said this past election?
 
2013-02-07 10:27:48 AM  
A POLITICIAN MISLED ME WAHHHHHHH
 
2013-02-07 10:35:36 AM  
we could really use some straight facts Harry...check yourself. If your ideas are so great then the honest truth should suffice.

dems, if he was wrong call him on it, it makes for a stronger party

reps, after you're done calling Reid out for his inaccuracies (possibly intentional lies) do us a favor and turn that sort of scrutiny lose on the GOP. Focusing your outrage only at the 'other team' has made the GOP into an absolute joke.
 
2013-02-07 10:38:15 AM  
You're just finding out that Harry Reid is an incompetent ignoramus? Liberals have known this for some time now.
 
2013-02-07 10:38:20 AM  

Uranus Is Huge!: History's greatest monster. He'll never get my vote.

Can a Fark Independent please explain the consequences of these egregious fabrications? Also, I'm pretty sure he was under oath on This Week. What's Ken Starr up to?


That's a thing now it seems. OK, he/she lied but you must prove adverse consequences or the lie doesn't matter.

How about he lied and I will never again believe a word that comes out of his pie hole. Is that a consequence, that distrust of the leader of the Senate?

Now, be sure to cite examples of others who have lied so I will be convinced lying is OK.
 
m00
2013-02-07 10:40:23 AM  

Shvetz: jehovahs witness protection: Like we expect him to tell the truth.
HMMM...where are the Fark libs who should be defending Harry?

Ok, I'll bite. He lied in the same way that shoplifting is like murder. When he starts telling us that Iraq has WMD's...


Pfft, that's not a real lie. Get back to me when Bush tells Congress that two American patrol boats were attacked without provocation by the North Vietnamese.
 
2013-02-07 10:51:26 AM  

Cletus C.: That's a thing now it seems.


Severity of consequences and importance of the action have ALWAYS been a thing when it comes to determining how grave someone's transgressions are.  WTF world have you lived in all your life?

Using poor wording to describe a budgetary change is bad.  It is still a damn sight better than "not intended as a factual statement" style lies.  Both of which are infinitely better than "hey guys Iraq has WMDs here is a picture of some trucks we know have them".

Would you say all three are the same?

Would you rank them as equally bad as "no bro, I swear we aren't planning a surprise party for you (haha we secretly are and I just lied!)"
 
2013-02-07 11:01:51 AM  

Smackledorfer: Cletus C.: That's a thing now it seems.

Severity of consequences and importance of the action have ALWAYS been a thing when it comes to determining how grave someone's transgressions are.  WTF world have you lived in all your life?

Using poor wording to describe a budgetary change is bad.  It is still a damn sight better than "not intended as a factual statement" style lies.  Both of which are infinitely better than "hey guys Iraq has WMDs here is a picture of some trucks we know have them".

Would you say all three are the same?

Would you rank them as equally bad as "no bro, I swear we aren't planning a surprise party for you (haha we secretly are and I just lied!)"


Beautiful. If you get caught cheating on your wife point out to her King Henry VIII cut off the heads of two of his wives. Cheating, big farking deal.

She will be dazzled and wowed by your logic.
 
2013-02-07 11:05:58 AM  

Cletus C.: Uranus Is Huge!: History's greatest monster. He'll never get my vote.

Can a Fark Independent please explain the consequences of these egregious fabrications? Also, I'm pretty sure he was under oath on This Week. What's Ken Starr up to?

That's a thing now it seems. OK, he/she lied but you must prove adverse consequences or the lie doesn't matter.

How about he lied and I will never again believe a word that comes out of his pie hole. Is that a consequence, that distrust of the leader of the Senate?

Now, be sure to cite examples of others who have lied so I will be convinced lying is OK.


Yes, lies that have no consequences are not very important in politics.

And quit acting like this is the reason you don't believe things that Harry Reid says.
 
2013-02-07 11:08:36 AM  

Cletus C.: Smackledorfer: Cletus C.: That's a thing now it seems.

Severity of consequences and importance of the action have ALWAYS been a thing when it comes to determining how grave someone's transgressions are.  WTF world have you lived in all your life?

Using poor wording to describe a budgetary change is bad.  It is still a damn sight better than "not intended as a factual statement" style lies.  Both of which are infinitely better than "hey guys Iraq has WMDs here is a picture of some trucks we know have them".

Would you say all three are the same?

Would you rank them as equally bad as "no bro, I swear we aren't planning a surprise party for you (haha we secretly are and I just lied!)"

Beautiful. If you get caught cheating on your wife point out to her King Henry VIII cut off the heads of two of his wives. Cheating, big farking deal.

She will be dazzled and wowed by your logic.


Well, there's a stupid farking rebuttal.

No one is saying there should be no consequence for lying or misstating something. We're saying if you cheat on your wife, you deserve to be divorced, not murdered. The consequence should fit the severity of the lie, as it's always farking been as along as humans have been able to string words together, you simpleton.
 
2013-02-07 11:10:51 AM  

un4gvn666: Cletus C.: Smackledorfer: Cletus C.: That's a thing now it seems.

Severity of consequences and importance of the action have ALWAYS been a thing when it comes to determining how grave someone's transgressions are.  WTF world have you lived in all your life?

Using poor wording to describe a budgetary change is bad.  It is still a damn sight better than "not intended as a factual statement" style lies.  Both of which are infinitely better than "hey guys Iraq has WMDs here is a picture of some trucks we know have them".

Would you say all three are the same?

Would you rank them as equally bad as "no bro, I swear we aren't planning a surprise party for you (haha we secretly are and I just lied!)"

Beautiful. If you get caught cheating on your wife point out to her King Henry VIII cut off the heads of two of his wives. Cheating, big farking deal.

She will be dazzled and wowed by your logic.

Well, there's a stupid farking rebuttal.

No one is saying there should be no consequence for lying or misstating something. We're saying if you cheat on your wife, you deserve to be divorced, not murdered. The consequence should fit the severity of the lie, as it's always farking been as along as humans have been able to string words together, you simpleton.


That was rude. I think I'm being civil. The king's wives, by the way committed the crime of failing to bear him a son, I believe.
 
2013-02-07 11:11:54 AM  
To a Democrat, a deliberate misrepresentation of facts to make them look better is a lie.
To a Republican, a deliberate misrepresentation of facts is a monumental occasion, because OH MY GOD they actually used a FACT!

What Reid did is still bad.  It's just I'm used to so much worse, I can't get up the energy to be outraged.
 
2013-02-07 11:15:48 AM  

Cletus C.: un4gvn666: Cletus C.: Smackledorfer: Cletus C.: That's a thing now it seems.

Severity of consequences and importance of the action have ALWAYS been a thing when it comes to determining how grave someone's transgressions are.  WTF world have you lived in all your life?

Using poor wording to describe a budgetary change is bad.  It is still a damn sight better than "not intended as a factual statement" style lies.  Both of which are infinitely better than "hey guys Iraq has WMDs here is a picture of some trucks we know have them".

Would you say all three are the same?

Would you rank them as equally bad as "no bro, I swear we aren't planning a surprise party for you (haha we secretly are and I just lied!)"

Beautiful. If you get caught cheating on your wife point out to her King Henry VIII cut off the heads of two of his wives. Cheating, big farking deal.

She will be dazzled and wowed by your logic.

Well, there's a stupid farking rebuttal.

No one is saying there should be no consequence for lying or misstating something. We're saying if you cheat on your wife, you deserve to be divorced, not murdered. The consequence should fit the severity of the lie, as it's always farking been as along as humans have been able to string words together, you simpleton.

That was rude. I think I'm being civil. The king's wives, by the way committed the crime of failing to bear him a son, I believe.


Civility is no defense for willful obtuseness.
 
2013-02-07 11:23:43 AM  

un4gvn666: Cletus C.: un4gvn666: Cletus C.: Smackledorfer: Cletus C.: That's a thing now it seems.

Severity of consequences and importance of the action have ALWAYS been a thing when it comes to determining how grave someone's transgressions are.  WTF world have you lived in all your life?

Using poor wording to describe a budgetary change is bad.  It is still a damn sight better than "not intended as a factual statement" style lies.  Both of which are infinitely better than "hey guys Iraq has WMDs here is a picture of some trucks we know have them".

Would you say all three are the same?

Would you rank them as equally bad as "no bro, I swear we aren't planning a surprise party for you (haha we secretly are and I just lied!)"

Beautiful. If you get caught cheating on your wife point out to her King Henry VIII cut off the heads of two of his wives. Cheating, big farking deal.

She will be dazzled and wowed by your logic.

Well, there's a stupid farking rebuttal.

No one is saying there should be no consequence for lying or misstating something. We're saying if you cheat on your wife, you deserve to be divorced, not murdered. The consequence should fit the severity of the lie, as it's always farking been as along as humans have been able to string words together, you simpleton.

That was rude. I think I'm being civil. The king's wives, by the way committed the crime of failing to bear him a son, I believe.

Civility is no defense for willful obtuseness.


But civility remains a good thing.

To recap, here is my position.

Reid went on the talk shows to tout spending cuts numbers that were false.

I am tired of politicians lying to me. I don't accept the excuse that others have made bigger lies so this one is OK. But I am required to state I don't like those bigger lies, either. My outrage certainly is reserved for the more significant lies but it still doesn't make the run-of-the-mill lies just fine and dandy.

Now we have another element added to the lie that must be established for that lie to be of note. We must prove the lie had some sort of dire consequences. Uh, no we don't. We can just say stop the farking lying you lying piece of shiat. It's OK. Really.

Not everything has to be so partisan.
 
2013-02-07 11:32:13 AM  
As someone who believes the greatest challenge facing America is JOBS, and not even close to being the deficit or debt, I find myself having difficulty getting upset because Reid lied/ mispoke/ whatever about job-kiling austerity measures.  "He said we're going full UK, when we're only going half UK" when we shouldn't be going UK in the first place is silly.
 
2013-02-07 11:35:41 AM  

Cletus C.: un4gvn666: Cletus C.: un4gvn666: Cletus C.: Smackledorfer: Cletus C.: That's a thing now it seems.

Severity of consequences and importance of the action have ALWAYS been a thing when it comes to determining how grave someone's transgressions are.  WTF world have you lived in all your life?

Using poor wording to describe a budgetary change is bad.  It is still a damn sight better than "not intended as a factual statement" style lies.  Both of which are infinitely better than "hey guys Iraq has WMDs here is a picture of some trucks we know have them".

Would you say all three are the same?

Would you rank them as equally bad as "no bro, I swear we aren't planning a surprise party for you (haha we secretly are and I just lied!)"

Beautiful. If you get caught cheating on your wife point out to her King Henry VIII cut off the heads of two of his wives. Cheating, big farking deal.

She will be dazzled and wowed by your logic.

Well, there's a stupid farking rebuttal.

No one is saying there should be no consequence for lying or misstating something. We're saying if you cheat on your wife, you deserve to be divorced, not murdered. The consequence should fit the severity of the lie, as it's always farking been as along as humans have been able to string words together, you simpleton.

That was rude. I think I'm being civil. The king's wives, by the way committed the crime of failing to bear him a son, I believe.

Civility is no defense for willful obtuseness.

But civility remains a good thing.

To recap, here is my position.

Reid went on the talk shows to tout spending cuts numbers that were false.

I am tired of politicians lying to me. I don't accept the excuse that others have made bigger lies so this one is OK. But I am required to state I don't like those bigger lies, either. My outrage certainly is reserved for the more significant lies but it still doesn't make the run-of-the-mill lies just fine and dandy.

Now we have another element added to the lie that must b ...


If that were true (which it isn't), based on the conduct of the Republican Party in the modern era, you should have no outrage left to muster to even post in this thread.

Why are you even here?
 
2013-02-07 11:37:33 AM  

Cletus C.: Smackledorfer: Cletus C.: That's a thing now it seems.

Severity of consequences and importance of the action have ALWAYS been a thing when it comes to determining how grave someone's transgressions are.  WTF world have you lived in all your life?

Using poor wording to describe a budgetary change is bad.  It is still a damn sight better than "not intended as a factual statement" style lies.  Both of which are infinitely better than "hey guys Iraq has WMDs here is a picture of some trucks we know have them".

Would you say all three are the same?

Would you rank them as equally bad as "no bro, I swear we aren't planning a surprise party for you (haha we secretly are and I just lied!)"

Beautiful. If you get caught cheating on your wife point out to her King Henry VIII cut off the heads of two of his wives. Cheating, big farking deal.

She will be dazzled and wowed by your logic.


Yes, because comparing the actions of political parties who are in direct competition for decision making positions is even remotely similar to comparing yourself to Henry the 8th.

You are one stupid farker.
 
2013-02-07 11:42:12 AM  

Cletus C.: But civility remains a good thing.


Your additions to this and other threads is anything but civil.  Civil means more than tip-toeing around calling a spade a spade.

You are either the idiot you deserve to be called, or you are willfully disingenuous when debating, thus shiatting the pool everyone is trying to swim in.  There is nothing civil about shiatting in the pool, even if you do so while calling me 'good sir' and smiling.  You are still shiatting in the pool.

Saying sir does not make one a gentleman.
 
2013-02-07 11:44:21 AM  

Smackledorfer: Cletus C.: Smackledorfer: Cletus C.: That's a thing now it seems.

Severity of consequences and importance of the action have ALWAYS been a thing when it comes to determining how grave someone's transgressions are.  WTF world have you lived in all your life?

Using poor wording to describe a budgetary change is bad.  It is still a damn sight better than "not intended as a factual statement" style lies.  Both of which are infinitely better than "hey guys Iraq has WMDs here is a picture of some trucks we know have them".

Would you say all three are the same?

Would you rank them as equally bad as "no bro, I swear we aren't planning a surprise party for you (haha we secretly are and I just lied!)"

Beautiful. If you get caught cheating on your wife point out to her King Henry VIII cut off the heads of two of his wives. Cheating, big farking deal.

She will be dazzled and wowed by your logic.

Yes, because comparing the actions of political parties who are in direct competition for decision making positions is even remotely similar to comparing yourself to Henry the 8th.

You are one stupid farker.


Another bastion of courtesy and fine manners who with each utterance shows the benefits of a refined upbringing.
 
2013-02-07 11:47:03 AM  

Cletus C.: Smackledorfer: Cletus C.: Smackledorfer: Cletus C.: That's a thing now it seems.

Severity of consequences and importance of the action have ALWAYS been a thing when it comes to determining how grave someone's transgressions are.  WTF world have you lived in all your life?

Using poor wording to describe a budgetary change is bad.  It is still a damn sight better than "not intended as a factual statement" style lies.  Both of which are infinitely better than "hey guys Iraq has WMDs here is a picture of some trucks we know have them".

Would you say all three are the same?

Would you rank them as equally bad as "no bro, I swear we aren't planning a surprise party for you (haha we secretly are and I just lied!)"

Beautiful. If you get caught cheating on your wife point out to her King Henry VIII cut off the heads of two of his wives. Cheating, big farking deal.

She will be dazzled and wowed by your logic.

Yes, because comparing the actions of political parties who are in direct competition for decision making positions is even remotely similar to comparing yourself to Henry the 8th.

You are one stupid farker.

Another bastion of courtesy and fine manners who with each utterance shows the benefits of a refined upbringing.


Cletus C: *smears shiat on his own face and everything around him*

Farkers: "That's really farking stupid, why are you doing that?"

Cletus C: "CIVILITY IS DEAD!"

/backinmydaytrollingmeantsomething.jpg
 
2013-02-07 11:47:58 AM  

Cletus C.: Another bastion of courtesy and fine manners who with each utterance shows the benefits of a refined upbringing.


Civility is not merely courteous speech.  It is also behavior.
 
2013-02-07 11:49:28 AM  

Smackledorfer: Cletus C.: But civility remains a good thing.

Your additions to this and other threads is anything but civil.  Civil means more than tip-toeing around calling a spade a spade.

You are either the idiot you deserve to be called, or you are willfully disingenuous when debating, thus shiatting the pool everyone is trying to swim in.  There is nothing civil about shiatting in the pool, even if you do so while calling me 'good sir' and smiling.  You are still shiatting in the pool.

Saying sir does not make one a gentleman.


I would argue we should be allowed to have different opinions and views of the topics of the day. I express mine and if they are not acceptable to the dominant thinking here and I become a target. Or my opinions become feces floating in a pool.

But I am OK with that. It's all part of what we do here, no?
 
2013-02-07 11:51:34 AM  
In Republican land, telling a lie is seen as a rite of passage.  Their lies have no real weight in the real world (even if those lies get thousands of people killed).  Also in Republican and right wing land, any comment made by a Democrat or the left wing that *might* been misstated is the most heinous lie ever told in all of history, and the person should not only be ashamed of themselves, but should prostrate themselves in front of the American people and beg forgiveness.  And then be willing to be jailed for infinity.


/am I doing it right?
 
2013-02-07 11:52:34 AM  

Smackledorfer: Civility is not merely courteous speech.  It is also behavior.


This pretty much summarizes the modern conservative.

Don't judge me, in any way whatsoever, on my actions, but only on what I say my actions are. Similarly, if I am deemed unpopular, it obviously cannot be because of my actions, but only because I did not use the appropriate words to describe what those actions are.

And then they wonder why their electoral failures are so epic.
 
2013-02-07 11:52:52 AM  

Cletus C.: Smackledorfer: Cletus C.: Smackledorfer: Cletus C.: That's a thing now it seems.

Severity of consequences and importance of the action have ALWAYS been a thing when it comes to determining how grave someone's transgressions are.  WTF world have you lived in all your life?

Using poor wording to describe a budgetary change is bad.  It is still a damn sight better than "not intended as a factual statement" style lies.  Both of which are infinitely better than "hey guys Iraq has WMDs here is a picture of some trucks we know have them".

Would you say all three are the same?

Would you rank them as equally bad as "no bro, I swear we aren't planning a surprise party for you (haha we secretly are and I just lied!)"

Beautiful. If you get caught cheating on your wife point out to her King Henry VIII cut off the heads of two of his wives. Cheating, big farking deal.

She will be dazzled and wowed by your logic.

Yes, because comparing the actions of political parties who are in direct competition for decision making positions is even remotely similar to comparing yourself to Henry the 8th.

You are one stupid farker.

Another bastion of courtesy and fine manners who with each utterance shows the benefits of a refined upbringing.


Get a load of Little Lord Fauntleroy.

Be careful though. His feeling are, apparently, easy to offend.

You are as partisan as they come. Own it.
 
2013-02-07 11:55:26 AM  
I am tired of politicians lying to me. I don't accept the excuse that others have made bigger lies so this one is OK.


This is well put.
 
2013-02-07 11:58:52 AM  

Uranus Is Huge!: Cletus C.: Smackledorfer: Cletus C.: Smackledorfer: Cletus C.: That's a thing now it seems.

Severity of consequences and importance of the action have ALWAYS been a thing when it comes to determining how grave someone's transgressions are.  WTF world have you lived in all your life?

Using poor wording to describe a budgetary change is bad.  It is still a damn sight better than "not intended as a factual statement" style lies.  Both of which are infinitely better than "hey guys Iraq has WMDs here is a picture of some trucks we know have them".

Would you say all three are the same?

Would you rank them as equally bad as "no bro, I swear we aren't planning a surprise party for you (haha we secretly are and I just lied!)"

Beautiful. If you get caught cheating on your wife point out to her King Henry VIII cut off the heads of two of his wives. Cheating, big farking deal.

She will be dazzled and wowed by your logic.

Yes, because comparing the actions of political parties who are in direct competition for decision making positions is even remotely similar to comparing yourself to Henry the 8th.

You are one stupid farker.

Another bastion of courtesy and fine manners who with each utterance shows the benefits of a refined upbringing.

Get a load of Little Lord Fauntleroy.

Be careful though. His feeling are, apparently, easy to offend.

You are as partisan as they come. Own it.


Not really. But I do appreciate your thoughts.

For example, when there are gun discussions I am very strongly anti-gun. That's right anti-gun. Take them all away from those "law-abiding" folk as I watch in amusement.

Also, I am strongly pro-gay rights.

People see me in other threads arguing my beliefs on those issues and think I am trolling. Not so.

Again, thank you for your thoughts.
 
2013-02-07 12:00:25 PM  

un4gvn666: Smackledorfer: Civility is not merely courteous speech.  It is also behavior.

This pretty much summarizes the modern conservative.

Don't judge me, in any way whatsoever, on my actions, but only on what I say my actions are. Similarly, if I am deemed unpopular, it obviously cannot be because of my actions, but only because I did not use the appropriate words to describe what those actions are.

And then they wonder why their electoral failures are so epic.


Yup.
 
2013-02-07 12:02:01 PM  
After he guaranteed filibuster reform and then waffled, I really don't care what he has to say anymore. He's dead to me.

Besides, it's not like the House will let any meaningful legislation get to the President's desk anyway.
 
2013-02-07 12:02:34 PM  

Cletus C.: Also, I am strongly pro-gay rights.

People see me in other threads arguing my beliefs on those issues and think I am trolling. Not so.


Show me ONE thread where someone thinks you are trolling for being in favor of gay rights. We can wait.
 
2013-02-07 12:02:45 PM  
Uranus Is Huge!:

But I did enjoy the  Little Lord Fauntleroy part. Funny.
 
2013-02-07 12:08:04 PM  

Smackledorfer: Cletus C.: Also, I am strongly pro-gay rights.

People see me in other threads arguing my beliefs on those issues and think I am trolling. Not so.

Show me ONE thread where someone thinks you are trolling for being in favor of gay rights. We can wait.


I was also curious about threads where you have been a vigorous defender of the Democratic position. I'm not saying they don't exist, but there is a reason your in a derpy shade of red in my browser.
 
2013-02-07 12:08:32 PM  

Smackledorfer: Cletus C.: Also, I am strongly pro-gay rights.

People see me in other threads arguing my beliefs on those issues and think I am trolling. Not so.

Show me ONE thread where someone thinks you are trolling for being in favor of gay rights. We can wait.


No thanks. I'm not going to wade through all that stuff. If I'm lying, though, I think you'd graciously acknowledge it is so minor a lie in the grand scheme of things it matters not at all. Plus, there are no dire consequences attached to the lie, therefore it is harmless. But I am not lying anyway.
 
2013-02-07 12:11:16 PM  

Uranus Is Huge!: Smackledorfer: Cletus C.: Also, I am strongly pro-gay rights.

People see me in other threads arguing my beliefs on those issues and think I am trolling. Not so.

Show me ONE thread where someone thinks you are trolling for being in favor of gay rights. We can wait.

I was also curious about threads where you have been a vigorous defender of the Democratic position. I'm not saying they don't exist, but there is a reason your in a derpy shade of red in my browser.


I think that's a downside of marking people like that. When you paint me red you are predisposed to take an adversarial position, even if I am making an honest argument.

In summary, I would prefer to be judged not based on the color of my name but the content of my comments.
 
2013-02-07 12:12:58 PM  

Cletus C.: Smackledorfer: Cletus C.: Also, I am strongly pro-gay rights.

People see me in other threads arguing my beliefs on those issues and think I am trolling. Not so.

Show me ONE thread where someone thinks you are trolling for being in favor of gay rights. We can wait.

No thanks. I'm not going to wade through all that stuff. If I'm lying, though, I think you'd graciously acknowledge it is so minor a lie in the grand scheme of things it matters not at all. Plus, there are no dire consequences attached to the lie, therefore it is harmless. But I am not lying anyway.


Bless your heart.

But yes, I would consider a mediocre troll lying on a message board to be a pretty minor lie and not deserving of anything more than calling him a moron. With your sarcasm laid on that thick, should I presume that you believe your lie is not harmless, or that it does matter in the grand scheme of things?
 
2013-02-07 12:14:13 PM  

Cletus C.: even if I am making an honest argument


I know that is a hypothetical form, but have you ever made one of those?

You'd probably have to 'wade through all that stuff' to dig one up, so I don't expect you will.
 
2013-02-07 12:16:05 PM  

Smackledorfer: Cletus C.: Smackledorfer: Cletus C.: Also, I am strongly pro-gay rights.

People see me in other threads arguing my beliefs on those issues and think I am trolling. Not so.

Show me ONE thread where someone thinks you are trolling for being in favor of gay rights. We can wait.

No thanks. I'm not going to wade through all that stuff. If I'm lying, though, I think you'd graciously acknowledge it is so minor a lie in the grand scheme of things it matters not at all. Plus, there are no dire consequences attached to the lie, therefore it is harmless. But I am not lying anyway.

Bless your heart.

But yes, I would consider a mediocre troll lying on a message board to be a pretty minor lie and not deserving of anything more than calling him a moron. With your sarcasm laid on that thick, should I presume that you believe your lie is not harmless, or that it does matter in the grand scheme of things?


I think you missed that part.

Also, would it have killed you to acknowledge how seamlessly I returned to the original discussion?
 
2013-02-07 12:17:53 PM  
As far as lying, you know the elected officials and representatives that I believe should have been charged with a crime for doing so?

Robert McNamara, for not giving the president the proper intelligence about the Gulf of Tonkin incident, and LBJ for expanding the war in Vietnam, even after knowing no actual attack took place.
Bush II and his entire cadre that gave us the clusterfark that was the Iraq war.

So, at least I'm fair and balanced.
 
2013-02-07 12:18:39 PM  

Cletus C.: Uranus Is Huge!: Smackledorfer: Cletus C.: Also, I am strongly pro-gay rights.

People see me in other threads arguing my beliefs on those issues and think I am trolling. Not so.

Show me ONE thread where someone thinks you are trolling for being in favor of gay rights. We can wait.

I was also curious about threads where you have been a vigorous defender of the Democratic position. I'm not saying they don't exist, but there is a reason your in a derpy shade of red in my browser.

I think that's a downside of marking people like that. When you paint me red you are predisposed to take an adversarial position, even if I am making an honest argument.

In summary, I would prefer to be judged not based on the color of my name but the content of my comments.


You Fark your way; I'll Fark mine.
 
2013-02-07 12:19:54 PM  

Cletus C.: I think you missed that part.


No, I didn't.

Smackledorf.: I would consider a mediocre troll lying on a message board to be a pretty minor lie and not deserving of anything more than calling him a moron.


Perhaps you need to look up the definition of "would"?  But since I'm being candid about your intellectual shortcomings in this thread, I DO think you are a mediocre troll who lies on message boards.  I think such lies are minor and not deserving of anything more than me calling you a moron.  Moron.

Cletus C.: Also, would it have killed you to acknowledge how seamlessly I returned to the original discussion?


That is your example of some great clever success here, and you ask for specific acknowledgement of it as an accomplishment of some kind?

un4gvn666: /backinmydaytrollingmeantsomething.jpg

 
2013-02-07 12:23:10 PM  

Smackledorfer: Cletus C.: I think you missed that part.

No, I didn't.

Smackledorf.: I would consider a mediocre troll lying on a message board to be a pretty minor lie and not deserving of anything more than calling him a moron.

Perhaps you need to look up the definition of "would"?  But since I'm being candid about your intellectual shortcomings in this thread, I DO think you are a mediocre troll who lies on message boards.  I think such lies are minor and not deserving of anything more than me calling you a moron.  Moron.

Cletus C.: Also, would it have killed you to acknowledge how seamlessly I returned to the original discussion?

That is your example of some great clever success here, and you ask for specific acknowledgement of it as an accomplishment of some kind?

un4gvn666: /backinmydaytrollingmeantsomething.jpg


I honestly thought we were heading for a virtual hug before it all fell off the beam there. Oh well, see you down the road, ranger.
 
Displayed 50 of 68 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report