Hey, Janeane G.: Come on down!
Earlier this month, Texas Tea Party activist Katrina Pierson invited Hollyweird Tea Party-basher Janeane Garofalo to the July 4 Independence Day Tea Party in Dallas.
Katrina and friends (yours truly included) have issued one more invite to the shindig in the spirit of outreach and education. Come on down, Janeane. What are you afraid of?
Posted in: Tea Party
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- How Dumb America’s Media? « Kerfuffles and Flourishes
- An invitation to you Janeane Garofalo #tcot #teaparty | Fire Andrea Mitchell!
- HR 2454 Barely Passed, 219 - 212 « Frugal Café Blog Zone
- Janeane Garofalo: Get Some Help for Your Hate, Honey « Frugal Café Blog Zone
- Got Tea? Where are the jobs? « Jim Blazsik
- John Boehner: Champion for Americans, Reads Aloud the Shocking Additions to the Global Warming Tax Increase Bill « Frugal Café Blog Zone
- Congress Living Large On Your Tax Dollars « NEOAVATARA
- The Enlightened Redneck » Put Your Body Where Your Redneck Slur Is
- Another invite to Jeneane Garofolo « The Daley Gator
- Polar Bear Numbers Surge to 50-Year High, Obama’s Approval Rating Plunges to New Dismal Low « Frugal Café Blog Zone
- Tea Party Weekend Coming Up « Blog Entry « Dr. Melissa Clouthier
- NEXT MIAMI TEA PARTY – July 2, 2009 « FactReal
- Kerfuffles :: Media Ignorance of Tea Bags :: May :: 2009
- Mad As Hell at Government? Tea Party Protests on Fourth of July « Frugal Café Blog Zone
- MIAMI TEA PARTY – JULY 2, 2009 « FactReal
- ~ Hey, Garofalo, Here’s Why I Went To a Tea Party (hint: nothing to do with racism) « Quick Daily Hits — The RBS Files
- Tea parties show Unity - Smart Girl Nation
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Tea Party
Legal Insurrection
» Thanks, Global Warming
Stop The ACLU
» Oops! Now New Zealand NIWA Accused Of Faking DataRiehl World View
» Climate Change: BBC Didn't Hide The Story?Riehl World View
» BBC, KGB, Oh My: More On Climate Change FraudNewsBusters.org
» Climategate: White House Involvement in Scandal Will Make It Harder for MSM to IgnoreJustOneMinute
» The Prescient Joe Biden
How could Garofalo resist an invitation like that? Great video editing.
Best line: “We invite you to rise above expectations.”
Brilliant and hilarious!
I wonder if she, unlike the cowards that promote, but refuse to defend “global warming”, will hike up her jockey shorts and have the testicular fortitude to go down there and face the people she has besmirched.
What do you have to be afraid of Janeane? It’s not like they are a mob of rabid liberals!
Soften your heart Janeane! It won’t soften your brain!
Great challenge MM and friends, dollar to a dough nut you’ll hear loud tones of silence.
While it would do her no end of good to attend, she will not. She, and those like her, cannot tolerate any disagreement. so she will just stand back and continue to throw insults.
It is a damn shame.
+Photi
Ummm, to late I think.
Hey, I saw Alfonzo in the Texas Tea Party video from MachoSauceProductions.com
He was all over YouTube promoting Christian Conservative values during the 2008 Presidential race. Check him out under “machosauceproduction” search
He is VERY VERY impressive. Wish I could be down in TX to participate.
There, I fixed it for ya.
For the daughter of an oil executive who was blessed with a college education and an average of 5 Hollywood gigs per year over her 20 year career so far…it fascinates me that Garofalo thinks that our Country and our Citizenry suck as much as she does.
Would it make her feel any less superior if I felt a little sorry for her?
Maybe she’s afraid her fellow liberals will treat her like they treat any liberal who doesn’t toe the party line. You know, like crap.
Just ask Sarah Palin, Michelle Malkin, Thomas Sowell, Clarence Thomas…
It is obvious that Janeane Garofalo is a follower of Saul Alinsky. As such, she is not interested in “intellectual debate” or “fair play”, but only in waging war against the enemy. As a reminder, here are a few examples of the Alinsky Rules for Radicals that guide Janeane, and others like her, in their attacks on Republicans:
Papa Louie – I really don’t see her in that class. Intellectual debate requires a level of intellect she doesn’t possess. She’s just another spoiled rich kid liberal with a massive ego and and opinion.
Personally, I think she should just be ignored. Confronting her like this suggests her nonsense may have weight, and gives her more attention, which is all she really wants anyway.
Excellent video invitation. It would be nice if Janeane G were able to dare to confront her prejudices and stop by to get to know the folks.
It’s not very probable that she will be able to overcome the fear of finding out if her preconceptions would pass this easiest of “acid tests” or not, but the Tea Party folks were thoughtful in re-extending their invite for her to do so.
Great video.
Liberals hate facts, what’s she gonna do?
Excellent video…keep pouring on the kindness…it confuses liberals!
What else? That there will be gun-and-Bible-totin’ red-necks, who believe that God created everything 5000 years ago, and who’re hankerin’ to blow away anybody who thinks that abortions are constitutionally protected.
I think that pretty much covers it–at least these will be her excuses for not being anywhere within 2000 miles of it.
I think it’s best explained in the movie “Team America: World Police,” where the puppet representing Ms. Garofalo says the following:
“As actors, it is our responsibility to read the newspapers, and then say what we read on television like it’s our own opinion.”
I think that sums it up fairly well.
Xenu
She is too far gone to EVER admit she was wrong. If asked, she will now claim she never even knew this video was on YouTube, and her fans will buy it.
Yohannbiimu, it would really help if actors actually announced that nothing they say has any credibility too, don’t ya think?
Are you that bigoted,Yohannbiimu?
I thought all leftwingers were tolerant!
/sarc
Ms. GurrrrBuffalo won’t be coming to Texas.
She’s afraid of Texas.
She’s done all that therapy to get deTexified, and she’s afraid of coming back here and loosing her nice New York patina.
Texas is strong… It could pull her back in.
NOBODY wants that…
Yeah NOBODY in Texas wants that, I’m sure.
Well, I don’t know if SHE’LL be there, but I sure will.
Like all looney, leftwing liberals, she fears the truth.
Garofolo can’t make it: she’ll be busy braiding her armpit hair and throwing darts at former President Bush.
Yeah, he is pretty impressive. He has great commentary on YouTube. You have to listen closely though. If you haven’t seen it, check it out.
Michelle, I spent 22 years in the US Navy. I retired as a Chief Petty Officer. One of the most important things I learned in the Navy is this…
Never try to teach a pig to sing. It’s a waste of your time and it will just end up annoying the pig.
Mz. Garofalo isn’t going to learn to sing no matter how hard you try.
Education is the very thing Ms. Garofalo is afraid of!
Oh thank you Texas Tea Baggers and Michelle Malkin!
I would come but now a passport is required to cross your northern border. I somehow missed the new enemy list requirements from your politburro!
I think Janeane Garofalo should experience a tea party, if not Texas, then another one.
That being said, it is rather comical that Janeane Garofalo is being challenged with being ‘afraid’ when the same posters are challenged in the same way, and still do not respond to questions, even though this blog is totaly anonymous.
Anyone who is challenged to respond to a direct posted question, and doesn’t, knows personally and intimately why Janeane Garofalo is afraid. It is the same reason, both have no game, and are style over substance bomb throwers without foundation in their arguements.
Janeane Garofalo, go to a tea. And posters, answer questions. No one should be ‘afraid’.
Here’s a good quote. Don’t know who said it, though.
Nothing so infuriates champions of ‘Diversity’ as much as an opinion diverse from their own.
Extremely accurate.
I’m guessing that she’ll be on MSNBC on Monday giving the world her expert opinion of the 4th of July Tea Parties (having not attended any).
I don’t know what Garafalo would have to be afraid of. But if she is ever invited to a tea party in my town, I would need advance warning so I would remember to wear a garlic necklace. And a spit guard. It’s not that I am afraid of her…I just wouldn’t want to take any chances with my soul or my health.
This assumes they actualy see the question.
I just adore ZO a.k.a. Alonzo! I follow his posts on youtube.com!
We’ll be Tea partying too here in San Antonio, TX. Inviting you to join us, ZO! Joe the Plumber & Marcus Luttrell will be there!
Actors use the news for free publicity, and so far Janeane has gotten a decent amount. Her statements create a buzz that keep her on the talk shows. This slight increase in recognizability gets her a higher Q rating. The rating assists getting parts and higher salaries – Hollywood and TV go by the numbers. It also helps to promote her radio show, if she still has one.
She keeps trying to get work, and this just helps her. Most people don’t care what she says, and treat her pronouncements like a commercial – something that comes on out of nowhere, and then is gone. If people were really aware and offended, she’d be gone in a flash.
In fact, if enough people cared about the foul politics of actors and did something about it, they’d become Republicans overnight.
It’s acting, and keeping the role going off screen. Jeaneane just doesn’t know that she’s playing the villain in this one.
She’s a little old to still be rebelling against daddy the oil man, isn’t she?
A fair point. Therefore, the same applies to Janeane Garofalo. Correct?
Yes but in the you tube world, it is hard to see her missing it. My GUESS is that she will see this and ignore it.
She has no need to actualy step out of her idealogical box. Thats where she is most comfortable and actualy makes money. Besides who wants to be exposed as the bigot they are.
I’m not going on television & yammering my opinions with Plastic-Ivy league Olbermann either. I’m not trying to force my face into the media for ‘any attention is good attention’ tactics.
I don’t have to answer any questions from any poster.
This was an excellent outreach ad. The offer to Grrr-uff will not be accepted in the manner in which it was offered.
She sells herself as uber-intelligent…above the level of those who disagree with her Stati-socialist views. It is not in her nature to be open to re-evaluation. To do so would go against everything she has spewed as “truth” over the years. Like Barack, she is irredeemably narcissistic.
She sees herself as a spokesperson for the far left, the only segment of the population that can offer the adoration she craves. Her skills as an actress are mediocre at best, but her fragile ego cannot handle the lack of recognition for her as an “artist.” She knows, inherently, that we are not “her people,” and she will never accept us.
It was a nice gesture to invite her, but lets stay on task. We don’t need any more distractions. Oblah-blah and company provide more than enough of that already.
I’d like to see some elected officials have the stones to stand up, point fingers, name names, and provide proof of what’s going on behind the closed doors of congress, regardless of party affiliation…and do it outside of the Tea Party arena!
This should not be a free platform for incumbents to spew more political bullsquat, rather, a platform to find their replacements!
You are acknowledging that you are making a guess and walking back your statement from your post #37.
Quoting you, “This assumes they actualy see the question.”
And, now you are assuming she sees the question because it is a “You Tube World”, as you said.
There is something intellectually dishonest about your two statements because there is no reconciling them.
And, neither does Janeane Garofalo. Correct?
Just because someone posts on a blog, or speaks on TV, does not mean they have to answer questions. Correct?
Dearest Janeane,
My name is Eddie G. I’m Latino, and I’ll be speaking at the Houston Tea Party on Friday, July 3.
So much for your racist redneck crapola.
xoxoxo,
Eddie
Z-troll, feeling unappreciated and lonely.
Nope, z-troll, it isn’t fear at all. I is a choice as to where we spend our time, and with whom.
Correct? Huh? Correct? Huh, huh?
She’s afraid they’ll make her take a bath.
Harsh, Nota.
True….
but harsh…
I thought I was going easy on her. Heh, heh.
She is a no-talent waste of time on “24″. If she were not on that popular show, she would not be given the time of day. I hope she does show up to a Tea Party and is asked to explain her stooopid positions and her idol love of Obamaramma. Give me a break – if she wasn’t on TV, nobody would care what she says.
Don’t be stupid. I said “assume” and “my opinion” because I don’t have proof. I will try again, slower this time.
It is my opinion that she has seen this video and she will ignore the invitation because she will not want to have her bigotry and hypocracy exposed.
Get it now?? If my opinion is wrong (no big deal) then its wrong. No harm, no foul.
Do i need to say it more slowly???
hmmm….nope; she either needs to put up or shut up.
I prefer ’shut up’.
LOL.
Intellectual dishonesty is intellectual dishonesty, even cloaked in assumption or opinion.
Since you don’t have proof. That also means you do not have facts. I said ‘fair point’ when you first said, and I quote, “This assumes they actualy see the question.”
Neither you, or know, if Janeane Garofalo has seen the question. And, it is fair not to assume she has, or that anyone has seen any question. That is your point.
Don’t assume anyone has seen the question. Correct? Isn’t that your first point?
Then you suggest, or opine, that it is a “You Tube World”, and that it is likely the question had been seen. Your words not mine.
You are duplicitous. First you say don’t assume, and then you go ahead and assume.
Have I said it slow enough for you?
Read your post #37
Yep, no big deal about opinions. Admiting that you guess and have no proof, however makes your opinions suspect.
OK, your opinions are duplicitous, suspect and without facts. Your tacit admission is enough for me.
No need for me to launch perjoratives. Your own words have cast a long shadow of doubt upon your credibility.
Have a nice day.
I really think the z-troll has a hardware problem.
Some bad wiring, perhaps….?
Thats why I said OPINION.
Good grief you are dense.
Why are these people complaining?
Why don’t they move to a country that doesn’t have a 911 system or national roads or national prison system or government enforced clean water?
In fact, if governement is too big these teabagging bigots are free to move to their own island and do all their free living there.
Who actually thinks the teabaggers are not a bunch of racist who have a problem with a black man being president? Not me!
Ragspierre, sonofdy–come clean. Did one of you hide the meds?
Ignore it. It’s just seeking attention.
Is that you god??? i mean no…
The Rag pokes it head out from that moist, warm and dark place again. Didn’t swing from the string this time, but I was still made to laugh out loud. Very loudly.
Ilovemycountry said: I love to give all my money to the governement.
That’s just gross and completely unnecessary, Z.
He is just defending his girlfriend.
***
There is no way that that “lady” can “come on down.
***
Like the old Navy joke goes–nothing is lower than WHALES**T lying on the bottom of the ocean. NOTHING!
***
Keep her out of Texas–someone might confuse “tea party” with “necktie party”.
***
John Bibb (Texan!)
***
Salt, it did the same thing about a million times the other day.
On & on it went with the tampon ‘jokes’.
Obsess much?
Ilovemycuber said:
Ah, the truth will out…
Hysterically…
maniacally…
Nope. As long as perjoratives are an accepted form of expressing one’s self on this BLOG, what is the point of stopping my characterization of the Rag. I am called all sorts of things and mis-characterized. I have respectfully asked to be called by my screen name, yet I suppose it is too much fun for others to hurl invectives.
The thing is, if you can dish it out, you should be able to take it. When the Rag dishes. I dish. When the Rag stops, I will stop. When someone elses dishes they better be ready to withstand the same.
Lastly, the Rag (and, at least another blogger) and I have a history. To date each of you have been mild with me, though Sonofdy recently called me ‘dense’ and I handled that with more civility.
If you think I have been offensive, I would only hope each of you would think others have been offensive, too. And, will say so. Yep, calling someone a troll is offensive.
No name calling. No perjoratives. No invectives. No bomb throwing.
Do you agree?
Because you were being dense. It is stupid to ask someone for proof of what they open lable as opinion. Do you want me to call you a wwwaaaamublance???
Grow up.
Cut and paste from my post where I ask you for proof. You won’t be able to because, I asked you to reconcile two distinct points you made.
You are delusional.
It is called reading and writing comprehension.
I don’t need an ambulance, but you certainly require remedial education.
zyzzyg: You want me to prove an opinion. You sir are a dumbass.
Thats my opinion, based on your own posting record. I am done with you.
To clarify, I expressed my thought on your statement because I thought it lacked taste, not in any defense of any other poster here.
Your response suggests that poor behavior can be justified by someone else’s poor behavior. I doubt that you sincerely believe that.
I will agree that the term troll gets bandied about here a lot, but that’s true of just about every blog everywhere, particularly those that have spirited debates which can descend into flame wars.
Two last thoughts:
1) Do you believe that an escalation of the bad behavior you wish would go away is effective? Or is it more likely just to make things worse?
2) While you focus on your history with other posters here, do you care about how your imagery affects your credibility with reasonable commenters here?
For what it’s worth, this is point where I believe it went off the rails:
You might have asked for clarification instead. I didn’t see anything that would suggest intellectual dishonesty here.
LOL.
I am not asking you for proof.
I am asking you to reconcile your two statements. But, you don’t have to, because you can’t. No one can.
You know this, and that is why you are going in another direction, seeing things that aren’t there. Saying things that never happened. Yep, I challenged you to cut and paste your assertion, and you failed. You couldn’t do it because it never happened, except in your mind.
Despite your invective, my only concern is that you improve you reading and writing skills with some remedial education.
Understood.
Yes, I accept that theory. My hope was that in being outrageous, other outrageous behaviour would stop. I even try laughing it off, in an effort to diminish posters.
Yep, I wish we all could stay on topic. Too often discussions are reduced to name calling when one party knows that they have no intelligent response. And, are unwilling to answer questions and deconstruct an arguement.
It is a lot for me to expect that another person would realize if they stopped, then I would stop. Heck, I have even politely asked in the past.
Effective? I do not know. If the result is that another person stops addressing me, as sonofdy in post #74 said would happen, then something has been effective. We will see if sonofdy lives up to the promise made.
My hope, again my expectations are high, is that reasonable commenters will track my posts within any one thread and recognize that it is not me that starts this mess.
I would like you take note that when I am addressed I cut and paste that posters entire comment in my response, so that nothing is missed.
As for my credibility based on imagery, I will rely on the strength of my arguements. And, hope the substance will be separately judged from the style.
The unfortunate reality is that people insult people on this blog in one form or another. I do my best to ignore it as much as I can, until I can’t take it anymore. And, then respond in kind.
If you have a suggestion on how to deal with bomb throwers, I am all ears.
Actually no. And your attempt to understand is honorable. You cut and pasted that quote from post #45.
There were several other posts that preceded that one. Begining with my first, #33.
Summarizing -
The intellectual dishonesty is sonofdy first saying that it is questionable to assume a question has been seen, and then saying it is a you tube world and it can be assumed a question has been seen.
First you suggest no assumptions should be made, then you make an assumption.
What’s up with that? Intellectual dishonesty is what.
zyzzyg: It really amazes me that you can seem to understnad the english language and totaly miss the point again and again and again. Shove your fake moral superiority up your A$$.
MY point is for the non-idiots out there was that is my opinion that she has seen the videos and will not respond because she will feel no need to based on her bigotry.
LOL
Seriously?
What happened to your post #74, especially the last five words?
So much for your ‘word’.
Your credibility is further diminished. Please stop, I am becoming embarrassed for you.
In #37, sonofdy was referring to your statement about whether or not posters saw the question to which you were alluding.
When you started this sub-thread I suspected you were bringing a past grievance from another thread into this one, but I did not know exactly what you were discussing.
In #42, sonofdy answered your question to him about Janeane specifically. It’s not unreasonable to suspect that she might have seen the video challenge, but we cannot know for sure. Even sonofdy has stated that it is only his opinion/guess.
#37 and #42 are about two different things. You tied them together whereas sonofdy had not. One was about posters and the question to which you were alluding, the other specifically about Janeane G. and the challenge issued to her.
I did not personally see any intellectual dishonesty in sonofdy’s answer and he appeared, to me, to be responding at level with you until you essentially called him a liar.
Z – You’re disgusting.
I’ve been scrolling past your tripe for a while now, but I read Salt’s quote of you because his response caught my eye. What you said is gross and pathetic, and, in my opinion, is a banning offense.
Then do me a favor, please refer to me by my complete screen name and when others hurl perjoratives, invectives, insults and verbal bombs, do the same thing and take them to task, too. It would be wonderful if you were consistent and pointed out everything offensive said on this blog.
BTW, how would know, how could you say, what I write is ‘tripe’ if you don’t read it and scroll through it?
If you do not have a full understanding of how this point was reached then you are making a judgement on incomplete information.
If you can’t be consistent, if you can’t use my entire screen name, if you don’t point out everything offensive, if you don’t read what I write, if you are content with not having all the facts . . . so be it.
It says more about you than it does about me.
Salt and joy, don’t bother with Z, he is just being a dumbass deliberately. He knows his points are inaccurate but simply wants to try to sound more intelligent than he really is.
I do know the beginning of this. I was there and participating in the conversation and you were completely out of line and still are. You’re clueless. And you ARE dense. If you don’t like being called a troll, stop acting like one. That is why I took to scrolling past you.
You’re insufferable and tedious and RUDE. Your way of interacting with the other folks on this site is what brings on the reaction and response to you. For once, look in the mirror and see it instead of harping and haranguing everyone else to death and expecting total civility in return.
There are lines Z. And MOST NORMAL people recognize the difference between calling someone dense, a troll or whatever and leaping over that line (WAY WAY over it) into filthy, disgusting, amoral, bizarre, gross and despicable and bitter, vile, degenerate ad hominem attacks.
sonofdy – My wish is that everyone would consistently ignore him. And I have for days and days. I jumped in on this because his revolting comments towards Ragspierre so totally cross the line and I think it needs to be addressed.
Thank you so much for a reasonable discussion. And, that is part of the problem. Too many people retreat to insults and not take the path you have.
You are certainly of the earth.
[Note: Do I have to explain?]
Yep. And, I agreed saying it was a fair point. See, I am not an evil person. When a point is made that I agree with, I am not afraid to say so. I then asked if that applies to Janeane Garofalo.
Sonofdy agreed that it does apply to Janeane Garofalo.
Sonofdy then said, it is a You Tube world and it can be assumed she saw the question.
I am going to try one more time. Sonofdy did not renconcile the disconnect, maybe you can.
The first opinion suggests that an assumption can not be made about actually seeing the question, then the second opinion making the assumption that the question has been seen, is incongruous.
Those are sonofdy’s two opinions. I am not questioning his opinions, I am asking him, and now you, to reconcile the two, make sense of the two diametrically opposite opinions.
I suggested it could not be done. Maybe you can.
I distilled previously saying -
You are duplicitous. First you say don’t assume, and then you go ahead and assume.
Yet, no direct response from sonofdy. What I get is that I am questioning the opinion. No. For goodness sake, NO. I am not questioning the opinions, plural. I am questioning why the two opinions contradict one another.
Nope. I did not bring any past grievances into this thread until I was insulted by someone who continually hurls perjorative epiteths without addressing the substance of my arguements.
For some, it is easier to insult than address what was actually said. It is easier for some not to answer questions, take tangents, create unseen scenarios and call people names.
Had I not been insulted in post #48 and then again in post #57, I would not have posted #63. I did not go there first. Not an excuse, a fact. I ignored the first, then addressed the second.
It is not about right and wrong, it is about taking people to task for what they say. I said I was over the top, neither right nor wrong.
Are you willing to take the poster of #48 and #57 to task for being over the top in insulting me? You could suggest it is an issue of degree. I say, it is still an insult and offensive.
Understood, and I say again. Reconcile that with sonofdy’s first opinion. Why suggest something should not be assumed, and then come back and make an assumption a couple of posts later?
Huh?
I did not make the statements. Sonofdy did. I did not force them from sonofdy. They were voluntarily given.
Take a deep breath and think about this. Though not connected in the moment and even if they had been said years apart. Two disparate statements by the same person are still contradictory.
A public figure who challenges another for an affair and suggests the only option is resignstion, then has an affair of their own and dismisses the option of resignation for themselves, is what? Inconsistent? Hypocrisy?
Sonofdy’s opinions are inconsistent. The content of the opinions are immaterial. It is that the opinions are like the politician’s. One day resignation is OK, and the next it is not. One day assumption is OK, and the next day it is not. You can’t have it both ways.
I did not connect anything. The opinions connected themselves.
I never called sonofdy a liar, essentially, or not. I asked, and now I am asking you, since sonofdy won’t, to reconcile the two opinions.
I don’t think I can be anymore clear. I have asked it before.
How can you suggest assumption is wrong in one breath, and then later, make an assumption?
Admittedly, I went way long, but should you elect to respond please address the bold question first.
Again, thank you for the discussion. You and I managed to do so without insults, perjoratives, invectives and name calling.
I just wish we all could.
LOL
Whatever.
Assigning motive to me, and incorrectly at that, does not help your cause.
Tell me again about your post #74, especially the last five words?
You are so funny.
I knew somehow that you would not address my respectful request. Or, specificaly address the statement and questions I made in post #84.
LOL.
Name calling is name calling. It is insulting and offensive. Everyone has their standards. You accept calling people trolls, and accept being called a troll yourself. I do not. We walk to the beat of different drummers. So be it.
I don’t suspect that you think you are dense and since sonofdy will not address the question, I will repeat it for you in the hope that you will answer it.
How can you suggest assumption is wrong in one breath, and then later, make an assumption?
That is a matter of opinion. Asking question is now rude, but not calling people names?
I don’t need to look in the mirror, you need to read and fully understand what is being said. Maybe if you, and others, answer a direct question it would be helpful.
Oh yeah, and repeatedly calling people names as a response to their posts, is not harping and haranguing?
Absolutely, there are lines. Lines are crossed all the time. And, I have asked others, and you just recently, to call me by my screen name. Well, you cross the line everytime you refer to me when you don’t use my screen name.
We all have lines. They are just in different places. If you cannot accommodate me, as I have respectfully asked others in the past, why should I accommodate you?
When you dish it out you had better be prepared to take it. When there is offense, take all of it to task.
From everything I’ve seen Z… you dish it out first by your ever disrespectful, baiting and antagonistic attitude (the LOL!s translate to sneering and laughing at a person) and then act truly astounded that people react the way they do to it.
Have at dude or dudette – since it seems to be working so well for you.