Jump to content

From the Mayor's Desk: 03-07-2007


Strife767

Recommended Posts

Thank you Paul LaClair for that wonderful explaination. Going by the name The Tao of Charlie Brown doesnt really flatter you.  The writing style is identical to the much earlier comments by someone named Paul I think?  My comments can be dismissed?  Sounds very lawyerish to me. "ad nauseum" another word commonly used by Paul.

So I guess this is another one of your supporters?  Oh I get it now. Did you ever wonder how many of your so called supporters originate befind the same keyboard.  Ad hominum. I might as well be talking to Paul here.

Obviously you have nothing of substance to say. Making false and irrelevant accusations does not flatter you --- not that you care since you conceal your identity.

To your insinuation, the post you reference was not written by me or anyone at my keyboard. Like you, I do not know who the author is. The writing in that post is excellent and to the point, but I would have spelled ad nauseam correctly.

If you would care to take a shot at addressing the points made by "The Tao of Charlie Brown," I would find that refreshing. However, I suspect that if you could have done it, you would have. "Tao" draws the conclusion that your arguments are easily dismissed, and then cogently and succinctly sets forth the reasons. He/she is absolutely right. If you wish to rebut Tao's arguments, you are free to do so on the merits, that is, if you can.

Apart from that, the constant barrage of inanity coming from the radical, fundamentalist right is already more than tiring, but not surprising. It's nauseating, hence the term "ad nauseam." By the way, I would also have spelled "ad hominem" correctly.

In other words, one who has nothing useful to say, does himself and all concerned a service by remaining silent. Not an attack, just an observation. A true one, don't you think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 61
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Guest Patriot
Obviously you have nothing of substance to say. Making false and irrelevant accusations does not flatter you --- not that you care since you conceal your identity.

To your insinuation, the post you reference was not written by me or anyone at my keyboard. Like you, I do not know who the author is. The writing in that post is excellent and to the point, but I would have spelled ad nauseam correctly.

If you would care to take a shot at addressing the points made by "The Tao of Charlie Brown," I would find that refreshing. However, I suspect that if you could have done it, you would have. "Tao" draws the conclusion that your arguments are easily dismissed, and then cogently and succinctly sets forth the reasons. He/she is absolutely right. If you wish to rebut Tao's arguments, you are free to do so on the merits, that is, if you can.

Apart from that, the constant barrage of inanity coming from the radical, fundamentalist right is already more than tiring, but not surprising. It's nauseating, hence the term "ad nauseam." By the way, I would also have spelled "ad hominem" correctly.

In other words, one who has nothing useful to say, does himself and all concerned a service by remaining silent. Not an attack, just an observation. A true one, don't you think?

Here's an observation........ You are one freakin obsessed maniac. If I were your doctor, I'd tell you to unplug the computer and take a freakin walk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest
Obviously you have nothing of substance to say. Making false and irrelevant accusations does not flatter you --- not that you care since you conceal your identity.

To your insinuation, the post you reference was not written by me or anyone at my keyboard. Like you, I do not know who the author is. The writing in that post is excellent and to the point, but I would have spelled ad nauseam correctly.

If you would care to take a shot at addressing the points made by "The Tao of Charlie Brown," I would find that refreshing. However, I suspect that if you could have done it, you would have. "Tao" draws the conclusion that your arguments are easily dismissed, and then cogently and succinctly sets forth the reasons. He/she is absolutely right. If you wish to rebut Tao's arguments, you are free to do so on the merits, that is, if you can.

Apart from that, the constant barrage of inanity coming from the radical, fundamentalist right is already more than tiring, but not surprising. It's nauseating, hence the term "ad nauseam." By the way, I would also have spelled "ad hominem" correctly.

In other words, one who has nothing useful to say, does himself and all concerned a service by remaining silent. Not an attack, just an observation. A true one, don't you think?

I won't conceal my identity anymore. I am Strife767. You got me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest wm660hrs
a typical lawyer response. a lot of words with very little meaning.

and the meaning is a typical politician's response. santos waited until after the boe petitions are filed. then he attacks bern mcdonald who is now running for reelection. next he will back someone who is running against her. like maybe joe w. who he just appointed to the rec commision. santos is just another politican who doesnt care about anything except himself

Hooray for you Santo's is just another in the long line of phony pols.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's an observation........ You are one freakin  obsessed maniac.  If I were your doctor, I'd tell you to unplug the computer and take a freakin walk.

I do walk. Some people are capable of typing a complete sentence in less than an hour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest
I do walk. Some people are capable of typing a complete sentence in less than an hour.

I am sorry, Paul but it doesn't look like you walk...by the way, WOW! That was a very intelligent response, Paul. You have way too much time in your hands! Do you work?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest NoLimitations
I am sorry, Paul but it doesn't look like you walk...by the way, WOW! That was a very intelligent response, Paul. You have way too much time in your hands! Do you work?

At least Paul is not a lying fraud like the people he is up against. Individuals who have use tax payer monies to spin their lies are criminals. Its called grand theft by deception.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest
Here's an observation........ You are one freakin  obsessed maniac.  If I were your doctor, I'd tell you to unplug the computer and take a freakin walk.

It's really bothering you that you can't muster an intelligent, on-point response, isn't it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. 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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...