Making Baby Jesus Cry

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
Uh, spent all day coordinating physicans who are treating refugees at one of the massive centers in Houston. I'll be at the George R. Brown Convention Center for a lot of the next week.

Me? I'm pretending to do all sorts of thing while posting in anon boards, so don't call me out.

but I have a bone to pick with this board- Fringey, who I believe has ran out of her meds, earlier said that I was ruining this board. To date only Penske has defended me, and Penske is supposed to be helping me ruin the board for some reason- maybe Halliburton contracts?

At any rate I would ask a bi-partisan series of testimonial teling ms. fringey that I am a net positve here, even if i do stoop negative from time to time.

[Spanky]

The major points in case you get you get lost in the minutae:

1) Ty said he "never defended" the Mayor and the Governor when he repeatedly did.

Is there anyone on this board that finds it believable when Ty said he never defended the Mayor or Governor?

2) Part of that defense was that he never saw one article or statement that would support the fact that the Mayor or the Governor made a mistake, although he posted many aritcles, some obscure that showed federal screw ups.

Does anyone on this believe that Ty never came across one story that critisized the Governor or Mayor, but was yet able to find multiple stories that critisized the feds.

[Nut Case, Sensitive]

Originally posted by Spanky
I hate to do this to you, but I just got off the phone with one of the editors of the San Francisco Chronicle and he told me they did report about the buses and that they cited many examples of Nagins mistakes and screwups (if you email me I will send you his name and title). He can't remember if they actually printed that same photograph. In addition, he said that Nagin has been pointing his finger at everyone and only a blind man could not see that this guy has royall screwed up (if you have read his paper).

I know it was on the cover of the San Jose Mercury News. If it wasn't the chronicle it was the Palo Alto dailey because I saw it on the front page of at least two papers in the bins.

Oh, Nuts. You're so busy reading between the lines you haven't read a word I've written. I note that I have posted more links to stories in the media critical of Nagin than you today.

My point was simply that it wasn't in the paper here and that I couldn't get a link to the story in either of the two you cited. I don't get to see whether this is a story which, in the hands of a seasoned reporter, brings out all the juicy facts or simple matter-of-fact statements that explain the non-use of the buses.

If it isn't clear to you, TO HELL WITH NAGIN. TO HELL WITH BLANCO. TO HELL WITH BUSH.

Now, I understand you're ready to tar and feather Nagin, since he is no longer with the Republican party, and Blanco, since she apparently never was. ARE YOU READY TO TAG BUSH AND HIS ADMINISTRATION WITH ANY CULPABILITY?

[Nut Case, Sensitive]

Originally posted by Spanky
The major points in case you get l

Lost in the minutae:

1) Ty said he "never defended" the Mayor and the Governor when he repeatedly did.

Is there anyone on this board that finds it believable when Ty said he never defended the Mayor or Governor?

2) Part of that defense was that he never saw one article or statement that would support the fact that the Mayor or the Governor made a mistake, although he posted many aritcles, some obscure that showed federal screw ups.

Does anyone on this believe that Ty never came across one story that critisized the Governor or Mayor, but was yet able to find multiple stories that critisized the feds.

Does Bush have any culpability?

[Gattigap]

Originally posted by Penske_Account


for ... Gatti ... to claim that ... I have ever made a "serious" comment that was a blatant lie and attempted to use a doctored photo to bolster that lie is incredibly disengenuous and ... should apologize to the board for their jackassinine behaviour.

This I'm having a hard time following, but feel pretty confident saying that this I did not do.

for ... Gatti ... to claim that the parodies influenced their ability to judge the others for what they were ... is incredibly disengenuous and ... should apologize to the board for their jackassinine behaviour.

This, I did do, at least as far as declaring that I'm taking none of your images seriously after being force-fed a diet of dumbass doctored images of Clinton, Byrd, Kennedy, Sheehan, and others over a course of years.

Tough shit. I am quite surprised that my declaring this so offends your delicate sensibilities.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Nut Case, Sensitive
Oh, Nuts. You're so busy reading between the lines you haven't read a word I've written. I note that I have posted more links to stories in the media critical of Nagin than you today.

My point was simply that it wasn't in the paper here and that I couldn't get a link to the story in either of the two you cited. I don't get to see whether this is a story which, in the hands of a seasoned reporter, brings out all the juicy facts or simple matter-of-fact statements that explain the non-use of the buses.

If it isn't clear to you, TO HELL WITH NAGIN. TO HELL WITH BLANCO. TO HELL WITH BUSH.

Now, I understand you're ready to tar and feather Nagin, since he is no longer with the Republican party, and Blanco, since she apparently never was. ARE YOU READY TO TAG BUSH AND HIS ADMINISTRATION WITH ANY CULPABILITY?

If you have been reading my posts I have consistently said that Bush has to bear some of the responsiblity. In fact, I have argued with people that have said he should not.

[Nut Case, Sensitive]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
What does this mean? Are you questioning the veracity of the story? The pics? Are deep is the liberal denial?

Who is more culpable: Bush or Hilary?

[Nut Case, Sensitive]

Originally posted by Spanky
If you have been reading my posts I have consistently said that Bush has to bear some of the responsiblity. In fact, I have argued with people that have said he should not.

Great. Thank you.

Nuts to All of Them.

[Southern Patriot]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
At any rate I would ask a bi-partisan series of testimonial teling ms. fringey that I am a net positve here, even if i do stoop negative from time to time.

Count me in. Please pm me the testimonial you'd like me to post. If you'd like, just forward standard RNC talking points and I'll do something with them.

[Gattigap]

Originally posted by Spanky
I still stand by that statement. It was everywhere. It was discussed in editorials etc. But the point is moot because Penske talked about it on this board, so we know Ty was aware of it.

I'm sorry, I misread you. I thought you were saying that it was run in every major local newspaper for days, generally.

Instead, by "every major local newspaper," you meant the SF Chronicle, the San Jose Merc, and possibly the Palo Alto paper and whatever else was in the bin at Peet's over the weekend.

I can understand its searing effect, then.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Spanky
Does anyone on this believe that Ty never came across one story that critisized the Governor or Mayor, but was yet able to find multiple stories that critisized the feds.

Since I've even posted a story criticizing the municipal government, you can stop beating this particular horse.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Gattigap
It means that Spanky may have been mistaken when he declared that the Signature Photo of the Hurricane was "in every major local newspaper for days." The man literally "could not get away from that picture," as "it was lead on every local channel."

Nice try, but your attempt to drag his point back to some false debate over whether the pictures were real or not. Is anyone else here sensing a pattern?

this is fucking absurd. Are you really questioning whether or not those pictures are what they are purported to be? If so, the two of you have lost all sanity.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Spanky
The major points in case you get you get lost in the minutae:

1) Ty said he "never defended" the Mayor and the Governor when he repeatedly did.

Is there anyone on this board that finds it believable when Ty said he never defended the Mayor or Governor?

2) Part of that defense was that he never saw one article or statement that would support the fact that the Mayor or the Governor made a mistake, although he posted many aritcles, some obscure that showed federal screw ups.

Does anyone on this believe that Ty never came across one story that critisized the Governor or Mayor, but was yet able to find multiple stories that critisized the feds.

I am in shock due to a state of disbelief at the loose grip on reality of both Gatti and Ty.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Nut Case, Sensitive
Oh, Nuts. You're so busy reading between the lines you haven't read a word I've written. I note that I have posted more links to stories in the media critical of Nagin than you today.

My point was simply that it wasn't in the paper here and that I couldn't get a link to the story in either of the two you cited. I don't get to see whether this is a story which, in the hands of a seasoned reporter, brings out all the juicy facts or simple matter-of-fact statements that explain the non-use of the buses.

If it isn't clear to you, TO HELL WITH NAGIN. TO HELL WITH BLANCO. TO HELL WITH BUSH.

Now, I understand you're ready to tar and feather Nagin, since he is no longer with the Republican party, and Blanco, since she apparently never was. ARE YOU READY TO TAG BUSH AND HIS ADMINISTRATION WITH ANY CULPABILITY?

This sock is stupid. Why don't you post with your primary?

As for the story being in a paper "here", maybe you live in an area with shoddy journalistic sources.

As for Bush, he has admitted unacceptable performance. I applaud and admire his ability to accept responsibility.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Gattigap
I'm sorry, I misread you. I thought you were saying that it was run in every major local newspaper for days, generally.

Instead, by "every major local newspaper," you meant the SF Chronicle, the San Jose Merc, and possibly the Palo Alto paper and whatever else was in the bin at Peet's over the weekend.

I can understand its searing effect, then.

No need to apologise, I did say the piciture was on the cover of the Chronicle when it looks like it was not. But I do know it was on two covers and I did see it before Penske posted it, because the first thought in my mind when Penske posted it was "oh not the buses again". In addition, before I knew that the mayor had been told to use them for the evacuation, I didn't really understand their relevance except that it was a cool picture. And that was also before it occurred to me that of all the property that can be saved, the moveable ones are the easiest to save so there was not reason not to move these buses to higher ground.