RadioBanter - View Single Post - While we're on the subject of funny and entertaining websites.....

April 8th 05, 07:35 PM

On Fri, 8 Apr 2005 10:57:39 -0400, (I
AmnotGeorgeBush) wrote:

From: (Dave*Hall)
On Wed, 6 Apr 2005 10:11:51 -0400, (I
AmnotGeorgeBush) wrote:
That was not meant as a criticism, just a
neutral observation.

Sure, sure,,a "neutral" observation whose first knee jerk reaction when
Dogie was busted was to jump to his defense and lie and say someone
someone withdrew the complaint against him to the FCC.

You're lying again. I never made any such
claim.

I simply offered that based on Doug's
"notoriety", that he MIGHT have been framed.
Are you stating that this scenario is impossible?

Your reasoning for your bizarre behavior means something only to
yourself.
Your first instinct was to deny it took place, call me a liar, then turn
around in your next sentence and attempt to explain WHY you made such a
claim. Very bizarre, David.

The only thing "bizarre" is your inability to comprehend simple
concepts. You accused me of stating that someone withdrew the
complaint. I made no such statement. That's a lie on your part,
predicated, no doubt, from your inability to remember who said what
over the years. You once tried to claim that I accused Keith of
something. When pressed on the issue, (While you scrambled through
google) you finally had to back off when you realized that you make a
mistake. But true to form, you would never be a man and admit it.

Are you man enough to apologize now, or will you just spin this some
more to lay down even more smoke?

The contingency recognizes this fact and several have illustrated and
commented on your position and hypocrisy.

....of one (you).

Despite your paranoia, I am not Frank, Jim, Shark, or anyone else that
has commented on your bizarre hypocrisy.

Despite your obvious paranoia, I never said you were.

I am no more hypocritical than any of those who have claimed the same
of me.

You
claiming the majority misunderstands you via explaining what you
"really" meant after the fact (usually accompanied by you misapplying
definitions of words and terms) adds to the joke.

No, you are claiming there's a "majority"

Yes, I did claim there was a majority on man occasion.

(Which has been strangely silent),

You always default to denial mode when other people tell you your
behavior is hypocritical. It's called denial.

No, it's called correcting an error. You still cannot demonstrate
anything hypocritical that I've posted. I'm forced to conclude that
you don't know the meaning of the word. So for your edification:

hy·poc·ri·sy ( P ) Pronunciation Key (h-pkr-s)
n. pl. hy·poc·ri·sies

1.The practice of professing beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one
does not hold or possess; falseness.
2. An act or instance of such falseness.

Now, where have I ever professed a belief, virtue, or feeling that I
don't possess?

the truth is there is only you.

Classic denial. I wasn't the one telling you about your hypocritical
political diatribes, despite your need to believe I am now posting as
Jim, or anyone else.

I never mentioned that. Guilty conscience?

Provide even ONE example of my misuse of

any term.

Empirical evidence, for one.
But you outdone yourself concerning your knowledge of the laws governing
your hobby regarding Civil Disobedience.

You have absolutely no idea what the concept of civil disobedience is
do you? You think it's your "get out of jail free card". You are so
far off, it's not even funny.

Despite being taught and
educated on this matter several times,

You are not capable of educating anyone. Your legal and political
views are akin to the malcontents and subversive slackers of the
1960's.

you fecklessly insist such an act
(such as dxing) makes one a federal criminal.

It does and it is. The FCC (a FEDERAL agency) via the communications
act of 1934 clearly defines both civil AND criminal penalties for
violation of the law. The fact that you haven't been caught yet does
not change that.

You very clearly are
suffering some sort of massive block, some type of learning disability
that prevents you from comprehending the differences between what
constitutes civil and criminal penalties, despite being properly
instructed each time you shout your ignorance concerning this subject.
You erroneously claimed, "it is perception" (yours, albeit wrong) that
distinguishes between such.

Your problem is that in your narcissistic mind, that you believe that
you know what's "proper". Someone can't be "educated" when the
"teacher" is further off the rails than the "student". Your knowledge
of the law is the worst that I've ever seen anywhere. I have a cousin
who's a lawyer and he just shakes his head at your ignorance.

Stick to fishing. It's probably the only subject you know anything
about.

You really should take some remedial education courses, including a
course on reading comprehension. That way you wouldn't be so quick to
accuse others of saying things they never said.

Have yourself a good weekend, old man.

Same to you. See you on Monday....

Dave
"Sandbagger"
http://home.ptd.net/~n3cvj