Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sun, 01 Oct 2006 05:25:48 -0700, Adolf the Unready did most oddly
state: Demon Lord of Confusion wrote: Hey, Snarky, tell us more about your first sexual experience. What happened to make you refrain from sex for 16 years? Did she say something unkind about you? Did you come on her trousers? Did she tell you your bits were too small? First *18* years, and beyond that is really none of your business. Of course, none of it's any of my business, and I couldn't give a flying ****. You seemed eager to chat about your less-than-minimal sex life. Oh, I am - with people who have no agenda regarding the outing of such info. When you say you did lots of reading in those years, what do you mean, Playboy? Amputee Monthly? NAMBLA Journal? Mainly genre fiction -- I find it more intellectually edifying than non-fiction. You mean gay crap written by computer program. No, Robert Heinlein wasn't a computer program. Nor is Spider Robinson, Jack Chalker, Dean R. Koontz, Stephen King, Robert Jordan, or Warren Murphy (or his deceased co-creator of the Destroyer series). So it's been two years now, hunh? Must be lots of pressure building up in the Snarky ballsack! How does it feel, Snark? Should only be another year or so. I can wait. A year? How can you know that? Is your 40-odd yr old bitch in jail or something? Anyway, have fun masturbating. I'll post some porn sites for you, if I can be bothered. Which I can't. She's saving up money to move here. On her last visit to Vancouver, she fell in love with it (as well as with me, all over again). How long is 'quite awhile'? When did you actually leave home, Snarky? 23? 25? 34? Again, we're into "None of your damn business, Outer Filth" Land. Go stalk easier meat, why don't you? You don't seem quite competent enough to find out anything useful about me. How could anything about you be useful, asshole? It's quite clear you didn't leave home until long after most of your contemporaries had careers and steady partners, and absolutely did not rely on ridiculous attempted bullying of better people on usenet to give them a sense of their own value. "Bullying"? Ah, you have me mistaken for a regular of alt.fan.art-bell. As a kookologist, I'm a "****head". After all, I metaphorically poke needles and pointy stix into people until they scream. It was quite effective on Wabbit. -- __________________________________________________ ______________________ Hail Eris! mhm 29x21; TM#5 Demon Lord of Confusion COOSN-029-06-71069 Supreme High Overlord of rec.radio.* Chuck Lysaght: Tarred & Feathered! "It would be offly hard for any of you to abuse me on usenet. Really. I have the advantage. I could easily turn alt.usenet.kooks into a cesspool of encoded posts. Bringing the noise ratio up so high as to make the group worthless. Anybody who can code could do this, why nobody has bothered before now is beyond me. The ultimate spamming engine.. 'BAWAHAHA'" -- Dustbin "Outer Filth" K00k's delusions of grandeur reached new heights, in Message-ID: "Immorality: The morality of those who are having a better time." -- H. L. Mencken "Consider that language a moment. 'Purposefully and materially supported hostilities against the United States' is in the eye of the beholder, and this administration has proven itself to be astonishingly impatient with criticism of any kind. The broad powers given to Bush by this legislation allow him to capture, indefinitely detain, and refuse a hearing to any American citizen who speaks out against Iraq or any other part of the so-called 'War on Terror.' "If you write a letter to the editor attacking Bush, you could be deemed as purposefully and materially supporting hostilities against the United States. If you organize or join a public demonstration against Iraq, or against the administration, the same designation could befall you. One dark-comedy aspect of the legislation is that senators or House members who publicly disagree with Bush, criticize him, or organize investigations into his dealings could be placed under the same designation. In effect, Congress just gave Bush the power to lock them up." -- William Rivers Pitt |