DELETED

Terry · Post by **Terry** » Mon Jan 26, 2009 9:41 pm

Sox already won...he aged himself 50 years with his comments and has one foot in the grave. Nothing can save him now, he's doomed.

cypressgirl · Post by **cypressgirl** » Mon Jan 26, 2009 9:48 pm

Terry wrote:Sox already won...he aged himself 50 years with his comments and has one foot in the grave. Nothing can save him now, he's doomed.

HUH???

Terry · Post by **Terry** » Mon Jan 26, 2009 10:27 pm

Okay, maybe a bit harsh...but it was a contest, wasn't it? You political folks are a bit hard to take sometimes, especially for STJ folks.

This is not a win/win situation.

Take Anthony's advice and chill...walk away from the computer.

flip-flop · Post by **flip-flop** » Mon Jan 26, 2009 10:36 pm

My favorite new rule: Godwin's Law.

Google it if you want to know more. That's all I'll say.

Thanks to the person who shall remain nameless (unless she outs herself) who tipped me off to the rule.

XOXO · Post by **XOXO** » Mon Jan 26, 2009 11:03 pm

Joshie wrote:
Lex wrote:A sudden rally by Gina has tied her for the lead with Sox in posts on this thread today.

SOX 12

Gina 12
My money's on SOX.

He strikes me as too old school to let a girl beat him.

-j

______________
Beat me? In your dreams.

You know, you are growing on me Joshie. But . . . I deleted your Oprah picture.

nah nah nah nah nah nah nah gooood byyyye.

And I would like to have a word with that captain!

Lex · Post by **Lex** » Mon Jan 26, 2009 11:42 pm

Pretty exciting competition today. I changed the game a bit. I counted all posts made today on any thread on the forum, not just this one. Remarkable how close it is. Gina is leading Sox 18-17.

If she can keep up this pace, she would rack up 6570 posts per year! At Sox' current pace, he would reach 6205 in a single year. Now that's posting!

soxfan22 · Post by **soxfan22** » Tue Jan 27, 2009 11:48 am

flip-flop wrote:My favorite new rule: Godwin's Law.

Google it if you want to know more. That's all I'll say.

Thanks to the person who shall remain nameless (unless she outs herself) who tipped me off to the rule.

Wow, that's interesting stuff! Learn something new everyday!
I wonder what the "law" is that describes someone who says that an elected official and a woman with a chance to become our first female VP "doesn't have two brain cells to rub together". Have we diagnosed that Internet personality yet?

As for the old Godwin's Law (18 years old)...I wonder...Was the great Jerry Seinfeld in violation of the great Godwin's Law during is famous "Soup Nazi" episode? I mean, I do understand that this law was developed strictly for the Internet, but lets see if we can apply across popular culture as well?

Here's a quote from your wiki:

It is precisely because such a comparison or reference may sometimes be appropriate, Godwin has argued that overuse of Nazi and Hitler comparisons should be avoided, because it robs the valid comparisons of their impact.

Also, it is important to note that I did NOT compare anyone here to Adolf Hitler, nor did I compare Obama to Adolf Hitler as it relates to the Holocaust, the Nazi party, Fascism, etc. And if we are to be technical, that is what is required to invoke said "Law".

This from a "Godwin's Law" FAQ (learning so much here!):

5. What should I do if somebody else invokes Godwin's Law?

The obvious response is to call them on it, say "thread's over", and declare victory. This is also one of the stupidest possible responses,
because it involves believing far too much in the power of a few rules that don't say exactly what you wish they said anyway. The proper response to
an invocation is probably to simply followup with a message saying "Oh. I'm a Nazi? Sure. Bye" and leave, and in most cases even that much of a
post is unnecessary.

Oops. Except that again, I never compared you to a Nazi. In fact, just the opposite.

Look Flip, we both said things we probably regret. I more than you. If you'd like to keep bringing this mindless BS up, then be my guest. I however, after numerous apologies, will not entertain your flames anymore.

It's been real, it's been fun...But it hasn't been real fun.

Thanks for playin'.

XOXO · Post by **XOXO** » Tue Jan 27, 2009 1:15 pm

Pssst . . . Les . . . I think you forgot to count the PM's I have sent praising our new accountant.

I have also sent PM's about our police. I am glad they are doing their job.

out

flip-flop · Post by **flip-flop** » Tue Jan 27, 2009 1:32 pm

Hey Sox, made you google it. That was the point.

I didn't bring the context into debate ... I just thought it was funny and that others might find it interesting. Maybe not.

You can keep at it if you'd like but I am done.

LysaC · Post by **LysaC** » Tue Jan 27, 2009 2:23 pm

To make things as balanced and fair as possible (ya know, like that INDEPENDENT media study released by the Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism found FOX News to be), I have to throw in my 2 cents and say that I totally back up Cypressgirl's retort:

War in Iraq..........BOTH parties believed there were WMD's and voted for the war.

Torture and Gitmo..........let's see what these murdering thugs do to us once they are released. ***LysaC adds on that prisoners who have been let go have already gone back to becoming major players in the terrorist movement

Economy............no doubt, Bush spent too much.

Media..........do you actually think they are non biased? If your answer is yes, I'm done taking you seriously. ***See above about independent study that was done post campaign.

LysaC · Post by **LysaC** » Tue Jan 27, 2009 2:33 pm

I would also like to add that I don't consider myself a conservative or a liberal, a republican or a democrat.

I don't like the idea of drinking either flavor of kool-aid.

I try to use my common sense and some business & political ethics I learned in college to weigh the facts and determine:

1. who's the most egotistical,
2. the most over confident,
3. the biggest liar/fact twister/ignorer of the actual question being asked,

...and then vote for the lesser of two evils.

jmq · Post by **jmq** » Tue Jan 27, 2009 3:02 pm

Lysa - you are not the only one who fears the release of those Gitmo thugs...

<object width="512" height="296"><param name="movie" value="http://www.hulu.com/embed/HSW-KMy7dQryZ ... ram><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.hulu.com/embed/HSW-KMy7dQryZ ... zA/198/585" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowFullScreen="true" width="512" height="296"></embed></object>

DELETED · Post by **DELETED** » Tue Jan 27, 2009 3:10 pm

DELETED

soxfan22 · Post by **soxfan22** » Tue Jan 27, 2009 3:10 pm

flip-flop wrote: Hey Sox, made you google it. That was the point.

I didn't bring the context into debate ... I just thought it was funny and that others might find it interesting. Maybe not.

You can keep at it if you'd like but I am done.

"made ya loook, made ya loook".

Good Lord.

Yeah, Flip, that's what I do when people mention things I know nothing about. I research them. I realize your opinion of me is that I am some non-intellectual rube who gets all his news from Drudge and Rush, but that's not the case.

You won, Flip. You won.

flip-flop · Post by **flip-flop** » Tue Jan 27, 2009 3:58 pm

Sorry, again, dang internet and forgetting to use smileys to convey it was INTENDED as a joke. I didn't even read as far as you. I thought the point that eventually every thread that goes on long enough will elicit a reference to Hitler was funny.

I should have elaborated. I am not trying to win with you. I know I can't.

(there I used the appropriate emoticon to express the intent there).

My bad.

usvi-on-line

Login or Register with your Facebook account

DELETED