 |
|
| Vegan (alt.food.vegan) This newsgroup exists to share ideas and issues of concern among vegans. We are always happy to share our recipes- perhaps especially with omnivores who are simply curious- or even better, accomodating a vegan guest for a meal! |
| Reply |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|||
|
|||
"usual suspect" > wrote in message
... > Scented Asshole wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>Skanky's irrational obsession with my diet has led to an > > > > interesting > > > >>>>>>>>>>exchange about how she's offended her hosts in the past. Let's > >>> > >>>discuss > >>> > >>> > >>>>>>>>>>one facet of this dialogue a little deeper. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>You snipped away my > >>>>>>>>>>>real concern > >>>>>>>>>>>about the other > >>>>>>>>>>>possibilities. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>What "other possibilities"? How many OTHER ways have you offended > >>> > >>>your > >>> > >>> > >>>>>>>>>>hosts? > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>From some of your posts over the last few days: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> If it's a stranger, > >>>>>>>>>> like a neighbourhood welcome > >>>>>>>>>> group to new neighbours, then you > >>>>>>>>>> can't be scared to say you are > >>>>>>>>>> veg*n. > >>>>>>>>>> -- Skanky > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>Nothing wrong with that > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>I know WHY you do it: so you can be a smarmy, sanctimonious bitch. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>Uh oh, > >>>>>> > >>>>>>You're wrong, Skanky. > >>>>> > >>>>>About what Snipper? > >>>> > >>>>So far, everything. > >>> > >>>How young are you? If > >>>you are still in your teens > >> > >>It would be VERY FUNNY if a teenager were correcting the rampant and > >>gross errors of a 43 year-old agoraphobic, drug-addled, clueless urbanite. > > > > I will patiently wait > > ...for a well-adjusted teenager to show you, a developmentally-arrested > 43 year-old, the way. Fishing... > >>>>>>>>>> I have no trouble > >>>>>>>>>> saying to people "You might want > >>>>>>>>>> to think twice about inviting me. > >>>>>>>>>> I'm hard to feed being vegetarian.". > >>>>>>>>>> -- Skanky > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>I've had great success with this. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>You're unbelievably narcissistic if you think that it's a success to > >>>>>>>>have the WHOLE PARTY have to adapt to your ****ing eating disorder. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>You're the only > >>>>>> > >>>>>>Address the issue, stupid. Why do you think it's a "success" that > >>>>>>everyone else has to cater to YOUR peculiar demands? > >>>>> > >>>>>The success is that people > >>>> > >>>>The other guests were forced to eat what YOU eat because you made a big > >>>>deal of your eating disorder in advance. That's NOT a success. It's a > >>>>****ing tragedy. > >>> > >>>You're the only one here > >> > >>Admit that your hosts altered their entire party so ONE insufferable > >>ninny (i.e., you) would feel comfortable. You're so self-absorbed that > >>you probably don't feel bad about it. Most people would. > > > > You make it sound > > I've repeated what you've written about the subject. You've just > confirmed, though, that you ARE so self-absorbed that you don't feel bad > that others put aside their ideas of a "good time" so you could have one. > > >>>>>I get enough invites to > >>>>>satisfy my needs > >>>> > >>>>You're agoraphobic. Your "needs" are satisfied by laying about your > >>>>apartment, dummy. > >>> > >>>I have my need for at-home-time > >> > >>It's not a need. Your agoraphobia isn't anything like a normal person's > >>need for private time. It's a mental illness. It's the effect of years > >>of drug abuse. > > > > Nope. > > Yes. > > > I don't go clubbing > > Because you're agoraphobic. Nope. There are non crowded clubs. I don't like booze. But since you think that only an agoraphobic would not go clubbing, I must assume that you DO go clubbing. Are you an alcoholic, just like you think I'm a drug addict? > >>>and my need for socializing out. > >> > >>We have two examples of how you "socialize" and neither is normal. > >>First, the example of the atmo group. You ditched them early by lying > >>that you had to meet someone else. > > > > No lie. > > Yes, it was a lie. Nope. > > Someone at home was waiting, > > Your cat. And a real live person, unlike your blowup doll who cooks for you. > > but I did leave earlier than > > I had to. > > Why would you leave someone waiting for you at your apartment in the > first place. And it's not a question because I know you lied to get out > of the restaurant. So do you. The only lie was in leaving a little bit earlier than I could have stretched it into. > > The place was crammed > > with people and extra chairs at > > tables etc. Yuk. > > Not everyone shares your agoraphobia. Agoraphobia might be the wrong term, since I have a dislike of crowds rather than a fear of them. > >>Second, you bragged that your eating disorder was such an issue to your > >>friends that they adopted it to make you feel comfortable. Would you do > >>the same for them? No. If you were able to compromise, they could've > >>enjoyed their normal food at that party instead of catering to YOUR > >>silly, irrational whims. > > > > We met at a restaurant > > That was in reference to the situation in which everyone else had to eat > veggie burgers because you made such a scene about not eating meat. Dummy. What scene, you insulting nutbar? > >>>Not as much as some people, > >> > >>Not as much as normal people. You're a shut-in, home-bound, agoraphobic, > >>carless pot-head. Add it all up and your time for socializing is nil. > > > > You're > > You're a shut-in, home-bound, agoraphobic, carless pot-head. Add it all > up and your time for socializing is nil. Fishing and snipping. Snipper boy, are you Rudy's pretend son? > >>>>>>>>>> They don't mind > >>>>>>>>>> talking about it either, so if they are > >>>>>>>>>> having a dinner where the only > >>>>>>>>>> vegan item is side of green peas, > >>>>>>>>>> one can eat before the get-together > >>>>>>>>>> or bring something. > >>>>>>>>>> -- Skanky > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>True friends let you know. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>True friends needn't ask ahead of time so they can decide if they'll > >>> > >>>eat > >>> > >>> > >>>>>>>>before the party or bring their own food. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>Why not? > >>>>>> > >>>>>>It's offensive to make such demands on your host, or to shun your > > > > host's > > > >>>>>>generosity in favor of feeding yourself in some fashion as you > > > > describe. > > > >>>>>Nonsense. > >>>> > >>>>It IS offensive. Why should they throw a party or invite *you* if you're > >>>>not going to gratefully and graciously accept their kindness? > >>> > >>>I'll bet > >> > >>Stop dodging and answer the ****ing question. Why should they throw a > >>party or invite *you* if you're not going to gratefully and graciously > >>accept their kindness? > > > > Only you > > Stop dodging and answer the ****ing question. Why should they throw a > party or invite *you* if you're not going to gratefully and graciously > accept their kindness? Kindness like your religious view? I don't hang out with anyone who would be offended religiously by my vegetarianism. > >>>>>>>>>If the meal is too meat based > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>You shouldn't be asked to attend. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>If it was your's > >>>>>> > >>>>>>You'll never be invited to my home, Skanky. > >>>>> > >>>>>I would never attend > >>>> > >>>>You'll never be invited to my home, Skanky. > >>> > >>>You're just > >> > >>You'll never be invited to my home, Skanky. > > > > Next time I pass through or visit > > Texas, > > You won't "pass through" or visit Texas, you dishonest skag. I have before. I may again. > >>>>>>>>>there is also the option of > >>>>>>>>>showing up to the party just > >>>>>>>>>in time for desert and hanging > >>>>>>>>>out. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>Dessert. A desert is a barren place, like inside your head. I'd be > >>>>>>>>insulted if my guests only showed up at the end of the party like > > > > you > > > >>>>>>>>do. Your friends show a lot more class and tact than you do by not > >>>>>>>>telling you what a disrespectful asshole you are. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>But I also bet some have confided what others have said behind your > >>> > >>>back. > >>> > >>> > >>>>>No, > >>>> > >>>>Yes. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Other times they > >>>>>>>>>> don't get offended if you bring your > >>>>>>>>>> own, like veg patties to a bbq. > >>>>>>>>>> -- Skanky > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>I've never offended anyone > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>Liar. You clearly have. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>Once. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>That you know of. > >>>>> > >>>>>It's very obvious if this happens. > >>>> > >>>>Not to you. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>>>>>by doing this. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>You don't have eyes in the back of your head, else you'd be able to > >>> > >>>see > >>> > >>> > >>>>>>>>how others respond to your loony antics. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>It's not > >>>>>> > >>>>>>You don't have eyes in the back of your head, dummy. > >>>>> > >>>>>You need to assume/hope that I > >>>>>am the subject of derision. > >>>> > >>>>No, I don't. You already are. > >>> > >>>I don't care > >> > >>Yes, you do. > > > > Nope, > > Yes. You make 99% of the insults in these 'conversations' if I can even call them that. You have a serious pathological disorder. > >>>You are not the sort of person I would > >>>hang out with in real life. > >> > >>You're agoraphobic. It's not like you hang out with people in real life. > > > > I hang out a lot. > > By yourself. > > > My friends hang > > out more at my place than me at > > theirs, > > Because you're a shut-in, home-bound, agoraphobic, carless pot-head. You're getting tiring, as per usual (pun intended). > > but it just evolved that way > > Evolved? No. You're a shut-in, home-bound, agoraphobic, carless pot-head. All that fishing and you never catch any. > > and suits me just fine. > > Because you're a shut-in, home-bound, agoraphobic, carless pot-head. > > >>>>>>>>>Then again, maybe > >>>>>>>>>Toronto is just a little more > >>>>>>>>>laid back > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>Your little clicqe may be accepting of you, but you're clearly on > > > > the > > > >>>>>>>>kook fringe even in Toronto. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>No. There are lots of vegetarians. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>So what. There are lots of vegetarians here. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>and accepting of > >>>>>>>>>other's differences > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>Okay, you ****ing asshole, let's deal with this bullshit once and > > > > for > > > >>>>>>>>all. I live in a minority-majority state -- one of four in the > > > > nation > > > >>>>>>>>where non-white populations exceed the white population. I live in a > >>>>>>>>city which is one of the most diverse and integrated in the country. > >>> > >>>In > >>> > >>> > >>>>>>>>2003, the last year for which I can find hate crimes statistics for > >>>>>>>>Texas, there were 294 reported incidents; our population is over 22 > >>>>>>>>million. Comparatively speaking, the LIBERAL states of New Jersey > > > > had > > > >>>>>>>>594 reported hate crimes (population just over 8.6 million), New > > > > York > > > >>>>>>>>had 602 reported hate crimes (population of about 19 million), and > >>>>>>>>Massachusetts had 403 reported hate crimes (population 5.2 million). > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050811/D8BTJN0O0.html > >>>>>>>>http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/03hc.pdf > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>I don't care > >>>>>> > >>>>>>That's why you're 43 and still sponging off your parents. > >>>>> > >>>>>Maybe you should > >>>> > >>>>YOU should take care of yourself, Skanky, and let your old parents enjoy > >>>>retirement. > >>> > >>>You just > >> > >>Do they hire someone to keep an eye on you when they go out of town, or > >>does your dependence interfere with any plan to get out of town for a > >>while? > > > > Your > > They don't go, do they. They have to stay around to make sure their 43 > year-old "baby" is okay. Your fishing is getting more and more bizarre. What's next? Only time will tell, I guess. > >>>>>>>>The states you would call "hard to the right" treat others more > >>>>>>>>respectfully, no matter how weird others are. So don't give me any > >>> > >>>more > >>> > >>> > >>>>>>>>of your baseless sterotyping bullshit about "acceptance." If you do, > >>>>>>>>I'll get out your own crime reports and see how well Ontario matches > >>> > >>>up > >>> > >>> > >>>>>>>>in terms of hate crimes. Like this: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>Toronto's Hate Crime Unit reported a 22% rise of hate > >>>>>>>>crimes in Metropolitan Toronto between 1997 and 1998, up to 228 > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>from 187. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>http://www.pch.gc.ca/progs/multi/evidence/series4_e.cfm > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>That's only ONE ****ing city with a metropolitan population a > > > > quarter > > > >>>>>>>>the size of my state. Why does your "accepting" city have nearly > >>>>>>>>four-times as many hate crimes as my entire state, bitch?! > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>That's funny. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>I don't think it's funny at all that your city is filled with so much > >>>>>>hatred and violence for "different" people. Why is your hate crimes > > > > rate > > > >>>>>>FOUR TIMES higher than my state's? > >>>>> > >>>>>In the same year? In the same > >>>>>other years too? Why are we on > >>>>>the subject of hate crimes rather > >>>>>than just crimes in general? > >>>> > >>>>You brought up the issue of tolerance and acceptance. As usual, your > >>>>points come back to bite your pimply, sagging old ass. > >>> > >>>Stop fantasizing about my ass. > >> > >>I never started, so you stop flattering yourself. > > > > You're picturing it > > No, describing it. I've only seen your cankles. That was enough. All you saw was a picture of fallen socks. Where's some skin? > >>>>>>>>>than a > >>>>>>>>>hard to the right state like > >>>>>>>>>Texas is. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>Hardly to the right. I live in the only county which has voted for > > > > the > > > >>>>>>>>Democratic presidential candidate in every election since > >>>>>>>>Reconstruction. As a whole, this state is about as far to the right > > > > as > > > >>>>>>>>the rest of the nation -- just right of center. Your stereotypes and > >>>>>>>>caricatures are way off base. See above. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>And yet > >>>>>> > >>>>>>You live in a city with an increasing number of hate crimes, and where > >>>>>>the number of officers working hate crimes is doubling because of the > >>>>>>serverity of the problem (which has doubled in the last decade). > >>>>>> > >>>>>>Noting that hate crimes in Ontario have increased by 93 per cent > >>>>>>since 1996, Kwinter said the funding will ensure that police > >>>>>>stay one step ahead of hatemongers and racists. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>Last winter, however, the unit’s funding appeared in jeopardy. A > >>>>>>spokesperson for Kwinter’s ministry informed the unit its > >>>>>>funding would be reduced, but the minister quickly reversed that > >>>>>>decision. However, for 10 weeks beginning in late March, the > >>>>>>unit’s lone staffer, Abbee Corb, was not paid. Funding resumed > >>>>>>on June 15. > >>>>>>http://www.cjnews.com/viewarticle.asp?id=7162 > >>>>>> > >>>>>>Why don't you people take violence more seriously up there? And why do > >>>>>>you accuse others of intolerance when your city has a hate crimes rate > >>>>>>four-times higher? > >>>>> > >>>>>We were talking about general > >>>>>acceptance of vegetarianism > >>>> > >>>>You made a very blanket statement (stereotype) about the state of Texas > >>>>with regard to acceptance and tolerance. I showed you that your city -- > >>>>the hate crimes capital of North America -- is far less tolerant and > >>>>accepting of "different" people in the aggregate. > >>> > >>>I have only seen the other side > >>>of Toronto. > >> > >>Further evidence of your being a shut-in, home-bound, agoraphobic, > >>carless pothead. > > > > I smell something fishy. > > Try a douche sometime, bitch. Or at least change your panties. Is that what fishy reminds you of?? LOL maybe you're not a tightass virgin afterall. Maybe you had sex with a very dirty (and cheap) hooker. > >>>>>>>>>>It sounds like you have plenty of experience with all of the above > >>>>>>>>>>"possibilities," you carless orthorexic OFFENSIVE asshole. Tell us > >>> > >>>how > >>> > >>> > >>>>>>>>>>many other ways you've offended gracious hosts, and please explain > >>> > >>>how > >>> > >>> > >>>>>>>>>>your serial offenses to other humans make you a better person than > >>>>> > >>>>>you'd > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>be if you'd eat what they graciously offer. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>I have the skill > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>You have no marketable skills, loser. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>You're more skilled > >>>>>> > >>>>>>Yes, but that's comparing apples to oranges. You're comparable to a > >>>>>>slug, or a parasite. > >>>>> > >>>>>So > >>>> > >>>>You're unskilled. That's why you know so much about Ontario's welfare > >>>>system. > >>> > >>>Stop > >> > >>No. You're unskilled. That's why you know so much about Ontario's > >>welfare system, isn't it. > > > > That there is so much you don't know. > > I've never been on welfare. I don't care to know what that's like. And I should care that you don't care, why? And I should believe you, why? -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"usual suspect" > wrote in message
... > Skanky wrote: > >>>>>Anyway just to add something reasonable on this topic.... My guess on > >>>>>reported crimes being higher in Toronto is that generally the various > >>>>>cultures are highly intermingled in Toronto- and several other major > >>>>>Canadian cities. > >>>> > >>>>Perhaps you should get out of Canada sometime and see that our > >>>>populations are a lot more alike than you seem to think. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>Incidents may therefore be more common than in an > >>>>>American city where cultures will tend to conglomerate more with their > >>>>>own > >>>> > >>>>Tend to conglomerate with their own where? Does Vancouver not have a > >>>>Chinatown just like nearly every other large city in North America? Does > >>>>Skanky not live near "Greektown" on Danforth Avenue in Toronto? > >>> > >>> > >>>Skanky lived there in 2003. Does she now? > >> > >>Stop referring to yourself in third-person, dummy. You've moved back in > >>with your parents. > > > > Did she or didn't she, > > Stop referring to yourself in third-person, dummy. You've moved back in > with your parents. Stop fishing, you moron. You know nothing about with whom I live. -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
> And, regarding remaining close to your ex-wife:
> > That's dumb. The odds are stacked against your new relationship > as long as the old ball and chain is around. You feel wives are a ball and chain? You feel one should not remain friends with exes? No wonder you're so screwed up. -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"usual suspect" > wrote in message
... > Skanky wrote: > >>Further evidence of your being a shut-in, home-bound, agoraphobic, > >>carless pothead. > > > > I smell something fishy. > > Go wash your cooch. It's your blowup doll. You're supposed to rinse them out every once in a while, you know. -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
C. James Strutz wrote: > "usual suspect" > wrote in message > ... > > See James Strut wrote: > > >> Why do you try to hurt people? > > > > I love it when we get under your skin. > > See James Strut, 31 Aug 05 > > No, the difference is that you truely try to hurt people. You are evil. >From his contribution to this thread it is obvious that hurting people is indeed Usual Suspect's objective. For his own sake, I hope he learns to be compassioniate before he has to leave this world. May I suggest that you stop helping him gratify his sadistic impulses? |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Derek" > wrote in message ... > On Fri, 2 Sep 2005 20:16:22 -0400, "C. James Strutz" > > wrote: >>"usual suspect" > wrote in message >>news  > [..] >>> No, Wendy did. That's why she tried to diagnose him with Asperger's. >> >>More attacks... >> >>Let me diffuse the whole issue now. Wendy and I have not been together >>since >>late May. We had been together for four years prior to that. The basic >>problem between us was that Wendy pressed hard in the last year or so to >>make a future together and I couldn't commit to that. I'm just not ready >>at >>this time in my life. >> >>Wendy, the psychologist, forever tried to explain my ambivalence and from >>that emerged the Asperger theory. She discussed with one of her long time >>colleagues and friend, who is also a psychologist, the possibility that I >>could be at the high functioning end of the autism spectrum. She agreed >>that >>it was possible. The primary impetus for this theory is my inclination >>towards structure and resistance to change. I have a couple of other >>autistic attributes according to the DMV IV manual. I ultimately >>volunteered >>for a study sponsored by UPMC's autism research branch. They tested me and >>determined that I am not on the spectrum. >> >>Now it's just me and my four cats. I've been taking some of my newly >>regained time to think about things. Wendy is an extremely intelligent and >>intense person who sometimes controls people around her without realizing >>it. She's tough to be in a relationship with. Despite that, we were a good >>match together in a lot of ways. She always said we completed each other's >>sentences. Though I miss immensely her I also feel better without all the >>stress from that relationship. It was unbelievable. >> >>There you have it - everything you ever wanted to know about Wendy and me. >>Hope it makes you better... > > You MUST be a nut if you in fact hooked up with > a psychologist. ;-) Hope you and your cats're doing > well C. James. Thanks, we are doing well... |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
C. James Putz wrote:
> You don't know the characters, relationships, or the circumstances involved. First, I know a lot more about women than you do. I know enough about them to understand that new girlfriends don't want to know about your old ones even if they ask lots of questions about them. I know enough about them to know that baggage from the past is best left in the past; you have to break with your past girlfriend (wife, soulmate, whatever) if you want a future with someone else. The more contact you have with a past flame, the less likely your new relationship will work out. Second, I know more about the dynamics of relationships than you do. That much is apparent from your losing Kristen to another man and losing Wendy to another woman (i.e., Kristen). Third, you've shared enough of the circumstances in public that I can make an informed estimate of what happened and, more importantly, *why*; I *do* understand the circumstances. > Your intention is to twist things around to screw with me. I tried to help you out two years ago when you mentioned you still had so much contact with Kristen. That wasn't screwing around with you. I gave you some very good advice. You didn't listen to me. > It's useless to > participate any further in this discussion. Only because you won't listen to sound advice. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Scented Asshole wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>And I've already responded by saying I'd much rather put aside my >>>>>>>>>>preferences for ONE meal than to offend someone. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>"Much rather". Sounds like >>>>>>>>>you're not sure. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>"Much rather" is very clear, dumb ass. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Saying that you would much rather >>>>>>>sounds like >>>>>> >>>>>>It means I've established my priorities as far as your hypothetical >>>>>>scenarios go. >>>>> >>>>>Hypothetical? >>>> >>>>Your hypothetical scenario of a gracious host loading my plate with a >>>>huge steak and small potato, which you then devolved into other >>>>scenarios. Remember, dumb ass? >>> >>>Yes, very hypothetical, >> >>I've yet to have a host slap a "huge steak and tiny potato" on my plate, >>per your inane question which you repeatedly insisted I answer. > > But certainly you must have I've yet to have a host slap a "huge steak and tiny potato" on my plate, per your inane question which you repeatedly insisted I answer. >>>>>>>>>Wow, you accuse vegans of >>>>>>>>>having religious views on food, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>They do. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Then why are you the only the second >>>>>>>person I've seen post about feeling >>>>>>>religious about diet >>>>>> >>>>>>I don't "feel religious about diet." >>>>> >>>>>http://tinyurl.com/8sacw >>>>>Yes you do. >>>> >>>>No, I don't. >>> >>>Yes >> >>No. > > Yes No. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Skanky Nutball wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>True friends needn't ask ahead of time so they can decide if >>> >>>they'll >>> >>> >>>>>>>eat >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>before the party or bring their own food. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>True friends are sympathetic to one's eating preferences. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>True friends are honest if your preferences go overboard. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>You automatically assume that vegans go "overboard" >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Veganism is already an extreme, so it's reasonable to point out >>> >>>vegans' >>> >>> >>>>>>>>extremism when it manifests itself in irrational and offensive >>> >>>actions. >>> >>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>It's far from reality. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Liar. Have you read through vegan literature or websites lately to > > see > >>>>>>>>how "overboard" they go in imposing their wills upon others? Not > > only > >>>in >>> >>> >>>>>>>>terms of diet, Putz, but with respect to medicine, apparel, and so > > on. > >>>>>>>>Lesley this morning pasted some diatribe taking credit for shutting >>> >>>down >>> >>> >>>>>>>>a farm that provided guinea pigs for medical research. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>If the meal is too meat based >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>You shouldn't be asked to attend. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>You mean 'invited'. An invitation is not a request. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>1. The act of inviting. >>>>>>>>>>2. A spoken or written *REQUEST* for someone's presence or >>>>>>>>>>participation. >>>>>>>>>>3. An allurement, enticement, or attraction. >>>>>>>>>>http://www.thefreedictionary.com/invitation >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>'Invitation' is still a more appropriate word. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>An invitation IS a request. Dummy. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>My emphasis. Are you a dummy or just a liar? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>You don't give many alternatives, do you? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>One more then: Both. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>Let's talk about you and Wendy. Are you still seeing her > > personally > >>>or >>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>just professionally for your "issues" now? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Why are you trying to change the subject again? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>You're the one who's taken this thread away from discussing Skanky's >>>>>>>>offenses, Putz. So let's discuss yours. Are you still seeing Wendy >>>>>>>>personally or just professionally for your "issues"? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>You take offence >>>>>> >>>>>>No, Wendy did. That's why she tried to diagnose him with Asperger's. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>You are jealous >>>> >>>>No. >>> >>> >>>Yes. >> >>No. > > Yes No. >>>It was proven >> >>No, it wasn't. Dreck's incessant shit-stirring isn't "proof" of >>anything, except that he lacks character. > > It was No, it was not. >>>>>of anyone who has >>>>>a real girlfriend >>>> >>>>Jim doesn't have a real girlfriend. She dumped him. >>> >>>If that's true, >> >>It is. >> >> >>>then at least he was >>>still 'getting some' >> >>The only pussy he's had eats Fancy Feast. > > He gets more than you No, he doesn't. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Skanky wrote:
>>>>>>>Anyway just to add something reasonable on this topic.... My guess on >>>>>>>reported crimes being higher in Toronto is that generally the various >>>>>>>cultures are highly intermingled in Toronto- and several other major >>>>>>>Canadian cities. >>>>>> >>>>>>Perhaps you should get out of Canada sometime and see that our >>>>>>populations are a lot more alike than you seem to think. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>Incidents may therefore be more common than in an >>>>>>>American city where cultures will tend to conglomerate more with > > their > >>>>>>>own >>>>>> >>>>>>Tend to conglomerate with their own where? Does Vancouver not have a >>>>>>Chinatown just like nearly every other large city in North America? > > Does > >>>>>>Skanky not live near "Greektown" on Danforth Avenue in Toronto? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Skanky lived there in 2003. Does she now? >>>> >>>>Stop referring to yourself in third-person, dummy. You've moved back in >>>>with your parents. >>> >>>Did she or didn't she, >> >>Stop referring to yourself in third-person, dummy. You've moved back in >>with your parents. > > Stop fishing, It isn't fishing. Was Mommy waiting up for you back at the apartment when you met with the atmo people? |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Scented Asshole wrote:
>>>>>How young are you? If >>>>>you are still in your teens >>>> >>>>It would be VERY FUNNY if a teenager were correcting the rampant and >>>>gross errors of a 43 year-old agoraphobic, drug-addled, clueless > > urbanite. > >>>I will patiently wait >> >>...for a well-adjusted teenager to show you, a developmentally-arrested >>43 year-old, the way. > > Fishing... Not fishing. You've already been caught. >>>>Admit that your hosts altered their entire party so ONE insufferable >>>>ninny (i.e., you) would feel comfortable. You're so self-absorbed that >>>>you probably don't feel bad about it. Most people would. >>> >>>You make it sound >> >>I've repeated what you've written about the subject. You've just >>confirmed, though, that you ARE so self-absorbed that you don't feel bad >>that others put aside their ideas of a "good time" so you could have one. Did that family ever invite you over for another meal? >>>>>>>I get enough invites to >>>>>>>satisfy my needs >>>>>> >>>>>>You're agoraphobic. Your "needs" are satisfied by laying about your >>>>>>apartment, dummy. >>>>> >>>>>I have my need for at-home-time >>>> >>>>It's not a need. Your agoraphobia isn't anything like a normal person's >>>>need for private time. It's a mental illness. It's the effect of years >>>>of drug abuse. >>> >>>Nope. >> >>Yes. >> >> >>>I don't go clubbing >> >>Because you're agoraphobic. > > Nope. There are non crowded clubs. > I don't like booze. But since you > think that only an agoraphobic would > not go clubbing, Strawman. > I must assume that > you DO go clubbing. Non sequitur. > Are you an > alcoholic, just like you think I'm a > drug addict? Non sequitur. One needn't drink to go to clubs, or go to clubs to drink. FWIW, I seldom ever drink. I'm usually the designated driver for my friends who do. >>>>>and my need for socializing out. >>>> >>>>We have two examples of how you "socialize" and neither is normal. >>>>First, the example of the atmo group. You ditched them early by lying >>>>that you had to meet someone else. >>> >>>No lie. >> >>Yes, it was a lie. > > Nope. Yes. >>>Someone at home was waiting, >> >>Your cat. > > And a real live person, Your mommy. >>>but I did leave earlier than >>>I had to. >> >>Why would you leave someone waiting for you at your apartment in the >>first place. And it's not a question because I know you lied to get out >>of the restaurant. So do you. > > The only lie was in leaving a little > bit earlier than I could have > stretched it into. You admit you lie, but you're trying to diminish *how much* you lied. The fact remains that you willfully deceived others to get out of a situation. There was nobody waiting for you. Except your cat, or mommy. >>>The place was crammed >>>with people and extra chairs at >>>tables etc. Yuk. >> >>Not everyone shares your agoraphobia. > > Agoraphobia might be the wrong > term, since I have a dislike of > crowds rather than a fear of them. It's fear. >>>>Second, you bragged that your eating disorder was such an issue to your >>>>friends that they adopted it to make you feel comfortable. Would you do >>>>the same for them? No. If you were able to compromise, they could've >>>>enjoyed their normal food at that party instead of catering to YOUR >>>>silly, irrational whims. >>> >>>We met at a restaurant >> >>That was in reference to the situation in which everyone else had to eat >>veggie burgers because you made such a scene about not eating meat. Dummy. > > What scene, The one that caused a family to eat veggie burgers instead of real meat so you'd "fit in." The only problem is they had to "fit in" with you. >>>>>Not as much as some people, >>>> >>>>Not as much as normal people. You're a shut-in, home-bound, agoraphobic, >>>>carless pot-head. Add it all up and your time for socializing is nil. >>> >>>You're >> >>You're a shut-in, home-bound, agoraphobic, carless pot-head. Add it all >>up and your time for socializing is nil. > > Fishing No, it's established. >>>>>>>>>>>>They don't mind >>>>>>>>>>>>talking about it either, so if they are >>>>>>>>>>>>having a dinner where the only >>>>>>>>>>>>vegan item is side of green peas, >>>>>>>>>>>>one can eat before the get-together >>>>>>>>>>>>or bring something. >>>>>>>>>>>>-- Skanky >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>True friends let you know. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>True friends needn't ask ahead of time so they can decide if > > they'll > >>>>>eat >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>before the party or bring their own food. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Why not? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>It's offensive to make such demands on your host, or to shun your >>> >>>host's >>> >>> >>>>>>>>generosity in favor of feeding yourself in some fashion as you >>> >>>describe. >>> >>> >>>>>>>Nonsense. >>>>>> >>>>>>It IS offensive. Why should they throw a party or invite *you* if > > you're > >>>>>>not going to gratefully and graciously accept their kindness? >>>>> >>>>>I'll bet >>>> >>>>Stop dodging and answer the ****ing question. Why should they throw a >>>>party or invite *you* if you're not going to gratefully and graciously >>>>accept their kindness? >>> >>>Only you >> >>Stop dodging and answer the ****ing question. Why should they throw a >>party or invite *you* if you're not going to gratefully and graciously >>accept their kindness? > > Kindness Yes, something quite foreign to self-absorbed misanthropic veg-ns like you. >>>>>>>>>>>If the meal is too meat based >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>You shouldn't be asked to attend. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>If it was your's >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>You'll never be invited to my home, Skanky. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>I would never attend >>>>>> >>>>>>You'll never be invited to my home, Skanky. >>>>> >>>>>You're just >>>> >>>>You'll never be invited to my home, Skanky. >>> >>>Next time I pass through or visit >>>Texas, >> >>You won't "pass through" or visit Texas, you dishonest skag. > > I have before. Liar. > I may again. Liar. >>>>>>>>>>>there is also the option of >>>>>>>>>>>showing up to the party just >>>>>>>>>>>in time for desert and hanging >>>>>>>>>>>out. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>Dessert. A desert is a barren place, like inside your head. I'd be >>>>>>>>>>insulted if my guests only showed up at the end of the party like >>> >>>you >>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>do. Your friends show a lot more class and tact than you do by not >>>>>>>>>>telling you what a disrespectful asshole you are. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>But I also bet some have confided what others have said behind your >>>>> >>>>>back. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>No, >>>>>> >>>>>>Yes. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>Other times they >>>>>>>>>>>>don't get offended if you bring your >>>>>>>>>>>>own, like veg patties to a bbq. >>>>>>>>>>>>-- Skanky >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>I've never offended anyone >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>Liar. You clearly have. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Once. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>That you know of. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>It's very obvious if this happens. >>>>>> >>>>>>Not to you. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>by doing this. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>You don't have eyes in the back of your head, else you'd be able > > to > >>>>>see >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>how others respond to your loony antics. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>It's not >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>You don't have eyes in the back of your head, dummy. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>You need to assume/hope that I >>>>>>>am the subject of derision. >>>>>> >>>>>>No, I don't. You already are. >>>>> >>>>>I don't care >>>> >>>>Yes, you do. >>> >>>Nope, >> >>Yes. > > You make 99% of the insults Exaggeration. Or are you not counting your own? >>>>>You are not the sort of person I would >>>>>hang out with in real life. >>>> >>>>You're agoraphobic. It's not like you hang out with people in real life. >>> >>>I hang out a lot. >> >>By yourself. >> >> >>>My friends hang >>>out more at my place than me at >>>theirs, >> >>Because you're a shut-in, home-bound, agoraphobic, carless pot-head. > > You're getting No, I already get it. You're a 43 year-old loser who tokes and passively hopes "friends" show up. >>>but it just evolved that way >> >>Evolved? No. You're a shut-in, home-bound, agoraphobic, carless pot-head. > > All that fishing It's all established by your own posts. >>>and suits me just fine. >> >>Because you're a shut-in, home-bound, agoraphobic, carless pot-head. >> >> >>>>>>>>>>>Then again, maybe >>>>>>>>>>>Toronto is just a little more >>>>>>>>>>>laid back >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>Your little clicqe may be accepting of you, but you're clearly on >>> >>>the >>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>kook fringe even in Toronto. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>No. There are lots of vegetarians. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>So what. There are lots of vegetarians here. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>and accepting of >>>>>>>>>>>other's differences >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>Okay, you ****ing asshole, let's deal with this bullshit once and >>> >>>for >>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>all. I live in a minority-majority state -- one of four in the >>> >>>nation >>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>where non-white populations exceed the white population. I live in > > a > >>>>>>>>>>city which is one of the most diverse and integrated in the > > country. > >>>>>In >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>2003, the last year for which I can find hate crimes statistics > > for > >>>>>>>>>>Texas, there were 294 reported incidents; our population is over > > 22 > >>>>>>>>>>million. Comparatively speaking, the LIBERAL states of New Jersey >>> >>>had >>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>594 reported hate crimes (population just over 8.6 million), New >>> >>>York >>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>had 602 reported hate crimes (population of about 19 million), and >>>>>>>>>>Massachusetts had 403 reported hate crimes (population 5.2 > > million). > >>>>>>>>>>http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050811/D8BTJN0O0.html >>>>>>>>>>http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/03hc.pdf >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>I don't care >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>That's why you're 43 and still sponging off your parents. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Maybe you should >>>>>> >>>>>>YOU should take care of yourself, Skanky, and let your old parents > > enjoy > >>>>>>retirement. >>>>> >>>>>You just >>>> >>>>Do they hire someone to keep an eye on you when they go out of town, or >>>>does your dependence interfere with any plan to get out of town for a >>>>while? >>> >>>Your >> >>They don't go, do they. They have to stay around to make sure their 43 >>year-old "baby" is okay. > > Your fishing It's established. >>>>>>>>>>The states you would call "hard to the right" treat others more >>>>>>>>>>respectfully, no matter how weird others are. So don't give me any >>>>> >>>>>more >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>of your baseless sterotyping bullshit about "acceptance." If you > > do, > >>>>>>>>>>I'll get out your own crime reports and see how well Ontario > > matches > >>>>>up >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>in terms of hate crimes. Like this: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>Toronto's Hate Crime Unit reported a 22% rise of hate >>>>>>>>>>crimes in Metropolitan Toronto between 1997 and 1998, up to 228 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>from 187. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>http://www.pch.gc.ca/progs/multi/evidence/series4_e.cfm >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>That's only ONE ****ing city with a metropolitan population a >>> >>>quarter >>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>the size of my state. Why does your "accepting" city have nearly >>>>>>>>>>four-times as many hate crimes as my entire state, bitch?! >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>That's funny. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>I don't think it's funny at all that your city is filled with so > > much > >>>>>>>>hatred and violence for "different" people. Why is your hate crimes >>> >>>rate >>> >>> >>>>>>>>FOUR TIMES higher than my state's? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>In the same year? In the same >>>>>>>other years too? Why are we on >>>>>>>the subject of hate crimes rather >>>>>>>than just crimes in general? >>>>>> >>>>>>You brought up the issue of tolerance and acceptance. As usual, your >>>>>>points come back to bite your pimply, sagging old ass. >>>>> >>>>>Stop fantasizing about my ass. >>>> >>>>I never started, so you stop flattering yourself. >>> >>>You're picturing it >> >>No, describing it. I've only seen your cankles. That was enough. > > All you saw was a picture of > fallen socks. No, cankles. >>>>>>>>>>>than a >>>>>>>>>>>hard to the right state like >>>>>>>>>>>Texas is. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>Hardly to the right. I live in the only county which has voted for >>> >>>the >>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>Democratic presidential candidate in every election since >>>>>>>>>>Reconstruction. As a whole, this state is about as far to the > > right > >>>as >>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>the rest of the nation -- just right of center. Your stereotypes > > and > >>>>>>>>>>caricatures are way off base. See above. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>And yet >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>You live in a city with an increasing number of hate crimes, and > > where > >>>>>>>>the number of officers working hate crimes is doubling because of > > the > >>>>>>>>serverity of the problem (which has doubled in the last decade). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Noting that hate crimes in Ontario have increased by 93 per cent >>>>>>>>since 1996, Kwinter said the funding will ensure that police >>>>>>>>stay one step ahead of hatemongers and racists. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Last winter, however, the unit’s funding appeared in jeopardy. A >>>>>>>>spokesperson for Kwinter’s ministry informed the unit its >>>>>>>>funding would be reduced, but the minister quickly reversed that >>>>>>>>decision. However, for 10 weeks beginning in late March, the >>>>>>>>unit’s lone staffer, Abbee Corb, was not paid. Funding resumed >>>>>>>>on June 15. >>>>>>>>http://www.cjnews.com/viewarticle.asp?id=7162 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Why don't you people take violence more seriously up there? And why > > do > >>>>>>>>you accuse others of intolerance when your city has a hate crimes > > rate > >>>>>>>>four-times higher? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>We were talking about general >>>>>>>acceptance of vegetarianism >>>>>> >>>>>>You made a very blanket statement (stereotype) about the state of > > Texas > >>>>>>with regard to acceptance and tolerance. I showed you that your > > city -- > >>>>>>the hate crimes capital of North America -- is far less tolerant and >>>>>>accepting of "different" people in the aggregate. >>>>> >>>>>I have only seen the other side >>>>>of Toronto. >>>> >>>>Further evidence of your being a shut-in, home-bound, agoraphobic, >>>>carless pothead. >>> >>>I smell something fishy. >> >>Try a douche sometime, bitch. Or at least change your panties. > > Is that Yes. Clean your cooch. >>>>>>>>>>>>It sounds like you have plenty of experience with all of the > > above > >>>>>>>>>>>>"possibilities," you carless orthorexic OFFENSIVE asshole. Tell > > us > >>>>>how >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>many other ways you've offended gracious hosts, and please > > explain > >>>>>how >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>your serial offenses to other humans make you a better person > > than > >>>>>>>you'd >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>be if you'd eat what they graciously offer. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>I have the skill >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>You have no marketable skills, loser. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>You're more skilled >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Yes, but that's comparing apples to oranges. You're comparable to a >>>>>>>>slug, or a parasite. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>So >>>>>> >>>>>>You're unskilled. That's why you know so much about Ontario's welfare >>>>>>system. >>>>> >>>>>Stop >>>> >>>>No. You're unskilled. That's why you know so much about Ontario's >>>>welfare system, isn't it. >>> >>>That there is so much you don't know. >> >>I've never been on welfare. I don't care to know what that's like. > > And I should care You should care enough about yourself that you lessen your dependence on your aged parents. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Scented Retard wrote:
>>And, regarding remaining close to your ex-wife: >> >>That's dumb. The odds are stacked against your new relationship >>as long as the old ball and chain is around. > > You feel wives are a ball and chain? *Ex*-wives are. So are ex-girlfriends. > You feel one should not remain > friends with exes? What purpose does it serve once you know it's an impediment to the success of a new relationship? In the case of Jim and Wendy, Wendy's complaints weren't born of insecurity -- they were because Jim was stuck in his comfortable old rut. Jim chose a close friendship with his ex-wife over committing to new life with someone else. That's certainly his right, but it's very unhealthy for establishing any future relationship. It's also unhealthy for him. Kristen got on with her life. Wendy's getting on with hers. Jim is just... stuck. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Skanky wrote:
>>>>Further evidence of your being a shut-in, home-bound, agoraphobic, >>>>carless pothead. >>> >>>I smell something fishy. >> >>Go wash your cooch. > > It's filthy. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Tue, 6 Sep 2005 07:45:10 -0400, "C. James Strutz" > wrote:
> >"Derek" > wrote in message .. . >> On Fri, 2 Sep 2005 20:16:22 -0400, "C. James Strutz" > >> wrote: >>>"usual suspect" > wrote in message >>>news >> [..] >>>> No, Wendy did. That's why she tried to diagnose him with Asperger's. >>> >>>More attacks... >>> >>>Let me diffuse the whole issue now. Wendy and I have not been together >>>since >>>late May. We had been together for four years prior to that. The basic >>>problem between us was that Wendy pressed hard in the last year or so to >>>make a future together and I couldn't commit to that. I'm just not ready >>>at >>>this time in my life. >>> >>>Wendy, the psychologist, forever tried to explain my ambivalence and from >>>that emerged the Asperger theory. She discussed with one of her long time >>>colleagues and friend, who is also a psychologist, the possibility that I >>>could be at the high functioning end of the autism spectrum. She agreed >>>that >>>it was possible. The primary impetus for this theory is my inclination >>>towards structure and resistance to change. I have a couple of other >>>autistic attributes according to the DMV IV manual. I ultimately >>>volunteered >>>for a study sponsored by UPMC's autism research branch. They tested me and >>>determined that I am not on the spectrum. >>> >>>Now it's just me and my four cats. I've been taking some of my newly >>>regained time to think about things. Wendy is an extremely intelligent and >>>intense person who sometimes controls people around her without realizing >>>it. She's tough to be in a relationship with. Despite that, we were a good >>>match together in a lot of ways. She always said we completed each other's >>>sentences. Though I miss immensely her I also feel better without all the >>>stress from that relationship. It was unbelievable. >>> >>>There you have it - everything you ever wanted to know about Wendy and me. >>>Hope it makes you better... >> >> You MUST be a nut if you in fact hooked up with >> a psychologist. ;-) Hope you and your cats're doing >> well C. James. > >Thanks, we are doing well... Great, because even though I've been married now for 24 years since our wedding anniversary last Sunday, there have been times when I thought things weren't going to work themselves out, and the very thought of being alone after all these years is quite frightening, to be honest. I haven't a clue what your situation apart from each other must be like, and I wouldn't want to find out either, so my hopes are that you're coping better than how I imagine you might be. I'm sorry to hear about your split but glad that know you've taken back control of your own life without her. I'll butt out of your private affairs now I've explained my own thoughts concerning it. Hope you didn't mind. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Sorry Suspect, I know that 'stereotype' obviuosly sounds cheesy but it
is indeed a very common remark we hear up here, made by U.S visitors from most major U.S cities comparing nightly liberties on the streets. That being said, the remarks on our taxes on consumer items almost have a 'pang' of why aren't Canadians in a revolt. On Mon, 05 Sep 2005 19:47:30 GMT, usual suspect > wrote: >Joe wrote: >> I have to say Suspect that I'm glad such organizations aren't 'as' >> established here - > >Just how established do you think they are here? Most have as tenuous a >grasp on their "offices" as they do on reality. > >> though there are a number of these factions >> existing/ operating at a very low level - which is adtmitedly >> disturbing enough. Yes, I do concede to your comment about me not >> being in a position to generalize on your Nation's cities .... but >> that being said, I did have a good chuckle inside just yesterday >> -thinking about this thread -when a visiting young couple from the >> States asked me where to go for some nightlife - I recommended an area >> downtown and told them they can stay out on this particularly nice >> summer night until 3am enjoying the night... their response "Yes...but >> is it safe!!". > >They'd ask that anywhere. > >> We only laugh up here at that very typical comment >> because we just don't have that fear [justifiable] here. > >There's no such justifiable fear here, either. The crime rate isn't so >high that we need armed guards to go to certain parts of town at certain >hours of the day or night. That's a pathetic stereotype. > ><...> |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"usual suspect" > wrote in message
.. . > Skanky Nutball wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>True friends needn't ask ahead of time so they can decide if > >>> > >>>they'll > >>> > >>> > >>>>>>>eat > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>before the party or bring their own food. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>True friends are sympathetic to one's eating preferences. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>True friends are honest if your preferences go overboard. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>You automatically assume that vegans go "overboard" > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>Veganism is already an extreme, so it's reasonable to point out > >>> > >>>vegans' > >>> > >>> > >>>>>>>>extremism when it manifests itself in irrational and offensive > >>> > >>>actions. > >>> > >>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>It's far from reality. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>Liar. Have you read through vegan literature or websites lately to > > > > see > > > >>>>>>>>how "overboard" they go in imposing their wills upon others? Not > > > > only > > > >>>in > >>> > >>> > >>>>>>>>terms of diet, Putz, but with respect to medicine, apparel, and so > > > > on. > > > >>>>>>>>Lesley this morning pasted some diatribe taking credit for shutting > >>> > >>>down > >>> > >>> > >>>>>>>>a farm that provided guinea pigs for medical research. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>If the meal is too meat based > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>You shouldn't be asked to attend. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>You mean 'invited'. An invitation is not a request. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>1. The act of inviting. > >>>>>>>>>>2. A spoken or written *REQUEST* for someone's presence or > >>>>>>>>>>participation. > >>>>>>>>>>3. An allurement, enticement, or attraction. > >>>>>>>>>>http://www.thefreedictionary.com/invitation > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>'Invitation' is still a more appropriate word. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>An invitation IS a request. Dummy. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>My emphasis. Are you a dummy or just a liar? > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>You don't give many alternatives, do you? > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>One more then: Both. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>Let's talk about you and Wendy. Are you still seeing her > > > > personally > > > >>>or > >>> > >>> > >>>>>>>>>>just professionally for your "issues" now? > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>Why are you trying to change the subject again? > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>You're the one who's taken this thread away from discussing Skanky's > >>>>>>>>offenses, Putz. So let's discuss yours. Are you still seeing Wendy > >>>>>>>>personally or just professionally for your "issues"? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>You take offence > >>>>>> > >>>>>>No, Wendy did. That's why she tried to diagnose him with Asperger's. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>You are jealous > >>>> > >>>>No. > >>> > >>> > >>>Yes. > >> > >>No. > > > > Yes > > No. Very jealous. > >>>It was proven > >> > >>No, it wasn't. Dreck's incessant shit-stirring isn't "proof" of > >>anything, except that he lacks character. > > > > It was > > No, it was not. It was proven by your own quotes. > >>>>>of anyone who has > >>>>>a real girlfriend > >>>> > >>>>Jim doesn't have a real girlfriend. She dumped him. > >>> > >>>If that's true, > >> > >>It is. > >> > >> > >>>then at least he was > >>>still 'getting some' > >> > >>The only pussy he's had eats Fancy Feast. > > > > He gets more than you > > No, he doesn't. I'd bet he does. -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"usual suspect" > wrote in message
.. . > I've yet to have a host slap a "huge steak and tiny potato" on my plate, > per your inane question which you repeatedly insisted I answer. But if you did, you would not eat it. Admit it. > >>>>>>>>>Wow, you accuse vegans of > >>>>>>>>>having religious views on food, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>They do. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>Then why are you the only the second > >>>>>>>person I've seen post about feeling > >>>>>>>religious about diet > >>>>>> > >>>>>>I don't "feel religious about diet." > >>>>> > >>>>> http://tinyurl.com/8sacw > >>>>>Yes you do. > >>>> > >>>>No, I don't. > >>> > >>>Yes > >> > >>No. > > > > Yes > > No. Then why did you write all this: http://tinyurl.com/8sacw -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"usual suspect" > wrote in message
... > Scented Asshole wrote: > >>>>>How young are you? If > >>>>>you are still in your teens > >>>> > >>>>It would be VERY FUNNY if a teenager were correcting the rampant and > >>>>gross errors of a 43 year-old agoraphobic, drug-addled, clueless > > > > urbanite. > > > >>>I will patiently wait > >> > >>...for a well-adjusted teenager to show you, a developmentally-arrested > >>43 year-old, the way. > > > > Fishing... > > Not fishing. You've already been caught. All you do is fish. You keep hoping that if you accuse me of something enough, I'll eventually confirm and deny stuff. > >>>>Admit that your hosts altered their entire party so ONE insufferable > >>>>ninny (i.e., you) would feel comfortable. You're so self-absorbed that > >>>>you probably don't feel bad about it. Most people would. > >>> > >>>You make it sound > >> > >>I've repeated what you've written about the subject. You've just > >>confirmed, though, that you ARE so self-absorbed that you don't feel bad > >>that others put aside their ideas of a "good time" so you could have one. > > Did that family ever invite you over for another meal? Yep. But why are you assuming it was a family? > >>>>>>>I get enough invites to > >>>>>>>satisfy my needs > >>>>>> > >>>>>>You're agoraphobic. Your "needs" are satisfied by laying about your > >>>>>>apartment, dummy. > >>>>> > >>>>>I have my need for at-home-time > >>>> > >>>>It's not a need. Your agoraphobia isn't anything like a normal person's > >>>>need for private time. It's a mental illness. It's the effect of years > >>>>of drug abuse. > >>> > >>>Nope. > >> > >>Yes. > >> > >> > >>>I don't go clubbing > >> > >>Because you're agoraphobic. > > > > Nope. There are non crowded clubs. > > I don't like booze. But since you > > think that only an agoraphobic would > > not go clubbing, > > Strawman. Stop avoiding. > > I must assume that > > you DO go clubbing. > > Non sequitur. Stop avoiding. > > Are you an > > alcoholic, just like you think I'm a > > drug addict? > > Non sequitur. One needn't drink to go to clubs, or go to clubs to drink. > FWIW, I seldom ever drink. I'm usually the designated driver for my > friends who do. Maybe you SHOULD drink. Might loosen you up a bit. > >>>>>and my need for socializing out. > >>>> > >>>>We have two examples of how you "socialize" and neither is normal. > >>>>First, the example of the atmo group. You ditched them early by lying > >>>>that you had to meet someone else. > >>> > >>>No lie. > >> > >>Yes, it was a lie. > > > > Nope. > > Yes. > > >>>Someone at home was waiting, > >> > >>Your cat. > > > > And a real live person, > > Your mommy. No, YOUR mommy. She needed a well deserved break from you. Mind you she also deserves a smack for bringing you into the world in the first place. > >>>but I did leave earlier than > >>>I had to. > >> > >>Why would you leave someone waiting for you at your apartment in the > >>first place. And it's not a question because I know you lied to get out > >>of the restaurant. So do you. > > > > The only lie was in leaving a little > > bit earlier than I could have > > stretched it into. > > You admit you lie, but you're trying to diminish *how much* you lied. > The fact remains that you willfully deceived others to get out of a > situation. There was nobody waiting for you. Except your cat, or mommy. Nope. I told the group it was a mix of agoraphobia and someone waiting. That is true. The former is the reason I did not stretch the evening out as long as I might have. > >>>The place was crammed > >>>with people and extra chairs at > >>>tables etc. Yuk. > >> > >>Not everyone shares your agoraphobia. > > > > Agoraphobia might be the wrong > > term, since I have a dislike of > > crowds rather than a fear of them. > > It's fear. In my case, it's a dislike. > >>>>Second, you bragged that your eating disorder was such an issue to your > >>>>friends that they adopted it to make you feel comfortable. Would you do > >>>>the same for them? No. If you were able to compromise, they could've > >>>>enjoyed their normal food at that party instead of catering to YOUR > >>>>silly, irrational whims. > >>> > >>>We met at a restaurant > >> > >>That was in reference to the situation in which everyone else had to eat > >>veggie burgers because you made such a scene about not eating meat. Dummy. > > > > What scene, > > The one that caused a family to eat veggie burgers instead of real meat > so you'd "fit in." The only problem is they had to "fit in" with you. How horrible. They had to eat veggie burgers. Someone call the cops. This just ain't right! > >>>>>Not as much as some people, > >>>> > >>>>Not as much as normal people. You're a shut-in, home-bound, agoraphobic, > >>>>carless pot-head. Add it all up and your time for socializing is nil. > >>> > >>>You're > >> > >>You're a shut-in, home-bound, agoraphobic, carless pot-head. Add it all > >>up and your time for socializing is nil. > > > > Fishing > > No, it's established. You keep fishing. You keep adding to the list. You're ****ed off that I won't confirm or deny anything. > >>>>>>>>>>>>They don't mind > >>>>>>>>>>>>talking about it either, so if they are > >>>>>>>>>>>>having a dinner where the only > >>>>>>>>>>>>vegan item is side of green peas, > >>>>>>>>>>>>one can eat before the get-together > >>>>>>>>>>>>or bring something. > >>>>>>>>>>>>-- Skanky > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>True friends let you know. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>True friends needn't ask ahead of time so they can decide if > > > > they'll > > > >>>>>eat > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>before the party or bring their own food. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>Why not? > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>It's offensive to make such demands on your host, or to shun your > >>> > >>>host's > >>> > >>> > >>>>>>>>generosity in favor of feeding yourself in some fashion as you > >>> > >>>describe. > >>> > >>> > >>>>>>>Nonsense. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>It IS offensive. Why should they throw a party or invite *you* if > > > > you're > > > >>>>>>not going to gratefully and graciously accept their kindness? > >>>>> > >>>>>I'll bet > >>>> > >>>>Stop dodging and answer the ****ing question. Why should they throw a > >>>>party or invite *you* if you're not going to gratefully and graciously > >>>>accept their kindness? > >>> > >>>Only you > >> > >>Stop dodging and answer the ****ing question. Why should they throw a > >>party or invite *you* if you're not going to gratefully and graciously > >>accept their kindness? > > > > Kindness > > Yes, something quite foreign to self-absorbed misanthropic veg-ns like you. Are you talking about yourself? You would not eat the steak. That's established. > >>>>>>>>>>>If the meal is too meat based > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>You shouldn't be asked to attend. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>If it was your's > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>You'll never be invited to my home, Skanky. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>I would never attend > >>>>>> > >>>>>>You'll never be invited to my home, Skanky. > >>>>> > >>>>>You're just > >>>> > >>>>You'll never be invited to my home, Skanky. > >>> > >>>Next time I pass through or visit > >>>Texas, > >> > >>You won't "pass through" or visit Texas, you dishonest skag. > > > > I have before. > > Liar. Why would I lie about that? Are you fishing again? > > I may again. > > Liar. Again, why would I lie about that? > >>>>>>>>>>>there is also the option of > >>>>>>>>>>>showing up to the party just > >>>>>>>>>>>in time for desert and hanging > >>>>>>>>>>>out. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>Dessert. A desert is a barren place, like inside your head. I'd be > >>>>>>>>>>insulted if my guests only showed up at the end of the party like > >>> > >>>you > >>> > >>> > >>>>>>>>>>do. Your friends show a lot more class and tact than you do by not > >>>>>>>>>>telling you what a disrespectful asshole you are. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>But I also bet some have confided what others have said behind your > >>>>> > >>>>>back. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>>No, > >>>>>> > >>>>>>Yes. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>Other times they > >>>>>>>>>>>>don't get offended if you bring your > >>>>>>>>>>>>own, like veg patties to a bbq. > >>>>>>>>>>>>-- Skanky > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>I've never offended anyone > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>Liar. You clearly have. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>Once. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>That you know of. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>It's very obvious if this happens. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>Not to you. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>by doing this. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>You don't have eyes in the back of your head, else you'd be able > > > > to > > > >>>>>see > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>how others respond to your loony antics. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>It's not > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>You don't have eyes in the back of your head, dummy. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>You need to assume/hope that I > >>>>>>>am the subject of derision. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>No, I don't. You already are. > >>>>> > >>>>>I don't care > >>>> > >>>>Yes, you do. > >>> > >>>Nope, > >> > >>Yes. > > > > You make 99% of the insults > > Exaggeration. Or are you not counting your own? I make about 1% of them. You're just an insult machine. You can barely type a sentence without one. > >>>>>You are not the sort of person I would > >>>>>hang out with in real life. > >>>> > >>>>You're agoraphobic. It's not like you hang out with people in real life. > >>> > >>>I hang out a lot. > >> > >>By yourself. > >> > >> > >>>My friends hang > >>>out more at my place than me at > >>>theirs, > >> > >>Because you're a shut-in, home-bound, agoraphobic, carless pot-head. > > > > You're getting > > No, I already get it. You're a 43 year-old loser who tokes and passively > hopes "friends" show up. > > >>>but it just evolved that way > >> > >>Evolved? No. You're a shut-in, home-bound, agoraphobic, carless pot-head. > > > > All that fishing > > It's all established by your own posts. Cites please. > >>>and suits me just fine. > >> > >>Because you're a shut-in, home-bound, agoraphobic, carless pot-head. > >> > >> > >>>>>>>>>>>Then again, maybe > >>>>>>>>>>>Toronto is just a little more > >>>>>>>>>>>laid back > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>Your little clicqe may be accepting of you, but you're clearly on > >>> > >>>the > >>> > >>> > >>>>>>>>>>kook fringe even in Toronto. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>No. There are lots of vegetarians. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>So what. There are lots of vegetarians here. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>and accepting of > >>>>>>>>>>>other's differences > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>Okay, you ****ing asshole, let's deal with this bullshit once and > >>> > >>>for > >>> > >>> > >>>>>>>>>>all. I live in a minority-majority state -- one of four in the > >>> > >>>nation > >>> > >>> > >>>>>>>>>>where non-white populations exceed the white population. I live in > > > > a > > > >>>>>>>>>>city which is one of the most diverse and integrated in the > > > > country. > > > >>>>>In > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>2003, the last year for which I can find hate crimes statistics > > > > for > > > >>>>>>>>>>Texas, there were 294 reported incidents; our population is over > > > > 22 > > > >>>>>>>>>>million. Comparatively speaking, the LIBERAL states of New Jersey > >>> > >>>had > >>> > >>> > >>>>>>>>>>594 reported hate crimes (population just over 8.6 million), New > >>> > >>>York > >>> > >>> > >>>>>>>>>>had 602 reported hate crimes (population of about 19 million), and > >>>>>>>>>>Massachusetts had 403 reported hate crimes (population 5.2 > > > > million). > > > >>>>>>>>>>http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050811/D8BTJN0O0.html > >>>>>>>>>>http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/03hc.pdf > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>I don't care > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>That's why you're 43 and still sponging off your parents. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>Maybe you should > >>>>>> > >>>>>>YOU should take care of yourself, Skanky, and let your old parents > > > > enjoy > > > >>>>>>retirement. > >>>>> > >>>>>You just > >>>> > >>>>Do they hire someone to keep an eye on you when they go out of town, or > >>>>does your dependence interfere with any plan to get out of town for a > >>>>while? > >>> > >>>Your > >> > >>They don't go, do they. They have to stay around to make sure their 43 > >>year-old "baby" is okay. > > > > Your fishing > > It's established. > > >>>>>>>>>>The states you would call "hard to the right" treat others more > >>>>>>>>>>respectfully, no matter how weird others are. So don't give me any > >>>>> > >>>>>more > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>of your baseless sterotyping bullshit about "acceptance." If you > > > > do, > > > >>>>>>>>>>I'll get out your own crime reports and see how well Ontario > > > > matches > > > >>>>>up > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>in terms of hate crimes. Like this: > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>Toronto's Hate Crime Unit reported a 22% rise of hate > >>>>>>>>>>crimes in Metropolitan Toronto between 1997 and 1998, up to 228 > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>from 187. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>http://www.pch.gc.ca/progs/multi/evidence/series4_e.cfm > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>That's only ONE ****ing city with a metropolitan population a > >>> > >>>quarter > >>> > >>> > >>>>>>>>>>the size of my state. Why does your "accepting" city have nearly > >>>>>>>>>>four-times as many hate crimes as my entire state, bitch?! > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>That's funny. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>I don't think it's funny at all that your city is filled with so > > > > much > > > >>>>>>>>hatred and violence for "different" people. Why is your hate crimes > >>> > >>>rate > >>> > >>> > >>>>>>>>FOUR TIMES higher than my state's? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>In the same year? In the same > >>>>>>>other years too? Why are we on > >>>>>>>the subject of hate crimes rather > >>>>>>>than just crimes in general? > >>>>>> > >>>>>>You brought up the issue of tolerance and acceptance. As usual, your > >>>>>>points come back to bite your pimply, sagging old ass. > >>>>> > >>>>>Stop fantasizing about my ass. > >>>> > >>>>I never started, so you stop flattering yourself. > >>> > >>>You're picturing it > >> > >>No, describing it. I've only seen your cankles. That was enough. > > > > All you saw was a picture of > > fallen socks. > > No, cankles. You're typing that with one hand, aren't you? > >>>>>>>>>>>than a > >>>>>>>>>>>hard to the right state like > >>>>>>>>>>>Texas is. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>Hardly to the right. I live in the only county which has voted for > >>> > >>>the > >>> > >>> > >>>>>>>>>>Democratic presidential candidate in every election since > >>>>>>>>>>Reconstruction. As a whole, this state is about as far to the > > > > right > > > >>>as > >>> > >>> > >>>>>>>>>>the rest of the nation -- just right of center. Your stereotypes > > > > and > > > >>>>>>>>>>caricatures are way off base. See above. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>And yet > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>You live in a city with an increasing number of hate crimes, and > > > > where > > > >>>>>>>>the number of officers working hate crimes is doubling because of > > > > the > > > >>>>>>>>serverity of the problem (which has doubled in the last decade). > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>Noting that hate crimes in Ontario have increased by 93 per cent > >>>>>>>>since 1996, Kwinter said the funding will ensure that police > >>>>>>>>stay one step ahead of hatemongers and racists. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>Last winter, however, the unit’s funding appeared in jeopardy. A > >>>>>>>>spokesperson for Kwinter’s ministry informed the unit its > >>>>>>>>funding would be reduced, but the minister quickly reversed that > >>>>>>>>decision. However, for 10 weeks beginning in late March, the > >>>>>>>>unit’s lone staffer, Abbee Corb, was not paid. Funding resumed > >>>>>>>>on June 15. > >>>>>>>>http://www.cjnews.com/viewarticle.asp?id=7162 > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>Why don't you people take violence more seriously up there? And why > > > > do > > > >>>>>>>>you accuse others of intolerance when your city has a hate crimes > > > > rate > > > >>>>>>>>four-times higher? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>We were talking about general > >>>>>>>acceptance of vegetarianism > >>>>>> > >>>>>>You made a very blanket statement (stereotype) about the state of > > > > Texas > > > >>>>>>with regard to acceptance and tolerance. I showed you that your > > > > city -- > > > >>>>>>the hate crimes capital of North America -- is far less tolerant and > >>>>>>accepting of "different" people in the aggregate. > >>>>> > >>>>>I have only seen the other side > >>>>>of Toronto. > >>>> > >>>>Further evidence of your being a shut-in, home-bound, agoraphobic, > >>>>carless pothead. > >>> > >>>I smell something fishy. > >> > >>Try a douche sometime, bitch. Or at least change your panties. > > > > Is that > > Yes. Clean your cooch. Fear of pussy, Useless? Fear that they must all smell like that cheap infected hooker you lost your virginity to? > >>>>>>>>>>>>It sounds like you have plenty of experience with all of the > > > > above > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>"possibilities," you carless orthorexic OFFENSIVE asshole. Tell > > > > us > > > >>>>>how > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>many other ways you've offended gracious hosts, and please > > > > explain > > > >>>>>how > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>your serial offenses to other humans make you a better person > > > > than > > > >>>>>>>you'd > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>be if you'd eat what they graciously offer. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>I have the skill > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>You have no marketable skills, loser. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>You're more skilled > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>Yes, but that's comparing apples to oranges. You're comparable to a > >>>>>>>>slug, or a parasite. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>So > >>>>>> > >>>>>>You're unskilled. That's why you know so much about Ontario's welfare > >>>>>>system. > >>>>> > >>>>>Stop > >>>> > >>>>No. You're unskilled. That's why you know so much about Ontario's > >>>>welfare system, isn't it. > >>> > >>>That there is so much you don't know. > >> > >>I've never been on welfare. I don't care to know what that's like. > > > > And I should care > > You should care enough about yourself that you lessen your dependence on > your aged parents. You don't even know whether my parents are even alive. Fess up. I'm not telling you. I won't confirm or deny any of your wackiness, and it's killing you. -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"usual suspect" > wrote in message
... > Scented Retard wrote: > >>And, regarding remaining close to your ex-wife: > >> > >>That's dumb. The odds are stacked against your new relationship > >>as long as the old ball and chain is around. > > > > You feel wives are a ball and chain? > > *Ex*-wives are. So are ex-girlfriends. Maybe to you, but then you've not any experience, so it's all guessing. > > You feel one should not remain > > friends with exes? > > What purpose does it serve once you know it's an impediment to the > success of a new relationship? Why throw away a friendship just because you don't have sex with that person anymore? > In the case of Jim and Wendy, Wendy's complaints weren't born of > insecurity -- they were because Jim was stuck in his comfortable old > rut. Jim chose a close friendship with his ex-wife over committing to > new life with someone else. That's certainly his right, but it's very > unhealthy for establishing any future relationship. It's also unhealthy > for him. It's very healthy. It's too bad though that his girlfriend was insecure about it. > Kristen got on with her life. Wendy's getting on with hers. Jim is > just... stuck. In you sick little head. You want to picture him as stuck somewhere bad. -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"usual suspect" > wrote in message
.. . > Skanky wrote: > >>>>>>>Anyway just to add something reasonable on this topic.... My guess on > >>>>>>>reported crimes being higher in Toronto is that generally the various > >>>>>>>cultures are highly intermingled in Toronto- and several other major > >>>>>>>Canadian cities. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>Perhaps you should get out of Canada sometime and see that our > >>>>>>populations are a lot more alike than you seem to think. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>Incidents may therefore be more common than in an > >>>>>>>American city where cultures will tend to conglomerate more with > > > > their > > > >>>>>>>own > >>>>>> > >>>>>>Tend to conglomerate with their own where? Does Vancouver not have a > >>>>>>Chinatown just like nearly every other large city in North America? > > > > Does > > > >>>>>>Skanky not live near "Greektown" on Danforth Avenue in Toronto? > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>Skanky lived there in 2003. Does she now? > >>>> > >>>>Stop referring to yourself in third-person, dummy. You've moved back in > >>>>with your parents. > >>> > >>>Did she or didn't she, > >> > >>Stop referring to yourself in third-person, dummy. You've moved back in > >>with your parents. > > > > Stop fishing, > > It isn't fishing. Was Mommy waiting up for you back at the apartment > when you met with the atmo people? Was she or wasn't she? You don't know and it's killing you. -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Derek" > wrote in message ... > On Tue, 6 Sep 2005 07:45:10 -0400, "C. James Strutz" > > wrote: > >> >>"Derek" > wrote in message . .. >>> On Fri, 2 Sep 2005 20:16:22 -0400, "C. James Strutz" >>> > >>> wrote: >>>>"usual suspect" > wrote in message >>>>news
>>> [..]>>>>> No, Wendy did. That's why she tried to diagnose him with Asperger's. >>>> >>>>More attacks... >>>> >>>>Let me diffuse the whole issue now. Wendy and I have not been together >>>>since >>>>late May. We had been together for four years prior to that. The basic >>>>problem between us was that Wendy pressed hard in the last year or so to >>>>make a future together and I couldn't commit to that. I'm just not ready >>>>at >>>>this time in my life. >>>> >>>>Wendy, the psychologist, forever tried to explain my ambivalence and >>>>from >>>>that emerged the Asperger theory. She discussed with one of her long >>>>time >>>>colleagues and friend, who is also a psychologist, the possibility that >>>>I >>>>could be at the high functioning end of the autism spectrum. She agreed >>>>that >>>>it was possible. The primary impetus for this theory is my inclination >>>>towards structure and resistance to change. I have a couple of other >>>>autistic attributes according to the DMV IV manual. I ultimately >>>>volunteered >>>>for a study sponsored by UPMC's autism research branch. They tested me >>>>and >>>>determined that I am not on the spectrum. >>>> >>>>Now it's just me and my four cats. I've been taking some of my newly >>>>regained time to think about things. Wendy is an extremely intelligent >>>>and >>>>intense person who sometimes controls people around her without >>>>realizing >>>>it. She's tough to be in a relationship with. Despite that, we were a >>>>good >>>>match together in a lot of ways. She always said we completed each >>>>other's >>>>sentences. Though I miss immensely her I also feel better without all >>>>the >>>>stress from that relationship. It was unbelievable. >>>> >>>>There you have it - everything you ever wanted to know about Wendy and >>>>me. >>>>Hope it makes you better... >>> >>> You MUST be a nut if you in fact hooked up with >>> a psychologist. ;-) Hope you and your cats're doing >>> well C. James. >> >>Thanks, we are doing well... > > Great, because even though I've been married > now for 24 years since our wedding anniversary > last Sunday, Heh, my wedding anniversary was on Saturday.. > there have been times when I thought > things weren't going to work themselves out, and > the very thought of being alone after all these years > is quite frightening, to be honest. It is frightening, but all things eventually work out. Use your head and your heart to figure out what's right and then do it. Things don't work out by themselves. You have to act on them. Get some outside help if you need it. > I haven't a clue > what your situation apart from each other must be > like, and I wouldn't want to find out either, so my > hopes are that you're coping better than how I > imagine you might be. I'm sorry to hear about your > split but glad that know you've taken back control > of your own life without her. I'll butt out of your > private affairs now I've explained my own thoughts > concerning it. Hope you didn't mind. At least you're respectful, more than can be said about some other folks in this newsgroup. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Scented Nectar" > wrote in message ... > "usual suspect" > wrote in message > ... >> Scented Retard wrote: >> >>And, regarding remaining close to your ex-wife: >> >> >> >>That's dumb. The odds are stacked against your new relationship >> >>as long as the old ball and chain is around. >> > >> > You feel wives are a ball and chain? >> >> *Ex*-wives are. So are ex-girlfriends. > > Maybe to you, but then you've not > any experience, so it's all guessing. > >> > You feel one should not remain >> > friends with exes? >> >> What purpose does it serve once you know it's an impediment to the >> success of a new relationship? > > Why throw away a friendship just > because you don't have sex with > that person anymore? > >> In the case of Jim and Wendy, Wendy's complaints weren't born of >> insecurity -- they were because Jim was stuck in his comfortable old >> rut. Jim chose a close friendship with his ex-wife over committing to >> new life with someone else. That's certainly his right, but it's very >> unhealthy for establishing any future relationship. It's also unhealthy >> for him. > > It's very healthy. It's too bad though > that his girlfriend was insecure > about it. People seem to be pretty divided on this issue. I have two sisters; one feels one way and the other feels the other way. I agree that being friendly with ex-partners is healthy. It says a lot about one's maturity to be able to get past bad stuff from the past without harboring any resentment or ill will. >> Kristen got on with her life. Wendy's getting on with hers. Jim is >> just... stuck. > > In you sick little head. You want to > picture him as stuck somewhere > bad. That's what he does; twists things around in the worst possible way to hurt people. He's a creep. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Tue, 6 Sep 2005 11:37:31 -0400, "C. James Strutz" > wrote:
>"Derek" > wrote in message ... >> On Tue, 6 Sep 2005 07:45:10 -0400, "C. James Strutz" > wrote: [..] >>>Thanks, we are doing well... >> >> Great, because even though I've been married >> now for 24 years since our wedding anniversary >> last Sunday, > >Heh, my wedding anniversary was on Saturday.. The 3rd? How's that for a near coincidence? >> there have been times when I thought >> things weren't going to work themselves out, and >> the very thought of being alone after all these years >> is quite frightening, to be honest. > >It is frightening, but all things eventually work out. Use your head and >your heart to figure out what's right and then do it. Things don't work out >by themselves. You have to act on them. Get some outside help if you need >it. That's good advice, of course, but I never listen to good advice when I'm panicked. ;-) >> I haven't a clue >> what your situation apart from each other must be >> like, and I wouldn't want to find out either, so my >> hopes are that you're coping better than how I >> imagine you might be. I'm sorry to hear about your >> split but glad that know you've taken back control >> of your own life without her. I'll butt out of your >> private affairs now I've explained my own thoughts >> concerning it. Hope you didn't mind. > >At least you're respectful, more than can be said about some other folks in >this newsgroup. 'usual suspect' et al will use anything they can get their hands on to attack your personal life. We all know that, and I'm glad to see it doesn't affect you the way they want it to. Good luck C. James. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Skanky Nutball wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>True friends needn't ask ahead of time so they can decide if >>>>> >>>>>they'll >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>>eat >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>before the party or bring their own food. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>True friends are sympathetic to one's eating preferences. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>True friends are honest if your preferences go overboard. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>You automatically assume that vegans go "overboard" >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>Veganism is already an extreme, so it's reasonable to point out >>>>> >>>>>vegans' >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>extremism when it manifests itself in irrational and offensive >>>>> >>>>>actions. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>It's far from reality. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>Liar. Have you read through vegan literature or websites lately to >>> >>>see >>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>how "overboard" they go in imposing their wills upon others? Not >>> >>>only >>> >>> >>>>>in >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>terms of diet, Putz, but with respect to medicine, apparel, and so >>> >>>on. >>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>Lesley this morning pasted some diatribe taking credit for > > shutting > >>>>>down >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>a farm that provided guinea pigs for medical research. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>If the meal is too meat based >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>You shouldn't be asked to attend. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>You mean 'invited'. An invitation is not a request. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>1. The act of inviting. >>>>>>>>>>>>2. A spoken or written *REQUEST* for someone's presence or >>>>>>>>>>>>participation. >>>>>>>>>>>>3. An allurement, enticement, or attraction. >>>>>>>>>>>>http://www.thefreedictionary.com/invitation >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>'Invitation' is still a more appropriate word. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>An invitation IS a request. Dummy. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>My emphasis. Are you a dummy or just a liar? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>You don't give many alternatives, do you? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>One more then: Both. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>Let's talk about you and Wendy. Are you still seeing her >>> >>>personally >>> >>> >>>>>or >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>just professionally for your "issues" now? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>Why are you trying to change the subject again? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>You're the one who's taken this thread away from discussing > > Skanky's > >>>>>>>>>>offenses, Putz. So let's discuss yours. Are you still seeing Wendy >>>>>>>>>>personally or just professionally for your "issues"? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>You take offence >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>No, Wendy did. That's why she tried to diagnose him with Asperger's. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>You are jealous >>>>>> >>>>>>No. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Yes. >>>> >>>>No. >>> >>>Yes >> >>No. > > Very Not one bit. >>>>>It was proven >>>> >>>>No, it wasn't. Dreck's incessant shit-stirring isn't "proof" of >>>>anything, except that he lacks character. >>> >>>It was >> >>No, it was not. > > It was No, it wasn't. >>>>>>>of anyone who has >>>>>>>a real girlfriend >>>>>> >>>>>>Jim doesn't have a real girlfriend. She dumped him. >>>>> >>>>>If that's true, >>>> >>>>It is. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>then at least he was >>>>>still 'getting some' >>>> >>>>The only pussy he's had eats Fancy Feast. >>> >>>He gets more than you >> >>No, he doesn't. > > I'd bet he does. You'd lose your welfare cheque, dummy. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Scented Retard wrote:
>>I've yet to have a host slap a "huge steak and tiny potato" on my plate, >>per your inane question which you repeatedly insisted I answer. > > But if you did, I've already answered the question. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Scented Asshole wrote:
>>>>I've repeated what you've written about the subject. You've just >>>>confirmed, though, that you ARE so self-absorbed that you don't feel bad >>>>that others put aside their ideas of a "good time" so you could have one. > >>Did that family ever invite you over for another meal? > > Yep. But why are you assuming it > was a family? Once a friend's dad made it into a big adventure where everyone tried veggie burgers for the first time. -- Shit4braincellette, 31 Aug 05 >>>>>I don't go clubbing >>>> >>>>Because you're agoraphobic. >>> >>>Nope. There are non crowded clubs. >>>I don't like booze. But since you >>>think that only an agoraphobic would >>>not go clubbing, >> >>Strawman. > > Stop avoiding. It's a strawman. >>>I must assume that >>>you DO go clubbing. >> >>Non sequitur. > > Stop avoiding. It's a non sequitur. >>>Are you an >>>alcoholic, just like you think I'm a >>>drug addict? >> >>Non sequitur. One needn't drink to go to clubs, or go to clubs to drink. >>FWIW, I seldom ever drink. I'm usually the designated driver for my >>friends who do. > > Maybe you SHOULD drink. Maybe you should **** yourself. Wait. You do that already. >>>>>>>and my need for socializing out. >>>>>> >>>>>>We have two examples of how you "socialize" and neither is normal. >>>>>>First, the example of the atmo group. You ditched them early by lying >>>>>>that you had to meet someone else. >>>>> >>>>>No lie. >>>> >>>>Yes, it was a lie. >>> >>>Nope. >> >>Yes. >> >> >>>>>Someone at home was waiting, >>>> >>>>Your cat. >>> >>>And a real live person, >> >>Your mommy. > > No, Yes. > Mind you she also deserves a smack for > bringing you into the world in the > first place. Feel the vegan love... >>>>>but I did leave earlier than >>>>>I had to. >>>> >>>>Why would you leave someone waiting for you at your apartment in the >>>>first place. And it's not a question because I know you lied to get out >>>>of the restaurant. So do you. >>> >>>The only lie was in leaving a little >>>bit earlier than I could have >>>stretched it into. >> >>You admit you lie, but you're trying to diminish *how much* you lied. >>The fact remains that you willfully deceived others to get out of a >>situation. There was nobody waiting for you. Except your cat, or mommy. > > Nope. Yes. >>>>>The place was crammed >>>>>with people and extra chairs at >>>>>tables etc. Yuk. >>>> >>>>Not everyone shares your agoraphobia. >>> >>>Agoraphobia might be the wrong >>>term, since I have a dislike of >>>crowds rather than a fear of them. >> >>It's fear. > > In my case Yes, it's fear in your case. >>>>>>Second, you bragged that your eating disorder was such an issue to > > your > >>>>>>friends that they adopted it to make you feel comfortable. Would you > > do > >>>>>>the same for them? No. If you were able to compromise, they could've >>>>>>enjoyed their normal food at that party instead of catering to YOUR >>>>>>silly, irrational whims. >>>>> >>>>>We met at a restaurant >>>> >>>>That was in reference to the situation in which everyone else had to eat >>>>veggie burgers because you made such a scene about not eating meat. Dummy. > >>>What scene, >> >>The one that caused a family to eat veggie burgers instead of real meat >>so you'd "fit in." The only problem is they had to "fit in" with you. > > How horrible. Your selfishness is an affront to common decency. >>>>>>>Not as much as some people, >>>>>> >>>>>>Not as much as normal people. You're a shut-in, home-bound, > > agoraphobic, > >>>>>>carless pot-head. Add it all up and your time for socializing is nil. >>>>> >>>>>You're >>>> >>>>You're a shut-in, home-bound, agoraphobic, carless pot-head. Add it all >>>>up and your time for socializing is nil. >>> >>>Fishing >> >>No, it's established. > > You keep It's already established. >>>>>Next time I pass through or visit >>>>>Texas, >>>> >>>>You won't "pass through" or visit Texas, you dishonest skag. >>> >>>I have before. >> >>Liar. > > Why would I lie about that? For the same reasons you lied to get out of your atmo gathering which YOU helped set up. You're a congenital liar. >>>I may again. >> >>Liar. > > Again, And again and again. Repeatedly. > why would I lie about that? For the same reasons you lied to get out of your atmo gathering which YOU helped set up. You're a congenital liar. >>>You make 99% of the insults >> >>Exaggeration. Or are you not counting your own? > > I make about 1% of them. You can't count. >>>>Evolved? No. You're a shut-in, home-bound, agoraphobic, carless > > pot-head. > >>>All that fishing >> >>It's all established by your own posts. > > Cites please. Review your posting history yourself, dummy. >>>>>>>>You brought up the issue of tolerance and acceptance. As usual, your >>>>>>>>points come back to bite your pimply, sagging old ass. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Stop fantasizing about my ass. >>>>>> >>>>>>I never started, so you stop flattering yourself. >>>>> >>>>>You're picturing it >>>> >>>>No, describing it. I've only seen your cankles. That was enough. >>> >>>All you saw was a picture of >>>fallen socks. >> >>No, cankles. > > You're Cankles. Big, fat cankles. >>>>>I smell something fishy. >>>> >>>>Try a douche sometime, bitch. Or at least change your panties. >>> >>>Is that >> >>Yes. Clean your cooch. > > Fear of pussy, Not at all. >>You should care enough about yourself that you lessen your dependence on >>your aged parents. > > You don't even know whether my > parents are even alive. You've written that they are. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"usual suspect" > wrote in message ... > Scented Retard wrote: >>>I've yet to have a host slap a "huge steak and tiny potato" on my plate, >>>per your inane question which you repeatedly insisted I answer. >> >> But if you did, > > I've already answered the question. You never answered the question. Answer it now. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"usual suspect" > wrote in message
... > Scented Retard wrote: > >>I've yet to have a host slap a "huge steak and tiny potato" on my plate, > >>per your inane question which you repeatedly insisted I answer. > > > > But if you did, > > I've already answered the question. You would not eat the steak. You (according to you) would offend your hosts by saying you're 'not interested' in it. -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"C. James Strutz" > wrote in message
... > > "usual suspect" > wrote in message > ... > > Scented Retard wrote: > >>>I've yet to have a host slap a "huge steak and tiny potato" on my plate, > >>>per your inane question which you repeatedly insisted I answer. > >> > >> But if you did, > > > > I've already answered the question. > > You never answered the question. Answer it now. He's scared to. He's been cornered. He claims refusing is ungrateful, yet he turns down meat himself. -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"usual suspect" > wrote in message
... > Skanky Nutball wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>True friends needn't ask ahead of time so they can decide if > >>>>> > >>>>>they'll > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>>>>eat > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>before the party or bring their own food. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>True friends are sympathetic to one's eating preferences. > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>True friends are honest if your preferences go overboard. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>You automatically assume that vegans go "overboard" > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>Veganism is already an extreme, so it's reasonable to point out > >>>>> > >>>>>vegans' > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>extremism when it manifests itself in irrational and offensive > >>>>> > >>>>>actions. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>It's far from reality. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>Liar. Have you read through vegan literature or websites lately to > >>> > >>>see > >>> > >>> > >>>>>>>>>>how "overboard" they go in imposing their wills upon others? Not > >>> > >>>only > >>> > >>> > >>>>>in > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>terms of diet, Putz, but with respect to medicine, apparel, and so > >>> > >>>on. > >>> > >>> > >>>>>>>>>>Lesley this morning pasted some diatribe taking credit for > > > > shutting > > > >>>>>down > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>a farm that provided guinea pigs for medical research. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>If the meal is too meat based > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>You shouldn't be asked to attend. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>You mean 'invited'. An invitation is not a request. > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>1. The act of inviting. > >>>>>>>>>>>>2. A spoken or written *REQUEST* for someone's presence or > >>>>>>>>>>>>participation. > >>>>>>>>>>>>3. An allurement, enticement, or attraction. > >>>>>>>>>>>>http://www.thefreedictionary.com/invitation > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>'Invitation' is still a more appropriate word. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>An invitation IS a request. Dummy. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>My emphasis. Are you a dummy or just a liar? > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>You don't give many alternatives, do you? > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>One more then: Both. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>Let's talk about you and Wendy. Are you still seeing her > >>> > >>>personally > >>> > >>> > >>>>>or > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>just professionally for your "issues" now? > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>Why are you trying to change the subject again? > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>You're the one who's taken this thread away from discussing > > > > Skanky's > > > >>>>>>>>>>offenses, Putz. So let's discuss yours. Are you still seeing Wendy > >>>>>>>>>>personally or just professionally for your "issues"? > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>You take offence > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>No, Wendy did. That's why she tried to diagnose him with Asperger's. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>You are jealous > >>>>>> > >>>>>>No. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>Yes. > >>>> > >>>>No. > >>> > >>>Yes > >> > >>No. > > > > Very > > Not one bit. > > >>>>>It was proven > >>>> > >>>>No, it wasn't. Dreck's incessant shit-stirring isn't "proof" of > >>>>anything, except that he lacks character. > >>> > >>>It was > >> > >>No, it was not. > > > > It was > > No, it wasn't. Yes it was. You claimed to have a girlfriend for 4 years. Then Derek posted a link where you said you were currently looking for a girlfriend in 2003 I think it was. They can't both be true. > >>>>>>>of anyone who has > >>>>>>>a real girlfriend > >>>>>> > >>>>>>Jim doesn't have a real girlfriend. She dumped him. > >>>>> > >>>>>If that's true, > >>>> > >>>>It is. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>then at least he was > >>>>>still 'getting some' > >>>> > >>>>The only pussy he's had eats Fancy Feast. > >>> > >>>He gets more than you > >> > >>No, he doesn't. > > > > I'd bet he does. > > You'd lose your welfare cheque, dummy. You're fishing about my financial and work status but what does it have to do with James getting luckier than you? I'd win the bet afterall. -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"C. James Strutz" > wrote in message
... > > "Scented Nectar" > wrote in message > ... > > "usual suspect" > wrote in message > > ... > >> Scented Retard wrote: > >> >>And, regarding remaining close to your ex-wife: > >> >> > >> >>That's dumb. The odds are stacked against your new relationship > >> >>as long as the old ball and chain is around. > >> > > >> > You feel wives are a ball and chain? > >> > >> *Ex*-wives are. So are ex-girlfriends. > > > > Maybe to you, but then you've not > > any experience, so it's all guessing. > > > >> > You feel one should not remain > >> > friends with exes? > >> > >> What purpose does it serve once you know it's an impediment to the > >> success of a new relationship? > > > > Why throw away a friendship just > > because you don't have sex with > > that person anymore? > > > >> In the case of Jim and Wendy, Wendy's complaints weren't born of > >> insecurity -- they were because Jim was stuck in his comfortable old > >> rut. Jim chose a close friendship with his ex-wife over committing to > >> new life with someone else. That's certainly his right, but it's very > >> unhealthy for establishing any future relationship. It's also unhealthy > >> for him. > > > > It's very healthy. It's too bad though > > that his girlfriend was insecure > > about it. > > People seem to be pretty divided on this issue. I have two sisters; one > feels one way and the other feels the other way. I agree that being friendly > with ex-partners is healthy. It says a lot about one's maturity to be able > to get past bad stuff from the past without harboring any resentment or ill > will. > > >> Kristen got on with her life. Wendy's getting on with hers. Jim is > >> just... stuck. > > > > In you sick little head. You want to > > picture him as stuck somewhere > > bad. > > That's what he does; twists things around in the worst possible way to hurt > people. He's a creep. Yes. He's the creepiest of the trolls here. The others have their 'qualities' too, but Useless is for sure the creepiest. The others just cuss and sputter garbage. Useless pouts and tries to dump his negative energy onto other people. -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"usual suspect" > wrote in message
... > Scented Asshole wrote: > >>>>I've repeated what you've written about the subject. You've just > >>>>confirmed, though, that you ARE so self-absorbed that you don't feel bad > >>>>that others put aside their ideas of a "good time" so you could have one. > > > >>Did that family ever invite you over for another meal? > > > > Yep. But why are you assuming it > > was a family? > > Once a friend's dad > made it into a big adventure > where everyone tried veggie > burgers for the first time. > -- Shit4braincellette, 31 Aug 05 Ah, ok. I guess since they are relatives, that can be called a family setting. > >>>>>I don't go clubbing > >>>> > >>>>Because you're agoraphobic. > >>> > >>>Nope. There are non crowded clubs. > >>>I don't like booze. But since you > >>>think that only an agoraphobic would > >>>not go clubbing, > >> > >>Strawman. > > > > Stop avoiding. > > It's a strawman. No it's not. You're dodging. > >>>I must assume that > >>>you DO go clubbing. > >> > >>Non sequitur. > > > > Stop avoiding. > > It's a non sequitur. You're playing dodge again. > >>>Are you an > >>>alcoholic, just like you think I'm a > >>>drug addict? > >> > >>Non sequitur. One needn't drink to go to clubs, or go to clubs to drink. > >>FWIW, I seldom ever drink. I'm usually the designated driver for my > >>friends who do. > > > > Maybe you SHOULD drink. > > Maybe you should **** yourself. Wait. You do that already. How does one do that? Please explain in detail. > >>>>>>>and my need for socializing out. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>We have two examples of how you "socialize" and neither is normal. > >>>>>>First, the example of the atmo group. You ditched them early by lying > >>>>>>that you had to meet someone else. > >>>>> > >>>>>No lie. > >>>> > >>>>Yes, it was a lie. > >>> > >>>Nope. > >> > >>Yes. > >> > >> > >>>>>Someone at home was waiting, > >>>> > >>>>Your cat. > >>> > >>>And a real live person, > >> > >>Your mommy. > > > > No, > > Yes. > > > Mind you she also deserves a smack for > > bringing you into the world in the > > first place. > > Feel the vegan love... Waaahhh. You can dish it out but you can't take it. > >>>>>but I did leave earlier than > >>>>>I had to. > >>>> > >>>>Why would you leave someone waiting for you at your apartment in the > >>>>first place. And it's not a question because I know you lied to get out > >>>>of the restaurant. So do you. > >>> > >>>The only lie was in leaving a little > >>>bit earlier than I could have > >>>stretched it into. > >> > >>You admit you lie, but you're trying to diminish *how much* you lied. > >>The fact remains that you willfully deceived others to get out of a > >>situation. There was nobody waiting for you. Except your cat, or mommy. > > > > Nope. > > Yes. > > >>>>>The place was crammed > >>>>>with people and extra chairs at > >>>>>tables etc. Yuk. > >>>> > >>>>Not everyone shares your agoraphobia. > >>> > >>>Agoraphobia might be the wrong > >>>term, since I have a dislike of > >>>crowds rather than a fear of them. > >> > >>It's fear. > > > > In my case > > Yes, it's fear in your case. I'm the one who knows, not you. And I'll tell you again, it's dislike. It should probably be given a separate name since it's not a fear. > >>>>>>Second, you bragged that your eating disorder was such an issue to > > > > your > > > >>>>>>friends that they adopted it to make you feel comfortable. Would you > > > > do > > > >>>>>>the same for them? No. If you were able to compromise, they could've > >>>>>>enjoyed their normal food at that party instead of catering to YOUR > >>>>>>silly, irrational whims. > >>>>> > >>>>>We met at a restaurant > >>>> > >>>>That was in reference to the situation in which everyone else had to eat > >>>>veggie burgers because you made such a scene about not eating meat. Dummy. > > > >>>What scene, > >> > >>The one that caused a family to eat veggie burgers instead of real meat > >>so you'd "fit in." The only problem is they had to "fit in" with you. > > > > How horrible. > > Your selfishness is an affront to common decency. > > >>>>>>>Not as much as some people, > >>>>>> > >>>>>>Not as much as normal people. You're a shut-in, home-bound, > > > > agoraphobic, > > > >>>>>>carless pot-head. Add it all up and your time for socializing is nil. > >>>>> > >>>>>You're > >>>> > >>>>You're a shut-in, home-bound, agoraphobic, carless pot-head. Add it all > >>>>up and your time for socializing is nil. > >>> > >>>Fishing > >> > >>No, it's established. > > > > You keep > > It's already established. Cite your sources. > >>>>>Next time I pass through or visit > >>>>>Texas, > >>>> > >>>>You won't "pass through" or visit Texas, you dishonest skag. > >>> > >>>I have before. > >> > >>Liar. > > > > Why would I lie about that? > > For the same reasons you lied to get out of your atmo gathering which > YOU helped set up. You're a congenital liar. No, you are. > >>>I may again. > >> > >>Liar. > > > > Again, > > And again and again. Repeatedly. > > > why would I lie about that? > > For the same reasons you lied to get out of your atmo gathering which > YOU helped set up. You're a congenital liar. I'm not a liar. > >>>You make 99% of the insults > >> > >>Exaggeration. Or are you not counting your own? > > > > I make about 1% of them. > > You can't count. > > >>>>Evolved? No. You're a shut-in, home-bound, agoraphobic, carless > > > > pot-head. > > > >>>All that fishing > >> > >>It's all established by your own posts. > > > > Cites please. > > Review your posting history yourself, dummy. You can't, can you. > >>>>>>>>You brought up the issue of tolerance and acceptance. As usual, your > >>>>>>>>points come back to bite your pimply, sagging old ass. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>Stop fantasizing about my ass. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>I never started, so you stop flattering yourself. > >>>>> > >>>>>You're picturing it > >>>> > >>>>No, describing it. I've only seen your cankles. That was enough. > >>> > >>>All you saw was a picture of > >>>fallen socks. > >> > >>No, cankles. > > > > You're > > Cankles. Big, fat cankles. Stop wanking over your imagination of me. > >>>>>I smell something fishy. > >>>> > >>>>Try a douche sometime, bitch. Or at least change your panties. > >>> > >>>Is that > >> > >>Yes. Clean your cooch. > > > > Fear of pussy, > > Not at all. > > >>You should care enough about yourself that you lessen your dependence on > >>your aged parents. > > > > You don't even know whether my > > parents are even alive. > > You've written that they are. Ok, I'll take your word on that. I don't personally remember posting that though. -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Scented Retard wrote:
>>>>And, regarding remaining close to your ex-wife: >>>> >>>>That's dumb. The odds are stacked against your new relationship >>>>as long as the old ball and chain is around. >>> >>>You feel wives are a ball and chain? >> >>*Ex*-wives are. So are ex-girlfriends. > > Maybe to you, To most men. >>>You feel one should not remain >>>friends with exes? >> >>What purpose does it serve once you know it's an impediment to the >>success of a new relationship? > > Why throw away a friendship To get on with one's life. That part of one's life and the relationship are both over. A couple can split amicably, and be pleasant should they have to deal with each other (e.g., if they have children together); but there is no reason for someone to continue to fawn over an ex-partner who's already moved on with his or her life. > just because you don't have sex with > that person anymore? I'll use the following steps from the first article I found during a search on "failed relationship" as an outline. Recovering from a failed relationship is tough. You can do it, though, and find love in five simple steps once you commit to leave the past behind 1. Leaving the past behind 2. Learning the lessons 3. Getting out and about 4. The dating game 5. When love comes again http://tinyurl.com/dby7q First, the past is past. In Jim's case, his past is all he wants because it's part of his familiar structure. I bet Wendy suggested that Kristen was sort of a security blanket for him, possibly even that Kristen enabled Jim's desire for "structure" (in his case meaning "living in the past") by continuing to give him time whenever he wanted. I also bet that Jim is an issue in Kristen's current marriage; the person Jim should ask for honesty about that isn't Kristen (his enabler), but her husband. Two's company, three's a crowd -- a potentially hostile crowd when the third wheel is an ex-spouse. Second, he's yet to learn the lessons of either failed relationship. He continues to blame Wendy for pressing hard, being too intense, controlling, and being difficult to be in a relationship with (while he tries to suggest in the next breath that everything was perfect). Meanwhile, he continues to put his ex-wife before himself and his current or future relationships. See step 1. Third, fourth, and fifth go together. He's admitted he's something of a loner: It was also good for her to understand why *I like to be alone*, why *I am not "touchy-feely"*, why *I don't reciprocate emotions very well*, why I need structure and don't adapt to changes very well. -- CJS, 16 Dec 2004 The break up has left him with "time to think about things," as he put it. He's not getting out. He's not moving along. He's still friends with Kristen, which in and of itself wouldn't necessarily be bad BUT he has to get over her and get on with his own life. That relationship has already affected one. Kristen cut Jim out of her life when she started banging someone else and divorced him to marry her paramour. It's puzzling that he thinks she's still a great friend after doing that to him. Finally, my advice about moving on and leaving the past in the past is neither novel nor extreme. Many, if not most, relationship counselors and mental health experts recommend doing that. >>In the case of Jim and Wendy, Wendy's complaints weren't born of >>insecurity -- they were because Jim was stuck in his comfortable old >>rut. Jim chose a close friendship with his ex-wife over committing to >>new life with someone else. That's certainly his right, but it's very >>unhealthy for establishing any future relationship. It's also unhealthy >>for him. > > It's very healthy. No, not if Kristen is his enabler/security blanket. Then it's patently unhealthy for both of them and her current marriage. > It's too bad though > that his girlfriend was insecure > about it. Wendy is a psychologist and, though I question her attempt to diagnose Jim with Asperger's to explain his actions (or inactions), I think she's probably mature and professional enough to separate her own insecurities from what she observes. She and Jim were in a relationship for a few years. This was an ongoing issue in their relationship and Jim chose the woman who rejected him instead of the one who wanted a future with him. >>Kristen got on with her life. Wendy's getting on with hers. Jim is >>just... stuck. > > In you sick little head. I'm not sick, Skanky, and most relationship and marriage counselors would agree with what I've already written. Apparently Wendy (the psychologist) did, too; I told Jim that his relationship with her would end sooner than later because of being a relationship pack-rat like that. I didn't write any of that out of malice, and there's nothing untoward in what I've suggested to him about relationships. Kristen has already divorced him. That relationship is over. They can be amicable if they run into each other. But I think it's unhealthy for both of them to go out of their way to pursue encounters together. It's ruined one of Jim's relationships already, and I suspect it's doing the same for Kristen's. > You want to picture him as stuck somewhere bad. I have the one he's painted of himself. He emotionally wore out Wendy. She wanted him to stop dividing his attention between her and his EX-wife -- not exactly unreasonable. In desperation, she turned to a clinical explanation for why he's the way he is. In the end, he's chosen his comfort zone -- his enabler EX-wife and his four cats -- over Wendy and a new life together. Yet he blames Wendy, except to say that he was unwilling to commit (see previous sentence) and then lists what he perceives to be her flaws. None of that is good. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Skanky wrote:
>>>>Stop referring to yourself in third-person, dummy. You've moved back in >>>>with your parents. >>> >>>Stop fishing, >> >>It isn't fishing. Was Mommy waiting up for you back at the apartment >>when you met with the atmo people? > > Was she Yes. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Dreck wrote:
>>It is frightening, but all things eventually work out. Use your head and >>your heart to figure out what's right and then do it. Things don't work out >>by themselves. You have to act on them. Get some outside help if you need >>it. > > That's good advice, of course, but I never listen to > good advice That's how you crippled yourself, fatso. >>>I haven't a clue Established! |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
C. James Strutz wrote:
>>>>>And, regarding remaining close to your ex-wife: >>>>> >>>>>That's dumb. The odds are stacked against your new relationship >>>>>as long as the old ball and chain is around. >>>> >>>>You feel wives are a ball and chain? >>> >>>*Ex*-wives are. So are ex-girlfriends. >> >>Maybe to you, but then you've not >>any experience, so it's all guessing. >> >>>>You feel one should not remain >>>>friends with exes? >>> >>>What purpose does it serve once you know it's an impediment to the >>>success of a new relationship? >> >>Why throw away a friendship just >>because you don't have sex with >>that person anymore? >> >>>In the case of Jim and Wendy, Wendy's complaints weren't born of >>>insecurity -- they were because Jim was stuck in his comfortable old >>>rut. Jim chose a close friendship with his ex-wife over committing to >>>new life with someone else. That's certainly his right, but it's very >>>unhealthy for establishing any future relationship. It's also unhealthy >>>for him. >> >>It's very healthy. It's too bad though >>that his girlfriend was insecure >>about it. > > People seem to be pretty divided on this issue. It's like any other issue. > I have two sisters; one > feels one way and the other feels the other way. I agree that being friendly > with ex-partners is healthy. It says a lot about one's maturity to be able > to get past bad stuff from the past without harboring any resentment or ill > will. Even though it's an obstacle in building new relationships? >>>Kristen got on with her life. Wendy's getting on with hers. Jim is >>>just... stuck. >> >>In you sick little head. You want to >>picture him as stuck somewhere >>bad. > > That's what he does; Tell me where I'm off base. I was right two years ago when I told you your relationship with Kristen would ruin the one with Wendy. You admitted I was right that Wendy is relieved the relationship is over. I've not said anything different from what Wendy and your one sensible sister have told you. Are they also "sick" and "wanting to picture you somewhere bad"? |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
C. James Strutz wrote:
>>>>I've yet to have a host slap a "huge steak and tiny potato" on my plate, >>>>per your inane question which you repeatedly insisted I answer. >>> >>>But if you did, >> >>I've already answered the question. > > You never answered Yes, I did. I'd rather eat something I don't like during ONE meal than offend someone. Did you object when Wendy cooked venison? |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Scented Retard wrote:
>>>>I've yet to have a host slap a "huge steak and tiny potato" on my plate, >>>>per your inane question which you repeatedly insisted I answer. >>> >>>But if you did, >> >>I've already answered the question. > > You would not eat the steak. I wrote that I'd rather eat it than offend someone, dumb ass. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Scented Retard wrote:
> Yes. He's the creepiest of the trolls > here. Coming from an arrested-development, morally-confused old skag like you, that's a compliment. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Skanky Nutball wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>True friends needn't ask ahead of time so they can decide if >>>>>>> >>>>>>>they'll >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>eat >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>before the party or bring their own food. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>True friends are sympathetic to one's eating preferences. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>True friends are honest if your preferences go overboard. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>You automatically assume that vegans go "overboard" >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>Veganism is already an extreme, so it's reasonable to point out >>>>>>> >>>>>>>vegans' >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>extremism when it manifests itself in irrational and offensive >>>>>>> >>>>>>>actions. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>It's far from reality. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>Liar. Have you read through vegan literature or websites lately > > to > >>>>>see >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>how "overboard" they go in imposing their wills upon others? Not >>>>> >>>>>only >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>in >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>terms of diet, Putz, but with respect to medicine, apparel, and > > so > >>>>>on. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>Lesley this morning pasted some diatribe taking credit for >>> >>>shutting >>> >>> >>>>>>>down >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>a farm that provided guinea pigs for medical research. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>If the meal is too meat based >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>You shouldn't be asked to attend. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>You mean 'invited'. An invitation is not a request. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>1. The act of inviting. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>2. A spoken or written *REQUEST* for someone's presence or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>participation. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>3. An allurement, enticement, or attraction. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>http://www.thefreedictionary.com/invitation >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>'Invitation' is still a more appropriate word. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>An invitation IS a request. Dummy. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>My emphasis. Are you a dummy or just a liar? >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>You don't give many alternatives, do you? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>One more then: Both. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>Let's talk about you and Wendy. Are you still seeing her >>>>> >>>>>personally >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>or >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>just professionally for your "issues" now? >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>Why are you trying to change the subject again? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>You're the one who's taken this thread away from discussing >>> >>>Skanky's >>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>offenses, Putz. So let's discuss yours. Are you still seeing > > Wendy > >>>>>>>>>>>>personally or just professionally for your "issues"? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>You take offence >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>No, Wendy did. That's why she tried to diagnose him with > > Asperger's. > >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>You are jealous >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>No. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Yes. >>>>>> >>>>>>No. >>>>> >>>>>Yes >>>> >>>>No. >>> >>>Very >> >>Not one bit. >> >> >>>>>>>It was proven >>>>>> >>>>>>No, it wasn't. Dreck's incessant shit-stirring isn't "proof" of >>>>>>anything, except that he lacks character. >>>>> >>>>>It was >>>> >>>>No, it was not. >>> >>>It was >> >>No, it wasn't. > > > Yes it was. No. > You claimed to have > a girlfriend for 4 years. Correct. > Derek posted a link where you > said you were currently looking > for a girlfriend in 2003 I think it > was. They can't both be true. Why not? :-) >>>>>>>>>of anyone who has >>>>>>>>>a real girlfriend >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Jim doesn't have a real girlfriend. She dumped him. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>If that's true, >>>>>> >>>>>>It is. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>then at least he was >>>>>>>still 'getting some' >>>>>> >>>>>>The only pussy he's had eats Fancy Feast. >>>>> >>>>>He gets more than you >>>> >>>>No, he doesn't. >>> >>>I'd bet he does. >> >>You'd lose your welfare cheque, dummy. > > You're fishing No, it's established. |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| New survey on the RFC site: Would you get offended if... | General Cooking | |||
| Preserving and TV Hosts | Preserving | |||
| Skanky's pot abuse problem | Vegan | |||
| Skanky Carpetmuncher's dilemma | Vegan | |||
| Skanky Carpetmuncher's ignorance compounds her arrogance | Vegan | |||
Linear Mode
