Let's discuss why Codell's signature is offensive...

Huh? A) never lied...B) what does it have to do with anything? I know you're joking...just don't get it.

 

Dude,

Just throwing out some BS to derail this innane discussion.


Liar !



DD

 

Oh, ok, but why are you doing it wearing a tutu?

 

Arabs make up less than 5% of the Muslim world- is that accurate? I know a large amount of Muslims live in the Philippines and India and don't commit terrorism.

Perhaps Codell should say Arabs, not Muslims.

I don't agree with you that Jewish settlers commit more terrorism however. Not even percentage wise- there are Jews all over the world as well. Can you really deny that extremist Arab Muslims are the people committing the majority of terrorism in this world?

As far as priests, the percentage is still very low.

 

....and then some of the victim's families have filed a class action lawsuit against some Arabs who they claim aided in the bombing. Wow MacBeth, interesting how your examples has come full circle so quickly.

http://www.cbn.com/CBNNews/News/021022a.asp

 

This isnt an argument as to whether one mass murderer is worse than another.
The argument is about sigs. Yours for instance is a joke Geo.Will was telling Cub fans that they would understand. You obviously would like to take it a different way.
Codells sig is also a joke..but is so close to the truth it makes some folks uncomfortable. Your sig isnt.

 

i don't argue with any of your points here

 

That's it, I am taking off the tutu, and putting on my g-string....it is a bit cramped on my manhood, but nevertheless the guantlet has been thrown down.

I am offended that all tutu wearing people like me are made fun of, please stop, we have rights tutu.



DD

 

1) We are talking about sigs, and whether or not they are offensive...the sematics don't alter anything. If you want to be literal, we aren't talking about bombers, right. We also aren't alking about suicide bombers...but suicide bombers who masquerade as huggers...If you want to draw ridiculous lines about literal intepretation, I can do that too...and i have yet to hear of any suicide bombers, muslim or otherwise, masquerading as huggers in order to kill. As such, if taken literally as you suggest, it is offensive because it is innacurate. We can argue the letter of the sig, or the spirit, it's up to you. I just don't want to argue if you are saying " This part of the sig should be taken absolutely literally...this part, however, is clearly not to be taken literally."

2) What the hell do you know about how I want to take Will's comment, or what he meant either? It was a comment about conservatism, liberalism, and baseball made by a noted conservative...that is my only remark about it so far. Add to that the fact that I don't consider myself either conservative or liberal, and the reason that I love Will is that he has the ability to laugh at himself and his positions despite being adamant about them, which is why I love the quote. As such, please explain to me my 'take' on Will's comment, let alone how it's obvious.

 

God, upon re-reading it, I sure do. I really need to learn how to type.

 

Seeing as how I am a nice and reasonable guy (plus the fact that I would hate to jeopardize my standing as the 5th most respectable poster on the BBS ), and despite the fact that I don't feel the need to or should have to, I am changing my sig because quite frankly, I am too engrossed in making certain people look bad in the "Larry Smith = Coach Killer" thread to take the proper time to defend myself in this thread.

Hence, my new sig is based on the following quote:

 

Codell,
You don't happen to have the url for the thread in which you got the Heretic quote, do you?

 

I love it...but for the record, Codell, I might have found your post a bit offensive, but I know that you are not, nor never would mean to be offensive, and I wouldn't have had a problem with you if you'd kept it. In fact, they are two seperate points...1) I can see people finding it offensive...2) I agree with your take vis a vis If you don't like it, ignore me,etc. In fact, if this argument had become about whether or not you should have to change it as opposed to whether or not it is offensive, I would have been arguing on your side.


That said, your new post should remain carved in stone, especially if it influences the views of new posters about DD's sense of style.

 

That thread is pretty old. Probably 2-3 months ago. So no, I don't. However, I do remember that no one had said anything to Heretic about it (that I remember).

 

There are an army of posters who share a common fantasy of finding an error in either my logic or an inconsistency in my line of thinking. It is their ultimate wet dream to locate one of these and point it out. Because they strive tirelessly to pleasure themselves in this manner, they will make ridiculous allegations and *enormous* stretches in logic. This is yet another example. Franchise Blade, glynch and No Worries are generals in this army. pgabriel, underoverup, Timing and SamFisher are foot soldiers in the army.

 

Thanks...that's all I wanted to know...

 

It wasnt a comment about conservatism or libralism..it was a joke about the Cubs. Any Oiler fan knows what he is getting at...You dont even understand your own sig.

 

Wow.


I am mortified that my hours a day spent trying to figure out a way to poke a hole in your otherwise invulnerable reasoning were not recognized with at least a NCO distinction...I know that others spend 25-27 hrs/day, and i can't copmare, but surely I am worthy of at least two stripes.


p.s...You don't really believe what you just said, do you?

 

Codell,

I am honored.

In honor of you....I have changed my sig tutu.

DD

 

Lol! I guess not...I just own the series where he said it, have read a few books he's written, and have seen the man speak several times in person.

Yes, it was a joke...but yes, he also chose the substance of the joke...and again, you are making incorrect assumptions about how I take this. He used the terms liberal and conservatism, hence it is at least partly about liberalism and conservatism, however serious..beyond that I have made absolutely no comment on what he is saying about liberalism and conservatism, or how seriosu he was in saying it. YOU have given me those words, and then judged me on them. And this despite my last post which pointed out exactly why I enjoy this quote...

Certainly one of us isn't understanding something.