OOTB's Political Thread . ..

[bluetoe]

Tell it to RFK

did RFK post here? I'm telling you, in direct reply to your post. Pesticides are helpful...but misused.

If you tried to suddenly ditch unprocessed food we'd likely have a financial shock, followed by something like a famine.

Let's see, who was it said that whatever needed to be done, be done 'in a phased, smart manner' ? Oh yeah, that was you calling for the banning of pesticides. Wouldn't you think that anything of import needs to be done this way, and not like Biden getting out of Afghanistan? That's what I think anyway, which is why I said nothing about 'ditching unprocessed foods suddenly'......or even at all, at least not entirely.

One thing I'm convinced that needs to happen though is getting so much sugar out of everything. That could happen immediately AFAIC.

 

[nctransplant]

I also agree with your take here on trans surgeries.

 

[strummingram]

You really don't know how military actions/inactions/policy and intelligence gathering/relationships can **** up stuff long term? For example, we do something to piss off our allies in the intelligence community and they stop sharing intelligence. You think you can just flip a switch and fix that?

Oh, I know! I was asking what YOU were referring to! Thank you for the detail.

 

[bluetoe]

I'm not complaining. I think it's hilarious.

OK, just redefine 'complaint' to mean 'hilarity'. We first define our terms, right? Let's try again.....

crazy isn't it? They shove the trans in our faces non-stop and then find it hilarious that we focus on the trans.

That better? Do you think that makes you sound more sane? It doesn't.

 

[tarheel0910]

I also agree with your take here on trans surgeries.

I'm just going to assume this is just a bad joke, because you have proven in the past that you're smart enough to know the actual issue.

 

[bluetoe]

But self-regulation + massive profits is a prob.

self-regulation could be a problem, but I'm not sure where we introduced the notion of self-regulation. I may have missed it. What I had in mind was gov. regulation, but on the up and up..

Massive profits is only a problem for commies. Massive profits fund massive research which saves lives and improves Q of L. Saving lives is kinda neat, huh?

 

[bluetoe]

I also agree with your take here on trans surgeries.

 

[strummingram]

OK, just redefine 'complaint' to mean 'hilarity'. We first define our terms, right? Let's try again.....



That better? Do you think that makes you sound more sane? It doesn't.

It has nothing to do with sanity. Sanity is hardly universal/objective. Redefine whatever you want. I still think it's funny... and, mostly, sorta pathetic... that trans people pose such a threat to people like you. You still get to be the same old bigot that you are, and rail at them until you finally keel over.

 

[strummingram]

You really don't know how military actions/inactions/policy and intelligence gathering/relationships can **** up stuff long term? For example, we do something to piss off our allies in the intelligence community and they stop sharing intelligence. You think you can just flip a switch and fix that?

Aren't you looking forward to the war in Gaza ending, the Ukraine war ending, and all of the other wars ending... before he even gets inaugurated? Not to mention, the concepts of plans.

 

[tarheel0910]

Aren't you looking forward to the war in Gaza ending, the Ukraine war ending, and all of the other wars ending... before he even gets inaugurated? Not to mention, the concepts of plans.

I would love for Israel to finish them, so we don't have to worry about it. And if Russia can go back to making decent vodka and stop invading countries for no reason that would be great. If Trump can somehow do that, then I would say well done. But he can't do that regardless of what some believe.

 

[gunslingerdick]

I would love for Israel to finish them, so we don't have to worry about it. And if Russia can go back to making decent vodka and stop invading countries for no reason that would be great. If Trump can somehow do that, then I would say well done. But he can't do that regardless of what some believe.

So you believe a year from now that there is no resolution in either situation?

 

[strummingram]

I would love for Israel to finish them, so we don't have to worry about it. And if Russia can go back to making decent vodka and stop invading countries for no reason that would be great. If Trump can somehow do that, then I would say well done. But he can't do that regardless of what some believe.

Maybe he can. He says he can. He says he WILL do it.

I really don't know much about his appointees for intelligence offices. I know Tulsi Gabbard, but I don't know if she's qualified for that office. He will have very loyal folks around him this time.

If America gets kicked to the curb, and left out in the cold (I need more cliches)... then, Americans are to blame. They voted for him, they got a GOP-led everything. So, I'm looking forward to inflation disappearing, tariffs bringing vitality back the the US Economy, gas at $1 a gallon, all the global fighting to finally end. We get to pick all our own fruit, and have all the menial jobs that no one wants to do, go unfilled... that will lead to great economic prosperity. And, no more dogs and cats being eaten! 25 million wetbacks get sent wet-back-packing.

 

[tarheel0910]

So you believe a year from now that there is no resolution in either situation?

Well, as far as Ukraine goes, my definition of resolution is for Russia to go back home with no gains. So, I don't believe that will be over. As far as Gaza goes, I'm not sure. It depends on how fast Israel can get rid of them and how much more Iran gets involved. I have no doubt it will be up to Israel when it ends. Not Trump. But it would be great if he could. I would be extremely happy watching Putin fall on his face and a couple of terrorists groups wiped off the map.

 

[pooponduke]

Tell it to RFK

If you tried to suddenly ditch unprocessed food we'd likely have a financial shock, followed by something like a famine.

Wasn't ignoring you, just had one of those days. And, on a Friday evening, I just don't have the energy to go back and dig through/respond to each specific comment. I'll just say that I think it's a good thing to have someone involved who is openly speaking about some of the dirty little secrets from a health standpoint. Couple of things to hit.

You say that RFK "walks and talks like someone anti-vaxx" which sounds like another poster (former????) here who's favorite phrases were claiming someone was a crotch remora and then completely mischaracterizing what was said by prefacing it by saying "sounds like". RFK has repeatedly said that he is not anti-vax. Rather, he says that he is pro vax choice and that he is pro safe vax. You say things like there is absolutely no connection between autism rates skyrocketing and vaccines, but just exactly how do you know that? Because someone from pharm or the government told us so? Something is causing it along with a host of other issues medically speaking and that needs to be determined whether it is vaccines or something else. I got vaccines, my kids got vaccines, and so far the grandbaby has gotten what has been recommended. The fear is whether or not those "recommendations" are the best advice. Forgive me if I don't exactly trust the same people saying this who told us that the ouuchi would keep us from getting covid and that young people who basically didn't get or have any impact whatsoever (statistically) from covid needed, cha-ching, to be vaxxed - repeatedly. How many boosters are you up to at this point? IF you'll be honest, I bet you stopped them like everyone else. WHY? They are STILL recommended.

That's the problem with a bunch of vaccines. If you look at the list of vaccines that we got as kids and the list now, it's crazy. I'm out of my depth here, admittedly, but there are some obvious issues. Why are we giving newborns things like Hepatis B vax? In large part, it's spread by sex and needles, but newborns are getting vaxxed? That recommendation didn't start until 1991 I think. Do you remember your friends having an epidemic of Hep B growing up? Neither do I, but, cha-ching. Just makes no sense to give stuff to babies that can wait even if there is a real value to it over the long term from an entire life standpoint. But, cha-ching.

One more thing. You'll be shocked by me being a fan of Ronnie Raygun. But he was far from perfect. How on earth he passed immunity for vaccines is beyond me. Lastly, what happened to the guy who was on Obama the God's short list for FDA? Did he only become a nut after he decided Trump was relatively better than KH?

Gonna get some supper and get ready for the game at 8:00. Enjoy.

 

[bluetoe]

It has nothing to do with sanity. Sanity is hardly universal/objective. Redefine whatever you want. I still think it's funny... and, mostly, sorta pathetic... that trans people pose such a threat to people like you. You still get to be the same old bigot that you are, and rail at them until you finally keel over.

nothing to do with sanity? I beg to differ. It may be subjective, but I don't think you can reasonably contend that it isn't a sign of some sort of mental disorder to constantly stick something in someone's face and then go nuts when they react to it.

I have nothing at all against transgender people or any other people based merely on what their makeup is; but I don't care much for misfortune, including the misfortune of confused sexuality. Something else I don't care for is a virtue-signaling dufus who thinks we should all believe whatever idiocy he happens to believe or else he'll go infantile and make stupid accusations out of pettiness..

Now redefine whatever suits you.

 

[bluetoe]

I would love for Israel to finish them, so we don't have to worry about it. And if Russia can go back to making decent vodka and stop invading countries for no reason that would be great. If Trump can somehow do that, then I would say well done. But he can't do that regardless of what some believe.

I doubt Trump is gonna flip some switch and make Putin change his course of action regarding Ukraine, and I'm not going to think it to be some big failure if he doesn't. But I wouldn't rule anything out, either. If I was Trump, I would negotiate and put Russia on a better footing with us and the rest of the world in exchange for leaving Ukraine alone. There is no other highly significant reason for us to treat Russia as an enemy, especially since it's clear that doing so isn't going to keep Trump out of office.

I do not want to abandon Ukraine to the Russians. If that's the way it goes, it will be just another 'bad' to be taken with the overwhelming good of Kamala Harris not being president.

 

[strummingram]

I have nothing at all against transgender people

Bullshit

I think the statement was "I wish it didn't exist, but..."

Then you prove it with your own bigoted commentary...

"I don't care much for misfortune, including the misfortune of confused sexuality."

Misfortune? They're not confused at all. Just like homosexuals are not confused. Nor are they defective... There's nothing unfortunate or wrong with it. Unless, you're just a prejudiced bigot who hates what he doesn't understand or agree with.

 

[heelmanwilm]

Chill dawg. I haven’t forgotten about you. You can jerk me off too.

 

[bluetoe]

Bullshit

I think the statement was "I wish it didn't exist, but..."

Then you prove it with your own bigoted commentary...

"I don't care much for misfortune, including the misfortune of confused sexuality."

Misfortune? They're not confused at all. Just like homosexuals are not confused. Nor are they defective... There's nothing unfortunate or wrong with it. Unless, you're just a prejudiced bigot who hates what he doesn't understand or agree with.

you don't mind seeming to be completely stupid in order to try to make your asinine point, do you? Of course I said that. I wish there wasn't such a thing as sexual confusion. CONFUSION...look it up. I am absolutely sure that it doesn't say 'NOT confused'. Now try to demonstrate how that means I have anything against people who deal with sexual confusion. Try to overcome what should be inarguable, that I instead most likely have empathy for people who deal with the sexual confusion that makes one desire to be what they biologically are not intended to be. Or are we just going to conveniently redefine 'confusion', the way you previously tried to turn your obvious complaint into feigned hilarity?

There is hilarity here though, because you're just a fvcking joke.

I happen to wish there wasn't such a thing as poverty. Show mw how that means I have anything against poor people. Oh wait, I hate them because they're poor? Or oh wait what, they aren't really poor?

I mean what I say and no attempt on your part to distort what I say makes any difference. I happen to think you're just a petty prick who wants to strike back like a scorned woman who's been dumped, when you're losing an argument caused by your need to virtue-signal. Show me how that means you're anything but a petty, virtue-signaling prick acting like a snotty little girl who isn't getting her way.

LOL, you know, this lame attempt to shame me actually is pretty funny.


I can't stop there either. YOU are the one who takes us all to task for having the arrogance and audacity to believe we can speak the minds of others. And here your hypocrite ass is telling me what homosexuals think and feel. Even if you yourself are homo, does that make you capable of speaking for all homos?

 

[pooponduke]

This is gold. Things like:

"Black people. They're just like us!" and "Democrats have become like a royal family that, because of so much incest, has unfortunately had children who are retarded."

 

[strummingram]

you don't mind seeming to be completely stupid in order to try to make your asinine point, do you? Of course I said that. I wish there wasn't such a thing as sexual confusion. CONFUSION...look it up. I am absolutely sure that it doesn't say 'NOT confused'. Now try to demonstrate how that means I have anything against people who deal with sexual confusion. Try to overcome what should be inarguable, that I instead most likely have empathy for people who deal with the sexual confusion that makes one desire to be what they biologically are not intended to be. Or are we just going to conveniently redefine 'confusion', the way you previously tried to turn your obvious complaint into feigned hilarity?

There is hilarity here though, because you're just a fvcking joke.

I happen to wish there wasn't such a thing as poverty. Show mw how that means I have anything against poor people. Oh wait, I hate them because they're poor? Or oh wait what, they aren't really poor?

I mean what I say and no attempt on your part to distort what I say makes any difference. I happen to think you're just a petty prick who wants to strike back like a scorned woman who's been dumped, when you're losing an argument caused by your need to virtue-signal. Show me how that means you're anything but a petty, virtue-signaling prick acting like a snotty little girl who isn't getting her way.

LOL, you know, this lame attempt to shame me actually is pretty funny.


I can't stop there either. YOU are the one who takes us all to task for having the arrogance and audacity to believe we can speak the minds of others. And here your hypocrite ass is telling me what homosexuals think and feel. Even if you yourself are homo, does that make you capable of speaking for all homos?

Poverty and poor are completely different... It's like illness. Illness means suffering. You've got this prejudice that people who you believe are confused are actually suffering. That it's "bad" to be these things. The suffering implication only exists from the belief that it should be considered some kind of affliction. Homosexuals even co-opted the word GAY as a term of reference. Gay is the opposite of suffering. Your whole world view is a rigid ideology , and vernacular, that disparages women, feminity, anything that isn't white, Christian masculine in some archaic-traditional sense.

You have also shown that you don't really care about the "misfortune" of the poor or impoverished if they color outside the lines of your world view.

 

[bluetoe]

Poverty and poor are completely different... It's like illness. Illness means suffering. You've got this prejudice that people who you believe are confused are actually suffering. That it's "bad" to be these things. The suffering implication only exists from the belief that it should be considered some kind of affliction. Homosexuals even co-opted the word GAY as a term of reference. Gay is the opposite of suffering. Your whole world view is a rigid ideology , and vernacular, that disparages women, feminity, anything that isn't white, Christian masculine in some archaic-traditional sense.

You have also shown that you don't really care about the "misfortune" of the poor or impoverished if they color outside the lines of your world view.

right. Let's redefine 'suffering' now. People in poverty aren't suffering. Flood victims in WNC are not really victims and they aren't really suffering. A gazillion Jews didn't suffer during WWII because only illness causes suffering. What else do you need to redefine in a lame attempt to rationalize your misplaced pettiness? While we're at it, let's move those goalposts just enough that my contention doesn't seem to apply. Now suddenly we are no longer addressing, but in fact denying your implication that if you hate the condition, you must hate the person. To that end, we'll just stipulate that you have the most reliable, God-like knowledge that homosexuals are all deliriously happy with their circumstance.

The condition of poverty is not something that I want to exist. The condition of homosexuality is not something that I want to exist. But both do, and more often than not neither the homo or the poor person chose for that to be the case and in many cases in fact wishes it wasn't. I was poor when young and although now I'm fine with having been poor, it was definitely a problem and you can believe it caused suffering. I DID NOT WANT TO BE POOR, but now I'm actually proud to have been that way. Still, I would eliminate poverty if I could and I would eliminate homosexuality if I could, even as I count gay people among my friends and friendly acquaintances. It isn't like I blame them for being that way simply because there is nothing to blame them FOR...except in your twisted world view where any stance not aligned with yours represents bigotry or misogyny or racism or any other -ism excuse for virtue-signaling, as well as your stupidly misused notion of 'prejudice'.

And your virtue-signaling ass knows damn well that both have problems due to their circumstance, because otherwise you'd have nothing to virtue-signal about. Of course, that hasn't seemed to stop you so far, so maybe that isn't such a good point..

"You have also shown that you don't really care about the "misfortune" of the poor or impoverished if they color outside the lines of your world view."

The invectives you casually toss at me exist only in your demented mind. All you can do is state your misguided conclusions. You can not materially validate them. If you ever decide to not be such a petty shithead, try to know what you're talking about and be able to demonstrate it before you call someone a bigot.

I will admit that I am not a 'people person' and I don't cry myself to sleep at night worrying about the human condition. I accept that we will all die and I want everyone to stand on their own two feet in the meantime, as much as possible. But I detest trouble and suffering, and I'm not too fond of problems in general. Sue me..

 

[strummingram]

right. Let's redefine 'suffering' now. People in poverty aren't suffering. Flood victims in WNC are not really victims and they aren't really suffering. A gazillion Jews didn't suffer during WWII because only illness causes suffering. What else do you need to redefine in a lame attempt to rationalize your misplaced pettiness? While we're at it, let's move those goalposts just enough that my contention doesn't seem to apply. Now suddenly we are no longer addressing, but in fact denying your implication that if you hate the condition, you must hate the person. To that end, we'll just stipulate that you have the most reliable, God-like knowledge that homosexuals are all deliriously happy with their circumstance.

The condition of poverty is not something that I want to exist. The condition of homosexuality is not something that I want to exist. But both do, and more often than not neither the homo or the poor person chose for that to be the case and in many cases in fact wishes it wasn't. I was poor when young and although now I'm fine with having been poor, it was definitely a problem and you can believe it caused suffering. I DID NOT WANT TO BE POOR, but now I'm actually proud to have been that way. Still, I would eliminate poverty if I could and I would eliminate homosexuality if I could, even as I count gay people among my friends and friendly acquaintances. It isn't like I blame them for being that way simply because there is nothing to blame them FOR...except in your twisted world view where any stance not aligned with yours represents bigotry or misogyny or racism or any other -ism excuse for virtue-signaling, as well as your stupidly misused notion of 'prejudice'.

And your virtue-signaling ass knows damn well that both have problems due to their circumstance, because otherwise you'd have nothing to virtue-signal about. Of course, that hasn't seemed to stop you so far, so maybe that isn't such a good point..

"You have also shown that you don't really care about the "misfortune" of the poor or impoverished if they color outside the lines of your world view."

The invectives you casually toss at me exist only in your demented mind. All you can do is state your misguided conclusions. You can not materially validate them. If you ever decide to not be such a petty shithead, try to know what you're talking about and be able to demonstrate it before you call someone a bigot.

I will admit that I am not a 'people person' and I don't cry myself to sleep at night worrying about the human condition. I accept that we will all die and I want everyone to stand on their own two feet in the meantime, as much as possible. But I detest trouble and suffering, and I'm not too fond of problems in general. Sue me..

"Virtue signaler" provides you all the cover you need. If you'd just own your prejudice you could avoid writing a bunch of shit that I'm not going to read.

 

[bluetoe]

This is gold. Things like:

"Black people. They're just like us!" and "Democrats have become like a royal family that, because of so much incest, has unfortunately had children who are retarded."

View embedded media

yes this is gold, like much of what he has posited lately. I keep saying, he walks and talks like a republican; he's just too rooted in his idea of liberalism to BE a republican.

 

[bluetoe]

"Virtue signaler" provides you all the cover you need. If you'd just own your prejudice you could avoid writing a bunch of shit that I'm not going to read.

recognizing your deep emotional need to virtue-signal is not due to some prejudice of mine. Virtue-signalers demonstrably suck ass, and if you'd watch the video that @poopondook posted you might get some clue as to why that is so. I doubt it though, I'm sure you'll remain clueless. On the other hand it's a shame that you didn't read my post, because I had already made a point of your misuse of the notion of prejudice.

 

[strummingram]

recognizing your deep emotional need to virtue-signal is not due to some prejudice of mine. Virtue-signalers demonstrably suck ass, and if you'd watch the video that @poopondook posted you might get some clue as to why that is so. I doubt it though, I'm sure you'll remain clueless. On the other hand it's a shame that you didn't read my post, because I had already made a point of your misuse of the notion of prejudice.

You're just trying to get a kiss from me!

 

[bluetoe]

You're just trying to get a kiss from me!

I'm surprised you haven't already made a pass.

 

[strummingram]

and if you'd watch the video that @poopondook posted

I saw the episode.

I agree with Bill 100% in that clip!

ETA: But, you missed the part where he vehemently opposes the electoral college. He's not a republican.

 

[bluetoe]

I saw the episode.

I agree with Bill 100% in that clip!

ETA: But, you missed the part where he vehemently opposes the electoral college. He's not a republican.

he's obviously not actually a republican, as witnessed for one thing by his complaint that the dems wackiness caused the republican to get elected....but he OFTEN seems like one, espousing much that republicans find fault with the left for. I've been pointing that out for some time now.

 

[strummingram]

he's obviously not actually a republican, as witnessed for one thing by his complaint that the dems wackiness caused the republican to get elected....but he OFTEN seems like one, espousing much that republicans find fault with the left for. I've been pointing that out for some time now.

He just seems like Bill Maher to me.

 

[bluetoe]

He just seems like Bill Maher to me.

I've never watched his show that much, but enough so that it's clear to me that in the last several years he's pretty much run out of tolerance for the libtarditudinousness.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

I recommend watching this with speed turned up to 1.5x. YMMV.

We need to stop talking about gender, vaccines other relatively minor stuff, and focus on what Prof Wolff explains.

Cued to when he starts his talk.

 

[bluetoe]

The suffering implication only exists from the belief that it should be considered some kind of affliction. Homosexuals even co-opted the word GAY as a term of reference. Gay is the opposite of suffering.

for the sake of brevity I didn't address this previously, but it needs correcting. Your explanation is convenient to your POV, but it is of course erroneous. The term 'gay' didn't come about because homosexuals were so happy with their lot in life. It evolved from a time when homosexuality was seen as not just an aberration of normal sexuality, which it does happen to be, but a condition to be almost universally scorned even by many homosexuals.. 'Gay' was originally mildly pejorative based on the flamboyant and 'fruity' behavior that many associated with homosexuality.

The gay community embraced the term in much the same way that many black people embrace the word n____r, with the difference being that gays encouraged its use by non-gays as well because it was much more respectful and friendly, and therefor better, than the alternatives. This was also furthered by the more and more enlightened view that homosexuality was a condition that seemed to come about naturally and not some sickness or a sick lifestyle that was chosen. That isn't the case with the n-word, which is why it's use by non-blacks is so strongly discouraged.

The above...the evolution and use of terms according to the connotations resulting, would make for a very interesting discussion, but one that would bring about even more idiocy than a discussion of why the Civil War was fought.

The truest thing ever maintained is that 'a rose by any other name smells just as sweet', which of course means that it doesn't matter what you call something, it only matters what it in fact is.

 

[gteeitup]

gotcha moment

 

[bluetoe]

gotcha moment

View embedded media

to present things like this as some sort of 'gotcha' is just stupid. He's absolutely correct. Medical professionals are not always right, and as with most other aspects of our lives, we need to take 'authoritative' advice and use it to help us decide what is best for us.

I mean, please tell me....do I wear the mask or do I NOT wear the mask? Oh, both? Neither? You have no clue?

 

[bluetoe]

I recommend watching this with speed turned up to 1.5x. YMMV.

We need to stop talking about gender, vaccines other relatively minor stuff, and focus on what Prof Wolff explains.

Cued to when he starts his talk.

View embedded media

I tried to watch this at 1.5 as suggested, and having done as much of that as I could stand, my advice is...1.5 isn't fast enough. If you insist on watching it, watch it on warp speed just to get through it as fast as you can.

 

[strummingram]

for the sake of brevity I didn't address this previously, but it needs correcting. Your explanation is convenient to your POV, but it is of course erroneous. The term 'gay' didn't come about because homosexuals were so happy with their lot in life. It evolved from a time when homosexuality was seen as not just an aberration of normal sexuality, which it does happen to be, but a condition to be almost universally scorned even by many homosexuals.. 'Gay' was originally mildly pejorative based on the flamboyant and 'fruity' behavior that many associated with homosexuality.

The gay community embraced the term in much the same way that many black people embrace the word n____r, with the difference being that gays encouraged its use by non-gays as well because it was much more respectful and friendly, and therefor better, than the alternatives. This was also furthered by the more and more enlightened view that homosexuality was a condition that seemed to come about naturally and not some sickness or a sick lifestyle that was chosen. That isn't the case with the n-word, which is why it's use by non-blacks is so strongly discouraged.

The above...the evolution and use of terms according to the connotations resulting, would make for a very interesting discussion, but one that would bring about even more idiocy than a discussion of why the Civil War was fought.

The truest thing ever maintained is that 'a rose by any other name smells just as sweet', which of course means that it doesn't matter what you call something, it only matters what it in fact is.

I'm flattered that you would write, I mean posit, another novel days after I made the comment. But I'm not reading all that. I hope you dropped a lot of 50 cent words throughout, I'm sure you did.

 

[gteeitup]

to present things like this as some sort of 'gotcha' is just stupid. He's absolutely correct. Medical professionals are not always right, and as with most other aspects of our lives, we need to take 'authoritative' advice and use it to help us decide what is best for us.

I mean, please tell me....do I wear the mask or do I NOT wear the mask? Oh, both? Neither? You have no clue?

you missed the joke.

also, same guy that is somehow confused re: the “dangers” of cell phones and wifi.

eta: but he’s 70 and can do pull-ups.

 

[bluetoe]

you missed the joke.

also, same guy that is somehow confused re: the “dangers” of cell phones and wifi.

eta: but he’s 70 and can do pull-ups.

OK, let me point out the part of your post that doesn't make sense...

from here...

"you missed the joke. also, same guy that is somehow confused re: the “dangers” of cell phones and wifi. eta: but he’s 70 and can do pull-ups.

...to here

 

[bluetoe]

I'm flattered that you would write, I mean posit, another novel days after I made the comment. But I'm not reading all that. I hope you dropped a lot of 50 cent words throughout, I'm sure you did.

does it ever bother you that your fallback position is always one of ignorance and unqualified denial?