What’s there to say? Your posting history speaks for itself.
It depends on how many cups of hot cocoa I’ve had that evening. 
Prepare to be disappointed.
Just want to let it be known that I had been contemplating a jape about the careful definition the word “earnest” has been subjected to, contemplating various verbal mechanisms to associate it with “importance”. Upon reflection, I have restrained myself.
Your approval and commendation is presumed, it will not be necessary to explicity say so.
Aw, shucks, I was hoping you’d go Wilde.
I really don’t understand what the big problem is. We all know he importance of being earnest.
I don’t read merely the posts of those posting at the same time of day I am. I go back through threads I’m interested in and read all the posts I’ve missed. I have read plenty of your posts, enough even before this thread to have reached the conclusion that you are a complete imbecile. Then you come into this thread - strutting your ignorance about an issue I care deeply about, that I have knowledge about, that (one, two, three, four) four pit threads were already started about where you could have gained some knowledge, a thread that wasn’t even supposed to be for argument of the issues but for argument of the effect of the issues on politics - anyway, you come in here proudly being stupid, and I’m supposed to treat you kindly and gently show you the error of your ways?
Fuck you.
I sense that you’re conflicted. Why, in this very thread you first called me a complete imbecile (post #15), then you said I “seem bright” (post #91), and now you’re back where you started with complete imbecile again. Perhaps you should wait a few days till you get this sorted out in your mind. You appear to be under stress at the moment.
No, fuck you! 
You do seem bright, but you don’t use your brain. That makes you the functional equivilant of a complete imbecile. There’s no contradiction there at all.
Perhaps you could 'splain to me how one could be bright and an imbecile at the same time, functional or not. As far as I’m aware, imbecility is an absolute and once in its grip it is permanent.
And while you’re at it, perhaps you could also explain to me just what it was about my post to Miller that got your panties in a twist this time.
And then perhaps you could explain to me just what it is about my explanations as to my posts regarding Terri Shiavo that keep you from understanding what I’m saying even though I’ve gone to considerable pains to describe how they came about.
And finally, perhaps you could explain to me just how it is that despite my apology and the rescension of my comments, you continue to blather on about my faux pas? Among the posters I’m most familiar with, once an apology is offered, the vituperation tends to cease. Why is this not so in your case?
Can someone just open another thread to discuss StarvingArtist’s supposed imbecility?
Because for some reason unknown to me, there are posters on this board that like you. When one likes someone, one is willing to cut them some slack even in the case of repeated instances of willful and obstinate ignorance. I don’t like you, so I am not willing to cut you that slack. You must be too young to understand how social interactions work.
Maybe tomorrow. I’ll stop assisting in the hijack of this one now.
Ah…
First an attempt at argument by attrition, and now a denial of responsiblity by attrition.
Be careful you don’t jam those fingers in too much harder - I suspect they’re in danger of meeting in the middle.
Here’s a hint, though, which I assume you’ll blindly blow past: Admitting you’re a jackass doesn’t really do a whole lot of good if it’s followed by continued jackassery - particuarly if it’s jackassery in which you seem inordinately proud.
-Joe, apologizes for using such big words
Huh. Son of a gun. Somebody’s already started one, though the OP’s name doesn’t look familiar.
Well, I’m certainly old enough to know how graciousness and manners work. In any thread I can think of, once an opponent has acknowledged their error and apologized for it, his adversaries accept it graciously and cease with the vituperation. The fact that you feel yourself exempt from these generally accepted norms, along with the silly last line about my being too young to understand social interaction, leads me to believe you are just an immature twit.
But I will certainly keep in mind how lightly you take apologies the next time I’m tempted to offer one, and if I’m offering one to an entire group as in this case, I’ll be sure to exempt you along with an explanation as to why. I really don’t think you’ll find yourself that well thought of around here if your response to apologies is going to be so cavalier and based on whether or not you personally like the apologist.
On the presumption that there can be no actual hijacking a train wreck…
I have seen the edge, the theoretical limit. Fox News reached it today, (it was featured on the Daily Show, if you think I am but I swear I’m not making this up…)
John Edwards, the (ahem) psychic weighing in on his opinion of the alterntatively conciousnessed “Terry”…
You got your C, speed of light, absolute limit in motion/speed, absolute zero, lowest temperature limit, and John Edwards on Fox opining on “Terry”: neutron density douchebaggitude. Seen it all now, nothing left. Only options are suicide and strong drink.
See you at the bar.
Good lord, did he actually claim to be in communication with Terri? What did he say?
I know it’s Fox, so I shouldn’t be surprised but I am. Tooting around in the bootom of the barrel is something I expect from them, but this is boring right through the bottom of the barrel and into fetid soil beneath it.
For a pound, I will not hijack this train wreck to Luton.
Rooting.
You’ll be happy to know that The Daily Show mercilessly savaged them for that tonight. I must admit that I, too, was totally shocked by the clips that they showed of the fucktard weighing in on this matter and claiming that Terri was aware of the chaos that was going on around her. :::shudder:::
I don’t know about you, but I’m on my second drink for the evening.
John Edward communicates with the dead.
John Edward communicated with Terri Schiavo.
Therefore, Terri Schiavo is dead. QED