I’d like to see answers to either to these, if you’re responding.
^^ He’s probably blocked me and don’t see this, so I’ll make a bet: he says there are too much to choose from.
Oooh, he got you real good right there, Bill!
Don’t hold your breath. No matter how easy you make it for him, he’s clearly not interested.
Bumping this for Clothahump’s attention.
Still hoping for a straight and clear answer to each of the points I have repeated from the start.
So I hope we’ve all learnt some lessons here.
You can hug it out if you want to. I’ll skip it, thanks.
Jeez. You asked for a simple Yes or No, you got one. Interpret it however you wish. If you want to take it as a yes to everything, go for it.
And there you have it. Not Carlson was it everything you hoped for?
You express ire and distain toward other posters like SaneBill for making reasoned interpetations of your posting behavior, yet now you tell me to interpret your non-specific “yes” in whichever way I wish?
No. I’m not interested in playing a game of taking your words and twisting them to mean what I want them too. I want to know what YOU mean by YOUR own words.
Can you own your words?
Can you justify your words?
Can your words be trusted?
Words such as these:
Well, I am still hoping for clarification.
So, again, to the points I started with and have endeavored to lay out to you as clearly as possible multiple times:
A: You agree, with other posters that CosmicManiac’s reference to Norman Osborn was ridiculous, that he was wrong to use terms such as “bitch” and “broad”, and that he was wrong to brand Helena330 an “anti-male, feminist zealot” for using the term “thinking with his dick”.
Yes or no?
B: You agree that some of the comments posted before you stepped into the original Pit thread were actually quite rational.
Yes or no?
C: You agree that Helena330’s response to CosmicManiac’s attack was a gracious response.
Yes or no?
An honest a straight answer to each, please.
Nope.
Still banging my head against the brick wall. Beginning to suspect it has concrete and steel reinforcement behind it.
Fortunately, whenever I see your name the Sesame Street theme song starts playing in my severely fractured head, giving me the encouragement to keep trying.
Yes to each.
I don’t know what you are trying to prove with all of this, and I’m not sure you do either.
OK. Great!
Now, finally, we can get to the crux of the matter, which is this:
If you can agree (with the posters before you) that CosmicManiac’s comments were ridiculous, reprehensible and indefensible,
if you can now acknowledge that the posters before you were presenting rational comments in rebuke of CosmicManiac and in defense of Helena330,
and if you can now agree that Helena330 provided CosmicManiac with a charitable response to his nasty rant,
. . . then what in god’s good name made you feel the need to jump into that thread with a drive-by partisan snipe, thereby taking the side of CosmicManiac *against *Helena330 and placing yourself in opposition to all those posters who had made rational and justified comments before you jumped in?
If you claim you didn’t intend your post in support of CosmicManiac nor agree with his misogyny and mischaracterization of Helena330, then that means you can’t have properly read or understood the thread before you made your post.
If you say you didn’t mean your comment as a maligning of the specific posters who preceded you, then that means you chose to ignore those poster’s comments in favor of just making a blanket partisan attack on all.
So what made you feel the need to make such an unwarranted, illogical and antisocial snipe in that thread?
Don’t tell me it’s Liberal bigotry, stupidity or dishonesty that compelled you to do it. Not after you have now admitted that the posts preceding yours were logical and justified, unlike your own post and unlike CosmicManiac whom you chose to side with.
No. What compelled you to make that post came from inside you.
As, **digs **said on page 1 of this thread: This is a community. That means recognizing and engaging with other members. Not just lumping everyone into some nebulous conglomerate of otherness that you can sneer at.
If you can, in honesty, acknowledge that in this one case your post was fully unjustified, and that the posters you maligned were in fact engaged in rational and justifiable posting before you stepped in to stir things up, maybe you can begin to extrapolate that thought to your general behavior in this community.
Maybe stop and take a moment to think before you make your next drive-by anti-liberal jab.
Read the threads you post in before dismissing everyone else as illogical and dishonest. That behavior is so utterly insulting.
Take a moment to consider criticisms and contrary opinions before telling people to “fuck off” or putting them on ignore.
Do you even have an interest in belonging to this community?
That was beautiful, Not Carlson.
Not sure if you planned it from the start, but if you did, you are an evil, evil person, and deserve your own entry in the Smackdown thread. 
However after that Clothahump will feel so ambushed that your wise words will make nothing to improve his behaviour. In fact you may have made things worse if possible… but I’m sure no-one else will blame you as we all here love wit and art and this certainly was both.
I concur - an elegantly-presented argument.
Sadly, I suspect the response will be silence, and possibly adding Not Carlson to his Ignore list to avoid having to address such awkward questions.
But who knows - we may be pleasantly surprised. I wouldn’t put any money down on it, though.
Thanks.
It wasn’t my intent to set a trap for Clothahump, so much as to get him to look in the mirror.
I’d say the only trap is the one he set for himself by doing everything he claims to despise about his liberal strawman.
Clothahump has been limping around these boards with a bear trap on his leg for years. Some folks have tried to point this out to him, but most have given up and choose, understandably, to just point and laugh.
This thread has, essentially, been a week and a half exercise of trying, with fraying patience, to advise Clothahump
“Hey! Fella! There’s a bloody great big bear trap on your leg!”
Well, good on you for trying. As you note, many of us have also tried over the years, only to have him ignore all posts of substance and resort to abuse (and then accuse the rest of us of not having any posts of substance and resorting only to abuse). After a while you stop trying and just derive whatever feeble amusement you can out of pointing and laughing at his twisted rationalizations.
No. It’s been a week and a half of you wasting my time. But at least you were civil about it.
There are no bear traps on my leg. Have a nice day.
That, Boo-boo, is why Clot’s dumber than the aaaaverage bear.
Well, at least it wasn’t silence.
But once again, presented with a robust argument demonstrating that his position is wrong, he reacts in his usual fashion.
