The Ryan-why don’t you follow the links given, and go over to JanL’s forum. I have a feeling you’ll fit in just fine…
well, that’s jist downrite mean, Guin
I Like that in a person 
Just in case anyone feels like trying to figure out how Washington fit into Skemper’s refererence to Kentucky, the case seems to be Adland v. Russ, 107 F.Supp.2d 782 (E.D.Ky.2000).
Happily, Skemper has taught us that Constitutional interpretation is as simple as quoting a passage from the Constitution, then phrases from the FF, therefore allowing us to ignore more than 200 years of subsequent thought on any issue. At this rate, even I could be a Supreme Court justice some day.
Thanks for the cite, Robb. Not surprisingly, the word “Washington” appears nowhere in the opinion. And thus is imbecility yet again vanquished from the fields of the Straight Dope.
Hey Guin, didn’t you know The Ryan doesn’t follow links. Especially those that may prove him wrong.
And Skemper, I was going to write something really nasty here, but decided to show you this instead.
The Ryan: I really hope that was a parody, because it had me laughing. For a few moments anyway, then I got bored and didn’t finish it.
Let me put it this way. If I bested you in debate by some measure… say perhaps you resorted to sputtering gibberish and argumentum ad absurdum [I mean really, inferior vena cava uses ‘inferior’ in the same context as ‘of inferior intelligence’ :rolleyes:] while I continued to speak coherently, would you prefer I stated:
- “I am more intelligent than The Ryan.”
- “The Ryan is inferior to me.”
- “In the context of this debate, I am making more sense than The Ryan.”
?
Ah, yes…TheRyan once again indulges in his semantic/mental masturbation games.
Do clean up afterward, TheRyan, your keyboard will thank you!
Ah yes, of course. I disagree with you, therefore I must be racist :rolleyes:.
Waverly
So, you just ignore views that don’t agree with yours?
You seem to be implying that you’re a better debater than me, even though you clearly do not know what the phrase “argumentum ad absurdum” means, and you apparently see nothing wrong with using straw men (I never said that it was they same context).
And yet again you misrepresent my position. My position is that if one group is more intelligent than another, then saying that the second group is of inferior intelligence is accurate. So in this context, the correct analogy would be “If I’m a better debater than you, would you be okay with me saying that you are an inferior debater?” And my answer would be yes. Of courser, since you are not only unable to master even such simple terms such as “argumentum ad absurdum”, but insist on using terms beyond your comprehension, I don’t see that happening any time soon. To imply that I would go from “inferior intelligence” to simply “inferior” is completely unfair.
I just want to add that I’m proud to be a part of a board that chose somebody like Coldfire as a moderator.
I thought we closed this train wreck.
Guess not
You odious lying fuck-crumpet. When I stated:
You attempted to parse out the sentence and replied:
Did you or did you not attempt to draw a parallel between the two contexts in an effort to advance an idiotic notion that what is acceptable in one context is acceptable in another? You will have to forgive me if I find that a ridiculous or absurd argument. You really are a tedious little tosser. Feel free to dissect this post and have the last word, because I tire of masturbatory word play.