# Tomndebb is lame **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [January 6, 2009, 6:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tomndebb-is-lame/480056 "2009-01-06T06:25:43Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2009, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tomndebb-is-lame/480056/41 "2009-01-06T19:17:39Z")
> [@xtisme](#): > > Lame! I was trying to be nice to the OP. He had accused me of being lame and not a single example of my being lame could be found in the thread. I figured I would post one lame comment so that he would not look like a total buffoon. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2009, 7:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tomndebb-is-lame/480056/42 "2009-01-06T19:18:28Z")
You still should have kicked his puppy… 😉 -XT ---
**Author:** ![The\_Second\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@The\_Second\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Second_Stone)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2009, 9:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tomndebb-is-lame/480056/43 "2009-01-06T21:44:19Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Well, actually, the point is that I’m favouring tom over you because you sound like a nut. You make that sound like a bad thing. > [@Marley23](#): > > …Meanwhile, an actual anti-Semite conspiracy theorist shows up in the thread and you’re busy pitting **Tom** for pointing out that your off-topic sniping was off topic and snipe-y. 😛 For the record, I do not think Tomndebb is anything of the sort like an Anti-Semite. I don’t know who you are talking about. > [@Polycarp](#): > > I don’t often agree with **brazil84** on political questions, but IMO he called this one precisely correctly. It would be entirely legitimate to draw parallels between the Pearl Harbor and 9/11 attacks, in terms of what a President and his intelligence community might reasonably be expected to know about a generalized threat from an inimical group or power, what specific evidence might make him/them culpable of failing to prevent the actual attack which historically happened, and the state of (lack of) such specific evidence. > > Such a post, however, was not what the OP here actually posted, and the post he did make comprises a partisan political rant that was out of place in that thread. That I happen to agree that Mr. Bush is in general incompetent is irrelevant to the inappropriateness of that post. And the Crystal/Palance side comment was just OTT, whatever its purposes may have been. Bullshit. It’s either fair to draw the parallel, which I did, or not. Did I take a snipe afterwards at Bush. Yeah, but so what. Der Tris, Elucidator and Shodan would be allowed to do it. Order applied unequally is neither order nor justice. It’s chaos. > [@tomndebb](#): > > None of which was really required for that discussion and none of which was actually provided by your barely coherent interruption. > > You have already declined to open a thread to actually discuss your odd assertions, indicating pretty clearly, to me, (along with the further rant following the portion of your post I quoted, here), that I was correct that your primary, perhaps sole, purpose was to make one more cheap shot about G W Bush that would probably have the effect of turning an actual discussion into a trainwreck. > > If you lack the constitutional fortitude to open your own thread to propose and defend your thesis, you should probably quit whining about how I was so mean to you for urging you not to hijack the other. > > Have a nice day. Have a nice day yourself. If you got such a boner to open a thread about it, then do so. I don’t, and particularly not in your forum. You’ve already conceded that Der Tris, Elucidator and Shodan would not have drawn a snarky comment from you. My primary purpose was to point out that the shot being made at FDR was far less well based than one could be made at Bush and his supporters about 9/11, which Polycarp has agreed to as far as Bush goes, but not as far as Republicans in general go. What seems to be the focus is that I can’t go on to point out that the sort of scum who level this assertion at FDR ignore much better evidence against the Bush regime. But had others done it, specifically Der Tris, Elucidator and Shodan, you, by your own admission would have done nothing with the mod hat on. Really, you should see a specialist about having that bug removed. It wasn’t a hijack, it was a comparison that was a bit farther than others would have made. You weren’t being mean to me, you were being arbitrary in your application of your make up rules as you go application depending on the user name of the poster. The claim of me thinking you were being mean is just bizarre. You weren’t. You were arbitrary. Ultimately the issue is that the idiotic and time worn assertion that FDR knew about and caused etc. Pearl Harbor by right wing nutjobs really only has the answer that I made. I’m not going to repeat it in your forum because you have asked me not to in a particular thread. Perhaps to protect the delicate sensibilities of conspiracy theorist nutjob Republicans. I’m not going to open a new thread on it because it is a supporting argument that I don’t care to debate in full. Particularly not in your forum. I am incensed at this idea of disposing of justice in favor of order and treating different posters differently. And just the bizarre calling of a one time non-belabored point a “disruptive hijacking”. It’s like an NBA referee suddenly calling traveling on just one player. Really? It’s lame. You just don’t have enough of a conception of justice or order to realize it. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2009, 9:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tomndebb-is-lame/480056/44 "2009-01-06T21:51:58Z")
**The Second Stone** , you’re on our side (unlike **Sam Stone** , whom I often almost mistake you for). Could you just take your lumps\*, let it go, and not make people who hate GWB loook like monomaniacal idiots? That’s **Der Trihs** ’s job. And before him it was **Reeder** ’s If **Der Trihs** goes on vacation, we’ll consider your application to fill in for him. \*I mean, sheesh, it’s not even like it was an official Mod Warning[sup]TM[/sup]. ---
**Author:** ![ToeJam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/dfb087/32.png) [@ToeJam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ToeJam)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2009, 10:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tomndebb-is-lame/480056/45 "2009-01-06T22:03:43Z")
> [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](#): > > Did you see _City Slickers_? If you did, is this a whoosh? Alas, as much as I would have enjoyed another _Roosh_ of someone, I just didn’t get the joke/reference. I’ve never seen City Slickers, and it was a movie that came out when I was just a kid and had no interest in it at the time, so I never got around to it. So yeah, I retract my statement then if it actually is a reference and is a joke. Also for the record, I had no idea that \*\*Tomndebb \*\*could have been 2 people. I never thought the name meant “Tom and Debb”, I just figured it meant something, but people just easily liked to shorten it to Tom, and I never really thought about the ndebb part too much, (so yeah, the 4 cheeks reference was lost on me as well. I just thought you were insinuating that Tom’s Modding Posterior was so large that it was the size of double a normal man’s butt cheeks). Carry on then, I have been educated doubly so. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2009, 10:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tomndebb-is-lame/480056/46 "2009-01-06T22:07:08Z")
> [@The\_Second\_Stone](#): > > For the record, I do not think Tomndebb is anything of the sort like an Anti-Semite. I don’t know who you are talking about. You called Srdja Trifkovic as an anti-Semite. I was referring to the posts of **edivincison** , who appears to be blaming Pearl Harbor on a Jewish plot to kill the Egyptians or something insane like that. Your first two paragraphs were totally on target. Comparisons of Pearl Harbor and September 11 can be valid. You lost the strand when you went off on how conservatives should stop criticizing FDR because he didn’t get a memo about the attack. It had nothing to do with nothing. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2009, 10:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tomndebb-is-lame/480056/47 "2009-01-06T22:14:21Z")
> [@The\_Second\_Stone](#): > > It’s like an NBA referee suddenly calling traveling on just one player. Really? Apparently, you’re too young to remember the Jordan Rules. ---
**Author:** ![El\_Kabong](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/el_kabong/32/496_2.png) [@El\_Kabong](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/El_Kabong)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2009, 10:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tomndebb-is-lame/480056/48 "2009-01-06T22:50:30Z")
So what if he’s got a little trouble walking? That’s just mean. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2009, 11:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tomndebb-is-lame/480056/49 "2009-01-06T23:50:14Z")
> [@The\_Second\_Stone](#): > > Bullshit. It’s either fair to draw the parallel, which I did, or not. Did I take a snipe afterwards at Bush. Yeah, but so what. Der Tris, Elucidator and Shodan would be allowed to do it. Order applied unequally is neither order nor justice. It’s chaos. Actually, had Der Trihs or Elucidator posted the same thing you did, they’d have probably received the same admonition. (Shodan could not have done it regarding Bush, and would have had to find a way to attack someonme on the Left.) You have misunderstood my comments to Liberal. I took the opportunity of Liberal’s observation to make a broader point. We have one poster who is under a bit of restriction regarding what he may post in GD. I rather frequently get questions as to why I do not impose similar (or harsher) conditions on a different poster. I posted my rationale, then noted two reasons for permitting some posters to express themselves intemperately–despite the feelings of some other posters. On the one hand, despite their ability to raise hackles, they generally did not cause threads to jump the rails. On the other hand, there is a danger of creating an ever-widening ripple of censorship. If I restrict Poster A, his partisans will demand that I censor Poster B. If I accede to their demands, then partisans of Poster B will insist that Poster C is equally deserving of restraint. If I limit Poster C, then his partisans will seek out a poster D to be restrained, etc. By this point, my general observations had moved well beyond your little interruption and you are not even being included in my comments. (In fact, you were not mentioned in any part of my reply to Liberal, other than being one of hundreds who have, from time to time, submitted posts that were liable to cause disruptive hijacks.) > [@The\_Second\_Stone](#): > > My primary purpose was to point out that the shot being made at FDR was far less well based than one could be made at Bush and his supporters about 9/11, which Polycarp has agreed to as far as Bush goes, but not as far as Republicans in general go. What seems to be the focus is that I can’t go on to point out that the sort of scum who level this assertion at FDR ignore much better evidence against the Bush regime. Well, at least we agree that you were posting an off-topic comment. You apparently refuse to see it, of course, because it was your off-topic comment, but here we have your admission, despite the fact that you choose to deny it later in your post. The issue of whether FDR conspired to encourage or permit a surprise attack on Pearl Harbor is not the same as whether “conservatives” (actually, very different humans 60 years apart), suffer some ethical lapse that causes them to attack FDR on that point while defending GWB from similar charges. “FDR knew” is a conspiracy theorist concept, not a conservative one. > [@The\_Second\_Stone](#): > > But had others done it, specifically Der Tris, Elucidator and Shodan, you, by your own admission would have done nothing with the mod hat on. Absolutely incorrect, for the reasons I noted, above. (You also missed the ellipsis. I did not name three posters who habitually hijack threads and get away with it. I specifically named two additional posters (among several others), about whom I have received challenges to their right to post despite the fact that they do not (generally) cause hijacks. I could have named five or seven or more, but I figured adding two would be sufficiently illustrative.) > [@The\_Second\_Stone](#): > > Ultimately the issue is that the idiotic and time worn assertion that FDR knew about and caused etc. Pearl Harbor by right wing nutjobs really only has the answer that I made. I’m not going to repeat it in your forum because you have asked me not to in a particular thread. Perhaps to protect the delicate sensibilities of conspiracy theorist nutjob Republicans. I’m not going to open a new thread on it because it is a supporting argument that I don’t care to debate in full. Particularly not in your forum. I am incensed at this idea of disposing of justice in favor of order and treating different posters differently. And just the bizarre calling of a one time non-belabored point a “disruptive hijacking”. Had you stopped short at simply noting that FDR and GWB were both accused of similar conspiracies, your post would not have attracted my attention. Your deliberate effort to maker it a “conservative” issue changes the both the content and the tenor of your post. Note that I did not respond to your entire post. I specifically quoted the following paragraph for criticism. > [@Did FDR Will and Allow Pearl Harbor? Srdja Trifkovic's Take on the Conspiracy Theory](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-fdr-will-and-allow-pearl-harbor-srdja-trifkovics-take-on-the-conspiracy-theory/479197/28): > > There was no “Hirohito likely to attack US targets with carrier based planes next month” memo, so by conservative standards, who let Bush off completely with “Bin Ladin determined to attack US with hijacked planes next month” (or whatever), the conservatives can finally shut up with their conspiracy theories. But they won’t. Had Der Trihs or Elucidator (or Tamerlane or Ed Zotti) posted that paragraph, they would have received exactly the same wrist tap. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2009, 3:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tomndebb-is-lame/480056/50 "2009-01-07T03:39:00Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Well, actually, the point is that I’m favouring tom over you because you sound like a nut. > [@The\_Second\_Stone](#): > > You make that sound like a bad thing. One of the unfortunate byproducts of “wacky” sitcoms like _Dharma and Greg_ is the mass impression that nuttiness is cute and/or endearing. It’s not. Being a nut means you’re determinedly ignorant and there are few things more shameful, I feel, for a member of _homo sapiens sapiens_ to be. ---
**Author:** ![dropzone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dropzone/32/7515_2.png) [@dropzone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dropzone)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2009, 3:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tomndebb-is-lame/480056/51 "2009-01-07T03:50:20Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > [Not much of a story.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=5647046#post5647046) Sweet story, “asshole,” but I bet **DebB** is cuter. And you can’t deny it, either! 😃 Was **Lekatt** banned? Did I miss it? Or have we just not had any threads about NDEs to attract him? ---
**Author:** ![dropzone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dropzone/32/7515_2.png) [@dropzone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dropzone)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2009, 4:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tomndebb-is-lame/480056/52 "2009-01-07T04:02:01Z")
(too late for editing) The [del]love[/del] non-hate in this thread for **Tom** from all political fronts is is touching, but the old newspaper adage that, if everybody hates you, you are doing your job, says he ain’t doing it. Where’s the hayt? 😉 ---
**Author:** ![dropzone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dropzone/32/7515_2.png) [@dropzone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dropzone)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2009, 4:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tomndebb-is-lame/480056/53 "2009-01-07T04:08:40Z")
Gratuitous smiley added in case someone didn’t know I was ribbing my pal, **Tom**. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Second\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@The\_Second\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Second_Stone)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2009, 4:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tomndebb-is-lame/480056/54 "2009-01-07T04:59:56Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > Had Der Trihs or Elucidator (or Tamerlane or Ed Zotti) posted that paragraph, they would have received exactly the same wrist tap. You are not typing facts that are exactly accurate, and I believe that you knew that as you typed them. (Do you need a translation of that sentence?) You’ve said in this thread that you would not do so for all posters, and you would be more restrictive for others. Which is it? In order to answer that question, I suppose we have to see how you are going to overreact to whatever shiny post has your attention at that moment. > [@](#): > > Der Trihs is sufficiently ignored that he does not fall into the disruptive category at this time. lekatt, whose views provide something of a counterweight (or counterweightlessness) to Der Trihs, did fall into the disruptive category. It is probably not fair to put restrictions on lekatt’s posts that are not applied to those of Der Trihs, but it will not make it more fair to do the same thing to Der Trihs, (and then to Elucidator, and then to Shodan, . . .)\*. I prefer to interfere as sparingly as possible. > > - These are two (of many) posters of whom I see frequent complaints that they are threadshitting or posting hijacks, although I do not see that many hijacks originating from their posting. This should not be construed as a comment on the quality of either poster, just on the perceptions that some posters voice about them. Well, which is it? That is your post, isn’t it? Both of them are your posts, aren’t they? They are mutaually incompatible, aren’t they? Any rational reader would conclude that you ignore the “transgressions” of these certain posters. Do you ignore Der Trihs, lekatt, Elucidator and Shodan and interfere as sparingly as possible, or not? Personally, I love the posts of those posters, particularly the sign off: “Regards, Shodan” which makes me laugh at it every time I see it. Somebody commented it’s like a man throwing a purple feather boa over his shoulder that walking off. I just can’t stop laughing at that image. You ignore this priceless stuff and focus on my throwaway clauses? > [@](#): > > Well, at least we agree that you were posting an off-topic comment. You apparently refuse to see it, of course, because it was your off-topic comment, but here we have your admission, despite the fact that you choose to deny it later in your post. No, I only agree that I finished the comment with the flouish. The flouish was perhaps not something somebody else would have chosen to say, but it is entirely appropriate to some the OPs publicizing a disgusting article about FDR. A tu quoquo is only a formal violation. It’s done all the time in informal debate. Frankly, a competent moderator who isn’t busy protecting Republicans from offense would have shut down the thread with an appropriate remark about how the nutty FDR theory could have been linked to an article without the anti-Semitic cranking despite the disclaimer. But rather than ask the OP to try again with a better link, the link and the various smears, implied and explicit, stand. And by implied, I mean the subtext that a conspiracy of Democrats (some of them Jews!) goaded the Japanese into bombing Pearl Harbor. (Of course, I think that FDR full well knew that his course of action would likely lead eventually to war a few years down the road, but I still think that the embargo was the only moral thing to do in the face of Japanese war crimes in Manchuria and China. But the usual charge is that Roosevelt knew the date and time of the attack, which is pure poppycock.) ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2009, 5:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tomndebb-is-lame/480056/55 "2009-01-07T05:04:42Z")
He seriously should have kicked the OP’s puppy… -XT ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2009, 5:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tomndebb-is-lame/480056/56 "2009-01-07T05:24:55Z")
Is a flouish anything like a flourish? And what’s the connection between _tu quoquo_ and _tu quoque_? And does anybody think that ANYONE in that thread gives that blogger any serious consideration? Dude. Switch off the computer, call it a night, and get some rest. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2009, 5:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tomndebb-is-lame/480056/57 "2009-01-07T05:38:47Z")
> [@kaylasdad99](#): > > And does anybody think that ANYONE in that thread gives that blogger any serious consideration? With the possible exception of **edivincison** , of course. Woooof. Just now caught that guy. :eek: ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2009, 5:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tomndebb-is-lame/480056/58 "2009-01-07T05:39:49Z")
Tom’s not lame. The reason he walks that way? Well, let’s just say Debb’s a lucky woman. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2009, 5:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tomndebb-is-lame/480056/59 "2009-01-07T05:55:39Z")
> [@The\_Second\_Stone](#): > > You are not typing facts that are exactly accurate, and I believe that you knew that as you typed them. I typed them very accurately and your willful misunderstanding of the meaning does not interest me. I was not posting for your benefit, anyway, but to those of the TM who could understand the points I was making. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Second\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@The\_Second\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Second_Stone)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2009, 6:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tomndebb-is-lame/480056/60 "2009-01-07T06:09:25Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > One of the unfortunate byproducts of “wacky” sitcoms like _Dharma and Greg_ is the mass impression that nuttiness is cute and/or endearing. It’s not. Being a nut means you’re determinedly ignorant and there are few things more shameful, I feel, for a member of _homo sapiens sapiens_ to be. No, it means that I don’t conform to an artificial norm that in fact nobody conforms to. The DSMIV has lots of definitions of nuts for particular diseases, so few of them having determinedly ignorant as a criteria (even in other words) that drawing a Venn diagram of your hypothesis has almost no overlap. But if I’m a nut, and you’re arguing with me, what does that make you? A nut baiter? If so, are you masterful at it? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tomndebb-is-lame/480056.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tomndebb-is-lame/480056.md?page=4)