[kj] OT: Question for the Righties

The Exorcist killingjoke at theimmortalfool.com
Wed Sep 10 19:17:08 EDT 2008


If one masturbates with the right hand but is politically left or
if one masturbates with the left hand but is politically right
what do you call them? A leftist righty? A righty leftist?

This is all so confusing for my poor brain :(

Sincerely,
Me

At 05:31 PM 9/10/2008, sade1 wrote:

> My 2 examples were only to disprove your blanket

>interpretation of how a lying, insencere person interviews..

>BUT I never said "anyone" and I never said "only" - but

>you did, without which you couldn't shoot down the

>new-now-your point, fabricated by taking my point and

>contortioning it with your words "anyone" and

>"only." 'Straw man' i think that is.

>

>Not that I'm a rightie or anything like that....

>

>

>... ... ... ... ... ...

>

>[looking at the current state of things]

>

>'Save me...

> save me from Tomorrow..

> I don't want to sail in this Ship Of Fools...!'

>

>

>--- On Wed, 9/10/08, fluke fluke <fluke1 at live.co.uk> wrote:

>From: fluke fluke <fluke1 at live.co.uk>

>Subject: Re: [kj] OT: Question for the Righties

>To: "A list about all things Killing Joke (the band!)" <gathering at misera.net>

>Date: Wednesday, September 10, 2008, 1:44 PM

>

>

>

>

>

>So anyone who speaks coherantly is a raging

>psychopathic torturing sociopath and anyone who

>speaks incoherantly should be voted for because only psychos speak coherently ?

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>----------

>

>Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2008 13:27:27 -0700

>From: saulomar1 at yahoo.com

>To: gathering at misera.net

>Subject: Re: [kj] OT: Question for the Righties

>

>

> Now, have you seen Kissinger give

> interviews, or Zbijg9nweuv Brzextjrzinski[sp.]?

>Sure, flawless (shameless, too) at answering a

>question, no flinching, no blinking code like

>the current prez but, c'mon... those two guys

>are sadistic sociopaths, practically.

> Trust them at your peril.

>

>... ... ... ... ... ...

>

>[looking at the current state of things]

>

>'Save me...

> save me from Tomorrow..

> I don't want to sail in this Ship Of Fools...!'

>

>

>----- Original Message ----

>From: fluke fluke <fluke1 at live.co.uk>

>To: A list about all things Killing Joke (the band!) <gathering at misera.net>

>Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 12:02:23 PM

>Subject: Re: [kj] OT: Question for the Righties

>

>

>

> Not once did Obama look the camera in the

> eye , he kept avoiding eye contact, which is

> another sure sign that he was being insincere .

> The only time that he looked directly into the

> camera was to give it a well rehearsed , vote winning grin .

>

>

>

>

>

>

>----------

>

>From: bettedillinger at live.com

>To: gathering at misera.net

>Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2008 14:42:25 -0400

>Subject: Re: [kj] OT: Question for the Righties

>

> "A person who is hesitant when they are

> speaking is usually being dishonest."

>

>Haaaaaaaa!!!!!!!!!!!! You are hilarious!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

>Quite the opposite, love. Have you ever see a

>dictator "hesitate" when asked a question? A

>very malignant narcissist "hesitate"? No,

>because they have a "perfect" (to them)

>rehearsed dogmatic script in their mind. Read

>the "Culture of Narcissism" by Lasch and then get back to me.

>I bet ya the gal of the week, Ms Palin, never hesitates......Drill baby Drill!

>

>What a killing joke.

>

>Bette D.

>

>

>

>

>

>----------

>

>

>From: fluke1 at live.co.uk

>To: gathering at misera.net

>Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2008 13:15:47 +0000

>Subject: Re: [kj] OT: Question for the Righties

>

>"Personally, when someone answers a impromptu,

>serious question smoothly and quickly I don't

>hear an honest person. I hear a prepared

>soundbite, a used car salesman. A person more

>interested in talking than listening. While

>someone who hesitates slightly or speaks

>somewhat haltingly to me comes across as thoughtful and honest."

>

> A person who is hesitant when they are

> speaking is usually being dishonest .

>Try it for yourself : Describe your today today

>in detail . Describe in as much detail as

>possible what you have done since your alarm

>went off this morning (Do it in your head) .

> O.K. Now do the same thing , but this time

> make a pack of lies up . Begin your explanation

> with : "I didn't go to bed last night because I

> fell asleep on the train on the way

> home............" , now finish that off, making things up as you go along .

> You will find that in the second scenario,

> you will begin to be hesitant as you explain ,

> this is because you have to think about what you are saying .

> Obamas hesitancy was because he was being insincere

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>----------

>

>

>

>Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2008 19:15:43 -0700

>From: culturevirus at yahoo.com

>To: gathering at misera.net

>Subject: Re: [kj] OT: Question for the Righties

>

>

>

>

>This is how Obama typically appears in

>unscripted interviews and situations where he is

>speaking off the cuff. The difference between

>Obama and Bush is that when Obama does speak it

>is generally in complete sentences, using proper

>syntax and expressing coherent thoughts. I don't

>think Bush is half as stupid as his detractors

>make him out to be, but he is among the worst

>extemporaneous speakers I've seen. Surpassed

>only by certain infamous beauty pageant contestants.

>

>Obama wasn't asked when a baby becomes a "living

>being" he was asked "at what point does a baby

>gets human rights, in your view" (two very

>different questions). His answer to Pastor

>Warren was flippant without a doubt. But the

>explanation in the Stephanopoulos interview was

>much better and accurately reflects the deeply

>troubling nature of the question and the divide

>that exists within the Xian church regarding the

>issue. There is very little in the Scriptures

>for Xians to go on regarding the issue and there

>is a divide, although most err on the side of

>caution. The question of when the fetus becomes

>"a person" or receives "the soul" is a technical

>and intellectual question. One with profound

>theological implications. One that mankind has

>been pondering for a long time, hence the

>strongly divided positions on the issue.

>

>Personally, when someone answers a impromptu,

>serious question smoothly and quickly I don't

>hear an honest person. I hear a prepared

>soundbite, a used car salesman. A person more

>interested in talking than listening. While

>someone who hesitates slightly or speaks

>somewhat haltingly to me comes across as

>thoughtful and honest. Or that they are trying

>to be respectful to those who will hold contrary

>views and that they are framing the answer in a

>way that shows they understand their opponents viewpoint.

>

>I am culturevirus

>

>--- On Tue, 9/9/08, fluke fluke <fluke1 at live.co.uk> wrote:

>From: fluke fluke <fluke1 at live.co.uk>

>Subject: Re: [kj] OT: Question for the Righties

>To: "A list about all things Killing Joke (the band!)" <gathering at misera.net>

>Date: Tuesday, September 9, 2008, 3:30 AM

>

><http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wpoAVAA1F30&feature=related>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wpoAVAA1F30&feature=related

>

>

>Going by this interview , Obama seems hesitant ,

>stuttering and unsure of himself . He seems to

>have to think what he says before he says it ,

>this is a common trait with people who aren't

>being honest. He is either trying to deceive the

>electorate because he isn't being honest ,

>either that or he has trouble speaking

>coherently , either way, that makes him unfit to be President of any Country .

> He comes across as being insincere , like

> he is trying to sell himself, like he is

> saying what the electorate want to hear .

> He initially said that the issue of when a

> Baby becomes a living being was above his

> payscale , he admitted that he didn't have an

> answer, then he tried to justify his ignorance

> by getting technical and quasi intellectual .

> People dislike George Bush because they

> class him as being an idiot because of the way

> that he comes across on screen well sorry , but

> Obama comes across asn being even bigger idiot .

> Surely the U.S. can manage to find one

> coherent person to lead their Country ?

>

>

>

>

>

>----------

>

>From: vassifer at earthlink.net

>To: gathering at misera.net

>Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2008 19:48:58 -0400

>Subject: [kj] OT: Question for the Righties

>

>

>

>Serious question for the Neo-cons/McCain-supporters/Skeptics here:

>

>What *exactly* is so wrong with Obama? Why do

>you vilify him for a perceived lack of

>substance? How is he any less genuine than his opponents?

>

>Do tell. I'm all ears.

>

>Alex in NYC

>

>

>

>On Sep 8, 2008, at 6:37 PM, Karen Weil wrote:

>

>

>----------

>Try Facebook in Windows Live Messenger!

><http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/111354030/direct/01/>Try it Now!

>

>_______________________________________________

>

>Gathering mailing list

>

>Gathering at misera.net

>

>http://four.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/gathering

>

>

>

>----------

>Try Facebook in Windows Live Messenger!

><http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/111354030/direct/01/>Try it Now!

>

>----------

>Stay up to date on your PC, the Web, and your

>mobile phone with Windows Live.

><http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/msnnkwxp1020093185mrt/direct/01/>See Now

>

>----------

>Get Hotmail on your mobile from Vodafone

><http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/111354028/direct/01/>Try it Now

>

>

>

>----------

>Win £3000 to spend on whatever you want at Uni!

><http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/111354032/direct/01/>Click here to WIN!

>

>_______________________________________________

>

>Gathering mailing list

>

>Gathering at misera.net

>

>http://four.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/gathering

>

>_______________________________________________

>Gathering mailing list

>Gathering at misera.net

>http://four.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/gathering


Competition is a barbaric, insensitive ritual that reeks of social Darwinism.
We cannot allow the fittest to survive on our pages. Your loss is someone
else's gain, and your gain is someone else's loss. Therefore, losers contribute
to the society and winners take away from it.
Being a winner is unethical, while
a society of losers is happy and striving as a
collective. In the spirit of diversity,
inclusiveness, and collectivism our contests shall have no winners.
Everyone is declared a loser, which in our book means an ethical team player.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://four.pairlist.net/pipermail/gathering/attachments/20080910/af100679/attachment.htm>


More information about the Gathering mailing list