# Unilateral Ceasefire Declaration By IronMac



## IronMac (Sep 22, 2003)

I am here to announce a unilateral ceasefire on the "IronMac's BAD Calls!!!" thread. 

I believe that I've made it clear over the last couple of weeks that MacNutt's wrong in what he has said about me. Kicking him around the forum will only allow my vindictive side to have free rein and a gentleman should not do that. 

MacNutt, this is a ceasefire only, we will debate what we will debate but if you ever again lie what I say...well, you've got a taste of what will happen.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Amen, brother. Give peace a chance.


----------



## K_OS (Dec 13, 2002)

IronMac said:


> I am here to announce a unilateral ceasefire on the "IronMac's BAD Calls!!!" thread.
> 
> I believe that I've made it clear over the last couple of weeks that MacNutt's wrong in what he has said about me. Kicking him around the forum will only allow my vindictive side to have free rein and a gentleman should not do that.
> 
> MacNutt, this is a ceasefire only, we will debate what we will debate but if you ever again lie what I say...well, you've got a taste of what will happen.


Ho well I guess I won't be visiting you on that new boat of your's down at the Yacht club.

Laterz


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

"*Damn unilateralist bullies.....rant rant*..........oh wait a minute 

Good call....waste of time doing otherwise. :clap:

Now lets rag on the ClimateNet admins.


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

Perfect, Ironmac. 

We can come back to this once the current Liberal mess is not such a big item on my menu...okay?


----------



## IronMac (Sep 22, 2003)

MacNutt said:


> We can come back to this once the current Liberal mess is not such a big item on my menu...okay?


Only an idiot doesn't recognize when he's got a losing hand. I suggest that you don't tempt fate again.


----------



## thejst (Feb 1, 2005)

and so it begins anew...


----------



## IronMac (Sep 22, 2003)

thejst said:


> and so it begins anew...


I say, sir, that I am disappointed, deeply disappointed, at your lack of faith in our natures! 

-------------------------------------------------

Meanwhile...

*ssshhzzzz*
*click* *click*
"Gunny, initiate targeting sequence on thejst, now!"
"Targeting sequence initiated, sir!"
*ssshzzzhhh*


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

My thoughts are that Ironmac is quite serious about postponing our festivities until a less tumultous period is upon us. I applaud him for making the first move towrds a temporary truce. That took balls. Iron ones, I'd suspect. 

So we will suspend all of this until a later, better moment. 

Stay tuned.....


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

booo hissss booo hissss
i came here for blood, not peace

i just bought my bag of broiled sparrow and was sitting down with a good seat down front (for which i paid "porthos the ticket scalper" good money) to watch macnutt face the business end of a sword

just what kind of colosieum you runnin' here, anyway?

booo hiss booo hisss

i hope the lions don't back out of eating a few Christians....


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Michael, as it is written in "The World According to Macnutt", "We should love our enemy, as we love the water we drink and the air we breathe. The path to Enlightenment is littered with the obstacles of hatred and fear. Let hope and faith guide you past these obstacles, and look ahead to a brighter day. You shall have more enjoyment with Life. Trust me on this."


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

We interrupt this thread to bring you the latest score from The Colesseum:

Lions 4 - Christians 0


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Sinc, remember what was written in "The World According to Macnutt" -- "What should it profit a man or a woman to lose his/her dignity just to win the game? It is not how high up the ladder of success and victory you have come, but how high up you intend to go. Be careful how you treat those you pass upwards on the ladder of success, for you just might meet them on the way down. Trust me on this."


----------



## thejst (Feb 1, 2005)

IronMac said:


> I say, sir, that I am disappointed, deeply disappointed, at your lack of faith in our natures!
> 
> -------------------------------------------------
> 
> ...


Hey, I'm just here for the popcorn!


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

IronMac, this thread could be considered your first bad call


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Jim, I disagree. I am sure that IM has better things to do with his time than to go back and forth with Macnutt. They should agree to disagree and move on with their lives.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

[crowd getting restless]
[not seeing blood for several days now]
[broiled sparrow vendors not doing well - blood lust increases appetite, no blood, no appetite]

"Bring on the 'Barbarian from Gaul' !!!! "

[crowd cheers]
[trumpets sound]


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Michael, what next? Bear baiting? Throwing a few badgers and wolverines at the Fearsome Foursome? Let the antagonism slowly fade away from memory. Neither of the "combatants" is about to change their views, and at least IM had the common sense to declare a truce.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

This wasn't about changing views it was about MacNutt failing to come through with yet another promise. It's not the first time and won't be the last. While I agree the stand-off was a waste of IM's time, it will do nothing to discourage MacNutt for future vacuous calls. I think MacNutt would very likely fail the Turing test so why bother engaging a robot (I do note that I have asked this question before...)?


----------



## Peter Scharman (Jan 4, 2002)

Well, at least Macnutt *showed up* in this thread. The rusting duelling pistols are now back in their oak box. It is a safer world now.....not as exciting, but certainly safer. Wait! ..I forgot, there was no excitement at all because the opponent never showed up for the duel. Anti-violence tendencies or afraid to get shot dead? Probably anti-violence, don't you think?


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

To be honest...I never even looked in on that other thread at all. Not even once. A tempest in a teapot, if you ask me.

Maybe we'll get back to it once all of the other major exitement has died down. Maybe not. 

Right now, there is so much going on.....


----------



## IronMac (Sep 22, 2003)

MacNutt said:


> To be honest...I never even looked in on that other thread at all. Not even once. A tempest in a teapot, if you ask me.


MacNutt, you're entering the danger zone with your comments in this thread. I strongly suggest not revisiting it.


----------



## IronMac (Sep 22, 2003)

used to be jwoodget said:


> IronMac, this thread could be considered your first bad call



-------------------------------------------------

Revisiting our brave compatriots in a small and heretofore secret part of the Diefenbunker...

*ssshhzzzz*
*click* *click*
"Gunny, this is certainly a target rich environment!"
"Yes, sir and may I say that it's almost makes one weep with happiness!"
*ssshzzzhhh*


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Stick to the high road, IronMac. Be strong and resist temptation. Remember, as it is written in "The World According to Macnutt", "It is easier to make a person lose their calm than it is to teach a rock to swim. Try to maintain your sense of dignity at all times. Live your life to the fullest and remember that there are just two simple rules to know and understand as you search for Enlightenment -- The first rule is that I am always correct; the second rule is that there is nothing you are able to do or say to change the first rule. Therefore, be gentle with yourself and the world around you. Seek the path of balance and know the gentleness of the common moments in this life."


----------



## Peter Scharman (Jan 4, 2002)

MacNutt said:


> To be honest...I never even looked in on that other thread at all. Not even once.



Ha,ha, ha ,ha, oh,....ho.ho. ho (catch my breath).....ahha, ha ,ha ,ha (wipes tears from hid eyes) aha-a-a-a-a ha ha ha!! e-e-e-eha, ho, ha, ha. 
To-o-o-o funny! I saw reponses to practically all current threads the other night, except the one in question. Looked pretty obvious. Oh, Macnutt, you kill me....you're so slippery! La ya anyway!


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Peter, remember that it is written in "The World According to Macnutt" that "You may laugh at whatever is funny just so long as it feels good and does not hurt someone else. For to inflict pain or discomfort on anyone is to inflict it upon everyone. I use my words to enlighten and not to hurt others. My words are carefully selected and wise. Thus, be careful towards whom you laugh, for it may be directed at a mirror."


----------



## Peter Scharman (Jan 4, 2002)

Dr.G. said:


> Peter, remember that it is written in "The World According to Macnutt" that "You may laugh at whatever is funny just so long as it feels good and does not hurt someone else. For to inflict pain or discomfort on anyone is to inflict it upon everyone. I use my words to enlighten and not to hurt others. My words are carefully selected and wise. Thus, be careful towards whom you laugh, for it may be directed at a mirror."


Sorry, couldn't help myself. As for the mirror, I learned to laugh at myself many years ago. I'm not laughing AT anyone, I'm laughing WITH him.  Remember the mirror scene in Snow White? 
 "Mirror, mirror, on the wall, who's the fairest ehMaclander of all?"


----------



## Cameo (Aug 3, 2004)

MacNutt said:


> To be honest...I never even looked in on that other thread at all. Not even once. A tempest in a teapot, if you ask me.
> 
> IM - MacNutt is simply being sarcastic - I think most people get angry with MacNutts posts as they don't recognize the sarcasm in the first place.
> 
> These are my thoughts on this


----------



## Peter Scharman (Jan 4, 2002)

Not a sarcastic bone in his body!


----------



## Cameo (Aug 3, 2004)

hahaha - not a one!


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

"Mirror, mirror, on the wall, who's the fairest ehMaclander of all?" My vote would go for lotus. And then maybe Cameo a very close second, or a tie for first.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

MacNutt said:


> To be honest...I never even looked in on that other thread at all. Not even once. A tempest in a teapot, if you ask me.
> 
> Maybe we'll get back to it once all of the other major exitement has died down. Maybe not.
> 
> Right now, there is so much going on.....


So much for that famed "Highland honour" we keep reading about.
Perhaps it only comes out of the business end of a bottle of Lagavulin?


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

You want to see a quick fifteen pages on a nothing thread?

Start something with my name in it. Or relating to me.

Or better yet...start a thread about "Nothing". It will take off like wildfire.

Too funny.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

i'd just like to see you admit when you're wrong
perhaps they don't do that sort of thing west of the Rockies?


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

Wrong about the Afghan invasion? Nope.

Wrong about the Iraq invasion? Nope.

Wrong about Bush winning the presidency? Nope.

Wrong about how corrupt the Liberals are? Nope again.

Which "wrong" were you referring to, macspectrum? I've been beating these drums here at ehmac for several years now and my score is pretty good, really.

Especially when compared to some of the other people around here. Course I can see how that might piss some people off. Tough thing, that. I lose sleep about it sometimes.

Not.


----------



## PosterBoy (Jan 22, 2002)

You were wrong about the outcome of the last election in Canada.

The thing is though, that usually you're not so much "wrong" as you are "twisting facts and leaving stuff out so that it fits your argument/point of view/whatever."


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

Yeah...somehow I just knew our resident nitpicker would bring that one up. 

You might want to stop and think about this:

-Was I wrong in predicting a total wipeout of the long-term majority Liberals in the last election? (they were only partially wiped out)

-Or were the people who voted to bring them back into limited power actually wrong? Given the fact that pretty much all of this stuff was well known BEFORE the last election?

-And since most of those people now realise how terribly wrong they were about that last election (note the headlines that say "Ontario goes Tory Blue")....

Was I actually wrong...or just early?

BTW...if you or anyone wants to start a new thread on this subject then go ahead. This one is off track.


----------



## MannyP Design (Jun 8, 2000)

You were wrong with your prediction of Castro being ousted last year... does that count?


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Manny, if you are going to be a nitpicker and comb through all of the threads to find all of Macnutt's predictions that were either totally incorrect, partially incorrect, somewhat incorrect or just off-the-scale, then we might be here all day. Enjoy your doxie on this fine day and let the peace accord take effect. Paix, mon ami.


----------



## PosterBoy (Jan 22, 2002)

MacNutt said:


> Was I actually wrong...or just early?


You predicted a Conservative win in the last election, and it didn't happen. So you were wrong.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

PB, wrongness is somewhat relative. For, as it is written in "The World According to Macnutt", "Being correct all the time is not difficult, but not being incorrect all the time is very difficult. Let me explain this concept with a simple example you may try at home to prove scientifically why I am correct all the time, but not incorrect at any time. Take a cup of hot coffee and a glass of ice water and place it on the kitchen counter alongside of a glass of tepid water that has been sitting overnight. Then, place your finger in the cup of hot coffee and then quickly place it in the glass of tepid water. What do you feel? Yes, it was cool. Now, place your finger in the glass of ice water and keep it there for 30 seconds and then quickly place this finger into the glass of tepid water. How does this feel? Yes, it feels warm. Obviously, the tepid water cannot be both warm and cool at the same time, but this is what you felt. Thus, it is all relative, as is my being correct all the time and/or my not being incorrect at any time. In time you shall understand the wisdom of my way. Given enough time, all of my predictions shall be proven to be correct. Trust me on this."


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

Errrr.... WMDs???? End of world terrorism (the Bush administration recently deleted the stats for the number of incidents from its world terrorism report as it showed a 2.5 fold increase)???? Minimal US casualties (1500 + and unfortunately still counting)????? Minimal Iraqi civilian casualties???? Lower oil prices????? Booming US economy????

It must be easy to think you are correct when you have a short term and selective memory.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

macnutt mused;
_
Was I actually wrong...or just early?
_

if you keep calling "heads" and keep flipping a coin, you'd eventually be correct
regardless of what my math professors told me


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Michael, not if you call "Heads I win, tails you lose". This bit of Macnuttian logic is taught throughout the civilized world. Far too many fine people like Jim are confusing the issue with facts and statistics. It is far simplier to accept the fact that Macnutt is either totally correct, mostly correct, almost correct, somewhat correct, nearly correct, just a bit correct, close to being correct, or just not incorrect. Personally, I understand this perspective now and find my life far simplier and less complicated. Get with the program.


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

Like I said earlier...

Mention my name and the posts begin to rack up. Same as starting up a thread on "Nothing".

Has just about as much signifigance as well.   

Just keep on spelling my name right. Or not.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

ok then, change your screen name to, the now more appropriate, *MacNot*


----------



## Cameo (Aug 3, 2004)

It is always amazing to me how childish adults can get. Is it really that important to prove yourselves right to people you claim you don't like?


----------



## IronMac (Sep 22, 2003)

Cameo said:


> Is it really that important to prove yourselves right to people you claim you don't like?


Actually, yes.


----------



## Cameo (Aug 3, 2004)

Okay - that is your perogative. I don't understand as the only opinions that matter to me are from those that I care about or like. I don't feel the need to prove myself to anyone else.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

"I don't feel the need to prove myself to anyone else." Cameo, this is why you are one of the more respected persons living in ehMacLand. Paix.


----------



## Cameo (Aug 3, 2004)

Thank you Dr. G.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Don't thank me. I merely "call them like I see them". You have always taken the high road in the various threads that involved disputes.


----------



## IronMac (Sep 22, 2003)

Cameo said:


> Okay - that is your perogative. I don't understand as the only opinions that matter to me are from those that I care about or like. I don't feel the need to prove myself to anyone else.


Yes, that is my prerogative and I am going to leave it at that.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

IM, join Cameo up in the high road and you shall enjoy the vista and the serenity.


----------



## IronMac (Sep 22, 2003)

Dr.G. said:


> you shall enjoy the vista and the serenity.


I'll have all the serenity, if not the vista, I'd want when I'm dead and buried. To paraphrase in the broadest sense, crushing your opponents, making their women wail and burning down their homes is where the fun is!!!


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

IronMac, you are playing right into the hands of Macnutt. Still, it is your life. Paix, mon ami.


----------



## Peter Scharman (Jan 4, 2002)

Dr.G. said:


> IronMac, you are playing right into the hands of Macnutt. Still, it is your life. Paix, mon ami.


 Yes,...beware the Scott's "grip of death".


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Peter, I am told that this "grip of death" was fashioned after the grip that a doxie gets on a badger. Sadly, once the badger is in this grip, the only way it shall be released is with the death of the badger..............of if the doxie dies suddenly. I would hate to lose either IM or Macnutt.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

Cameo said:


> It is always amazing to me how childish adults can get. Is it really that important to prove yourselves right to people you claim you don't like?


look, i dished out good money for seats down front at the collosium, got a double helping of broiled sparrow and was all ready for a good old fashioned blood bath between Ironus Macus and The Barbarian from Gaul

Then "The Barbarian from Gaul" becomes "The Hairy legged who drops his sword and runs away"
no bloodbath, just the old "feeding Christians to the lions", again.....

"Porthos the ticket scalper" doesn't give any refunds
Something about it being in the hands of "the gods" 

Now, tomorrow, I go back to my my job making clay pots. You know how long it will be before I can save up enough to go to the Collosium, with those kind of seats, again?

It will be Augustus before that happens.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

Cameo said:


> Okay - that is your perogative. I don't understand as the only opinions that matter to me are from those that I care about or like. I don't feel the need to prove myself to anyone else.


I think you are missing the point Cameo. If we all took this approach then, for example, hate-mongerers would be unchallenged and factually incorrect information would be perpetuated. It is not so much a question of liking or respecting someone as trying to balance something you don't agree with by stating your own opinion. For example, while I don't agree with most of MacNutts opinions, I agree on some others (such as same-sex marriage). I think it would be folly to choose only to care about his opinion on one topic of many.

I do agree that things can degenerate into personality/ego battles but we do have some responsibility to stand behind what we say. Our opinions carry only as much weight as those who listen and comment are willing to ascribe. While you (or I) may not care what others think, we are not islands unto ourselves. The key is not to get your pants in a knot over someone elses opinion. Perspective, over ignorance. I also agree that there should be no need to prove yourself to anyone else, especially over a trivial matter. We all underestimate the ability of others to draw their own conclusions. No need for the double-underlined, bolded emphasis.....


----------



## Cameo (Aug 3, 2004)




----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

and the world s with you.  and you  alone.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Well, if you insist . . .

Let a  be your


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Sinc, what were we insisting to see???


----------



## IronMac (Sep 22, 2003)

*Let's Finish the Job!*

In response to MacNutt's comment about my suffering a "terrible embarassment", the troops are being called to their colours to await a proper response from him.


----------



## gwillikers (Jun 19, 2003)

Dr.G. said:


> "I don't feel the need to prove myself to anyone else." Cameo, this is why you are one of the more respected persons living in ehMacLand. Paix.


Right on Dr. G.!
Intelligent women have a unique perspective that isn't clouded by high levels of testosterone. They can see boys on a school ground, despite the fact that the boys are in their thirties, and forties.

Cameo is a voice of reason that we boys should heed.


----------



## Cameo (Aug 3, 2004)

I agree that we need to stand up for our beliefs. I just don't see how throwing childish, hurtful, disrespectful comments and inuendos at others is helping to do that. I simply feel that people can stand up for themselves and be civilised at the same time.
There are many important issues that I will argue about with others - but I am always willing to admit I am wrong when that is proved to me. Just as I feel good when I prove that I am right. If I believed that black was white - I would stubbornly argue that point until someone makes me understand where I am wrong. I just don't feel the need to be hurtful and, sorry, stupid, about trivial stuff. I am better than that.

"No need for the double-underlined, bolded emphasis....".......sorry, I don't get that part of your post?


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

> "No need for the double-underlined, bolded emphasis....".......sorry, I don't get that part of your post?"


I was just pointing out that one can make a point without printing it in upper case, underlined, bolded text, repeating it endlessly, or smothering it in smileys. It wasn't in response to your style Cameo. Some people think that shouting their message is effective. It may be for the hearing impaired but everyone here is clearly capable of reading.


----------



## Cameo (Aug 3, 2004)

Actually, when I added the smiley - your post wasn't there. I would gather we were posting around the same time. The smiley was intended for Macspectrum's post cause I thought it was funny the way he phrased things. Your post came up at 12:19 and mine at 12:20. 

Intonation puts forward a lot of meaning to things yes, and underlining, bold, etc is definately emphasis. Caps can be taken two ways I think and sometimes I have felt it was the same as being yelled at.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Cameo, again you are the voice of moderation. Right on!!!


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

Personally I belive that the smileys and the BOLD TEXT, the italics...(and the asides in brackets)...and...especially...the dramatic pauses...are all just a part of my impassioned and engaged style of writing.     

Don't like them? Don't like ME?? 

Fair enough....Then don't LOOK!! Don't read my stuff! EVER!!  

(But I bet you will anyway!)  

Trust me on this.


----------



## Cameo (Aug 3, 2004)

"Intonation puts forward a lot of meaning to things yes, and underlining, bold, etc is definately emphasis. Caps can be taken two ways I think and sometimes I have felt it was the same as being yelled at."

Uh, where does this state that there is anything wrong with intonation? (ie, bold, italics, caps, smileys etc)
It all depends on how it is used don't you think? As with anything else, it can be done correctly and incorrectly.
Some do take it the wrong way - the same can be said for the spoken statement too.

My whole point is this.....others need to learn to "discuss" their differences.
People do not need to resort to derogatory, insulting, hurtful comments and innuendoes. In fact, this simply turns around and makes the user look like the idiot. 

These are my thoughts on this.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Cameo, the key word in your previous posting is "discussion". I tend to see many of the postings in certain threads as non-discussions. Few seem to read and reflect upon the expressed thoughts of others. It is more like read and react, and the reaction is not in a tenable manner oftentimes. Still, there are those like yourself that speak the language of common sense and civility. For this, you should be praised.


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

posted by Cameo;


> The smiley was intended for Macspectrum's post cause I thought it was funny the way he phrased things.


let's get back to something important
I made Cameo smile?
I deserve a beer.

 

ok, continue


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

Ummmm.... Cameo I wasn't refering your restrained use of a single smiley either. The person the comment was vaguely aimed at has, a few posts above, kindly provided us with a typical example 

And you've also made Macspectrums day!


----------



## Cameo (Aug 3, 2004)

I made someone smile?.....Now I am very happy! _Yes!!!_


----------



## Cameo (Aug 3, 2004)

"read and react" Dr. G, that is exactly what happens. I too, am guilty of that....but where I differ is in that I don't respond with derogatory, hurtful remarks. I don't always get the point - obviously. Lots of times it will be sometime later on that it will sink in and I will think - oh, got it now. I can still feel good about how I behaved, I have not lowered myself.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Cameo, there is also the "bait and switch" tactic. Certain people will put various items into a posting with the hopes of turning on the "switch" that will send someone off of the deep-end into countless rantings. I find that Life is too short or precious to let slip away with countless hours of back and forth bashings online. I tend to just ignore many of these disputes since little will be resolved which, in the grander scheme of things, will make much of a difference with someone in this world. Better to walk around your neighborhood and pick up the stray bits of garbage that are blowing about than to follow the garbage that is being hurled back and forth among certain citizens of ehMacLand. They have every right to undertake these "exchanges", but I simply choose to use my time in a manner I feel is more productive. Paix.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Ah Cameo be not fooled by our gentle seeming Dr. G.......neath that quiet exterior beats a heart of FDR steel..

Clark Kent comes to mind. The singing steel of rapier wit is never entirely concealed. 
Despite protestations to the contrary.......


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Bow your head when you mention the name of FDR, Macdoc. Still, I do find it tiresome to watch people arguing over and over and over again by going around the same topic and not really trying to understand what the other person is attempting to say. This is why I like reading the postings of Cameo, Peter S. and Jim Woodget, to name just a few, because their postings get to the point and are not trying to antagonize or "bait" someone into a pointless arguement. Debate is fine, even heated debates, but there are certain people in ehMacLand that shall not change their views and literally dare others to try and hold their own in a pseudo-debate, in which there are no rules or logic.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

"Clark Kent comes to mind. The singing steel of rapier wit is never entirely concealed." I merely await the Dr.G. sign up in the clouds (not to be mistaken with the Bat sign or the D for the Fearsome Foursome Doxie Pack). Then, I shall shed my mild-mannered professorial garb and become the defender of Truth, Justice and the ehMacLandian way.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Yes we've noticed from time to time. 



> I trust that you won't find the Encyclopedia Britannica too "left" as it has sometimes been described due to their fair treatment of controversial issues.


a slight rattling of sabre perhaps ........


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Macdoc, "a slight rattling of sabre perhaps" would be a waste of my time to write, and anyone's time to read. To try to convince someone of the correctness of my view, or the wrongness of their view, and to bait and bait and bait them until they finally respond, and then to ignore their comments and rant on about this or that, is, in my humble opinion, pointless.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

mmmmmm I detect a little slick of chum wafting behind that post


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Macdoc, I don't fish, so I have no need for chum. Nor do I have any need to try and get others into a discussion/debate over my points. All a person has to do is ask me a question and I shall answer it ASAP if I am capable of such an answer. At least I shall give my honest opinion. I have no need to taunt, bait, badger (no doxie pun intended), berate, belittle, tease, insult or make fun of another person to get my point of view across. I don't want others to accept my POV based-solely upon my comments. I would rather that they reflect upon anything said and then find other POVs to balance this view point. Then, and only then, should they make up their own minds.

I do NOT have the simple single-mindedness of certain people in this forum.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

You have a subtle manner in doing so - you are plainly not "everyman" tho.
Your "too left" comment did not go unnoticed. 

and we DO have some new members like Vandave with a moderate right approach ala Fink Nottle who are welcome relief. Another BC perspective is most welcome.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

"Your 'too left' comment did not go unnoticed." Macdoc, you cannot take every bit of the social activist from me, n'est pas?


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

I would say you spread or shed social activism with your haircuts and finger nail trimming 
Bred in the bone so to speak. 

•••

You reminded me of another annoyance in the political scene these days....where are the orators that can give a fiery speech and ENGAGE people.????

Rene Leveque, FDR, De Gaulle, Tommy Douglas et al....... thunder from the podium........??


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

MacDoc said:


> I would say you spread or shed social activism with your haircuts and finger nail trimming
> Bred in the bone so to speak.
> 
> •••
> ...


i believe we have seen the last of that type of "fire-wagon" politician
the media trained electorate now view that type of politician as "crazy"
see - Howard Dean


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Macdoc, I come by it honestly via my grandparents and my mother. All socialists and activists. Paix, mon ami.


----------

