pirate

wrote:

On 13 Mar 2005 06:35:25 -0800, "Conan The Librarian"
wrote:

That said, if I understand your points, your think Limbaugh's false
characterizations are worse than Ivins because they don't involve
making fun of
accents or physical traits. OK, whatever floats your boat.

Just to help set you straight: I said that Limbaugh spends a good
portion of his time setting up strawmen and knocking them down, and
misrepresenting his opponents. This is in addition to his tendency to
engage in schoolyard tactics to describe those to the left of him that
are little more than namecalling.

I also mentioned that he "is fed" (to use your term) by
right-wingers such as Cheney, Ailes and other "luminaries". (None of
which you have deemed important enough to comment on.)

You also believe that the "independent" review panel was both
independent and
thorough. Again, OK, whatever floats your boat. It was neither
"independent"
or "thorough," and I'm fairly certain I knew the results of it before
many did.

Ah, so you still haven't bothered to look at it.

As to your assertion that I find it both "independent" and
"thorough" -- once again you are playing around with strawmen. I nver
intimated either, and I even suggested you might read it because it is
in fact *not* in favor of Rather.

Then, you defend Ivins by pointing out that her column is on the
editorial page.
However, she calls herself a journalist when it's beneficial to her
and falls
back on being "a op-ed columnist" when it's necessary, even mixing
the usage
in such a way that would make serious journalist laugh, and
apparently, such
self-serving waffling has worked on at least one, you.

Condescension doesn't become you.

I'm no fan of hers, as I've made that clear throughout this thread.
I know what she is and what she represents.

One thing I find
interesting is that many who lambaste Limbaugh cite Ivins and
vice-versa, when
the truth is they are both self-serving, self-important bozos,
neither of whose
"work" sensible people ought to take in the least bit seriously.

And that explains why Rush is so favored among bigtime
right-wingers.

Thanks for admitting that.


Chuck Vance

On 13 Mar 2005 15:40:23 -0800, "Conan The Librarian" wrote:


wrote:

On 13 Mar 2005 06:35:25 -0800, "Conan The Librarian"
wrote:

That said, if I understand your points, your think Limbaugh's false
characterizations are worse than Ivins because they don't involve
making fun of
accents or physical traits. OK, whatever floats your boat.

Chuck - please adjust the settings on your news client, or hand-edit.

TC,
R

wrote:

Chuck - please adjust the settings on your news client, or hand-edit.

Hmmm ... I'm just posting through Google Groups. What's the problem
on your end? When I go to read the threads, everything looks
properly-formatted, and I've never received any complaints before.

Please advise.


Chuck Vance

Conan The Librarian wrote:
wrote:
Chuck - please adjust the settings on your news client, or hand-edit.

Hmmm ... I'm just posting through Google Groups. What's the problem
on your end? ...

You should be set to post no more than 80 characters
per line or failing that at least go in manually and
hit return every 80 characters or so. Your posts as
they are don't thread worth a damn.

Not quite as irritating as top-posting but then librarians
could never be quite as irritating as lawyers. ;-)

--
Ken Fortenberry

On 14 Mar 2005 12:14:04 -0800, "Conan The Librarian" wrote:


wrote:

Chuck - please adjust the settings on your news client, or hand-edit.

Hmmm ... I'm just posting through Google Groups. What's the problem
on your end? When I go to read the threads, everything looks
properly-formatted, and I've never received any complaints before.

Please advise.

I've never used Google Groups, so I can't give specific fixes, but I think Ken
is on the right track. On my end, the line breaks make it difficult to easily
read and follow. It looks something like this:

Rather is a skunk. Rather is wonderful. Ivins is a
skunk. Ivins
is wonderful. Limbaugh blows goats. Limbaugh doesn't
blow goats.
all the time. Sometimes he pops
pills.

With the quoted text markers ( the ""s) mixed in, it takes as much time to
simply figure out what goes where as to read and reply.

TC,
R

Ken Fortenberry wrote:

Conan The Librarian wrote:

Hmmm ... I'm just posting through Google Groups. What's the
problem
on your end? ...

You should be set to post no more than 80 characters
per line or failing that at least go in manually and
hit return every 80 characters or so. Your posts as
they are don't thread worth a damn.

Not quite as irritating as top-posting but then librarians
could never be quite as irritating as lawyers. ;-)

That's what I figured he was referring to with his quotes from
earlier in
the thread, but everything looks fine on my end. I don't see any
choices of
settings within Google Groups, and I've been posting via Google for
ages
without complaints. (Hell, I used to **** people off with another
newsreader
because I had my character-width set too *narrow*. :-)

Anyhow, if it causes a problem, I'll try to remember to do manual
returns.
(FWIW, I added hard returns throughout the previous paragraph, and it
looks
screwy in "preview" mode in Google, while when I remove them, it looks
fine.)



Chuck Vance

"Ken Fortenberry" wrote

Not quite as irritating as top-posting but then librarians
could never be quite as irritating as lawyers. ;-)

well, to paraphrase a line that stopped me dead in my radical tracks in
the late '60's: "fine--when you get busted, call a librarian..."

wayno

"Conan The Librarian" wrote in message
oups.com...

That's what I figured he was referring to with his quotes from
earlier in
the thread, but everything looks fine on my end. I don't see any
choices of
settings within Google Groups, and I've been posting via Google for
ages
without complaints. (Hell, I used to **** people off with another
newsreader
because I had my character-width set too *narrow*. :-)

Anyhow, if it causes a problem, I'll try to remember to do manual
returns.
(FWIW, I added hard returns throughout the previous paragraph, and it
looks
screwy in "preview" mode in Google, while when I remove them, it looks
fine.)



Chuck Vance


Don't listen to Kenny, if he has problems followin' what you have written,
let his anal little ass *try* figure it out. Your posts were just fine 'til
ya began messin' with'em.

Mark

Mark

wrote in message
...
On 14 Mar 2005 12:14:04 -0800, "Conan The Librarian"
wrote:


wrote:

Chuck - please adjust the settings on your news client, or hand-edit.

Hmmm ... I'm just posting through Google Groups. What's the problem
on your end? When I go to read the threads, everything looks
properly-formatted, and I've never received any complaints before.

Please advise.

I've never used Google Groups, so I can't give specific fixes, but I think
Ken
is on the right track.

Well, why don't you just crawl on up in there with him........let us know if
it smells familiar.

On my end, the line breaks make it difficult to easily
read and follow. It looks something like this:

Rather is a skunk. Rather is wonderful. Ivins is a
skunk. Ivins
is wonderful. Limbaugh blows goats. Limbaugh doesn't
blow goats.
all the time. Sometimes he pops
pills.

With the quoted text markers ( the ""s) mixed in, it takes as much time
to
simply figure out what goes where as to read and reply.

See what an expensive education will get you? I don't have any trouble at
all reading that.

Gonzo! Like......truly gonzo!......dick.

Wolfgang
don't worry about it Chuck......no problems visible here.

"bearsbuddy" wrote in
:

Don't listen to Kenny, if he has problems followin' what you have
written, let his anal little ass *try* figure it out. Your posts
were just fine 'til ya began messin' with'em.

Yes, many news clients would agree.