It's not hard. I try not to let personal opinion cloud predictive analysis.

I'm not rooting. And I'm not trying to advocate to change anyone's mind or show them how smart I am.

This is a water is wet legal issue. It will get hammered on appeal.

(07-12-2025 08:29 AM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  tanq is who he is. We should all stop acting so surprised.

Who's surprised, lol? Certainly not the two of us.

(07-12-2025 08:28 AM)TripleA Wrote:  I would say Rath has shown a helluva lot more restraint over the months and years in debating these issues and refraining from name calling than have you, Tanq.

Does it never dawn on you that YOU are the one in the middle of all these stupid back and forth exchanges?

maybe look at who is starting the shade out here, 3A. You seem to overlook that in its entirety. As you typically do.

There is not an intelligent poster here that wouldn't take Andy's opinion over yours bubba.

(07-12-2025 08:32 AM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  It's not hard. I try not to let personal opinion cloud predictive analysis.

I'm not rooting. And I'm not trying to advocate to change anyone's mind or show them how smart I am.

This is a water is wet legal issue. It will get hammered on appeal.

Where have I predicted anything, rath? Please point that out.

As to the last sentence, folks can absolutely disagree that this is a 'water is wet legal issue'. Quite the level of that vaunted 'predictive analysis' you note there. Cool cool.

Ill take it you think that there is no issue in the PP defunding law, and that it has zero to do with targeting, 1st amendment viewpoint discrimination (fairly explicitly articualted in the the bill itself) and potential bill of attainder issues in the narrowness. Just the blanket above, with zero attention to any facts, nor to any relevant caselaw.

Yep, quite the scintillating level of 'predictive analysis' you put out above.

(07-12-2025 08:58 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-12-2025 08:28 AM)TripleA Wrote:  I would say Rath has shown a helluva lot more restraint over the months and years in debating these issues and refraining from name calling than have you, Tanq.

Does it never dawn on you that YOU are the one in the middle of all these stupid back and forth exchanges?

maybe look at who is starting the shade out here, 3A. You seem to overlook that in its entirety. As you typically do.

Uh huh. How many people do I tangle with here? Two.

How many people do most others tangle with here? Two. Maybe three.

How many do you tangle with? Every single person who disagrees with you.

(07-12-2025 09:03 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(07-12-2025 08:58 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-12-2025 08:28 AM)TripleA Wrote:  I would say Rath has shown a helluva lot more restraint over the months and years in debating these issues and refraining from name calling than have you, Tanq.

Does it never dawn on you that YOU are the one in the middle of all these stupid back and forth exchanges?

maybe look at who is starting the shade out here, 3A. You seem to overlook that in its entirety. As you typically do.

Uh huh. How many people do I tangle with here? Two.

How many people do most others tangle with here? Two. Maybe three.

How many do you tangle with? Every single person who disagrees with you.

Which is like, every single person except two or three.

(07-12-2025 09:03 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(07-12-2025 08:58 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-12-2025 08:28 AM)TripleA Wrote:  I would say Rath has shown a helluva lot more restraint over the months and years in debating these issues and refraining from name calling than have you, Tanq.

Does it never dawn on you that YOU are the one in the middle of all these stupid back and forth exchanges?

maybe look at who is starting the shade out here, 3A. You seem to overlook that in its entirety. As you typically do.

Uh huh. How many people do I tangle with here? Two.

How many people do most others tangle with here? Two. Maybe three.

How many do you tangle with? Every single person who disagrees with you.

I typically tangle with the dipshits who simply namecall. There are number of people with whom I disagree that I dont get personal with.

But leave it up to you to allege that without bothering with the facts. Lolz. Cant wait for the next broad as a barn statement that is rhetorically stretched well beyond the breaking point as you typically do pretty much on a constant basis.

My suggestion if you dont want to tangle, simply stop with your dumfk personal asides. Easy peasy. Something that you simply show that you cannot do. And instead by rote nature head down the whiny ***** path you exhibit above like a pro.

(07-12-2025 09:04 AM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  

(07-12-2025 09:03 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(07-12-2025 08:58 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-12-2025 08:28 AM)TripleA Wrote:  I would say Rath has shown a helluva lot more restraint over the months and years in debating these issues and refraining from name calling than have you, Tanq.

Does it never dawn on you that YOU are the one in the middle of all these stupid back and forth exchanges?

maybe look at who is starting the shade out here, 3A. You seem to overlook that in its entirety. As you typically do.

Uh huh. How many people do I tangle with here? Two.

How many people do most others tangle with here? Two. Maybe three.

How many do you tangle with? Every single person who disagrees with you.

Which is like, every single person except two or three.

The discussions where I dont namecall have a singular unique additional feature to them. Surprise surprise. Lolz. Apparently you cant seem to denote that. Double lolz.

I repeat. I tangle with two people here. Tanq tangles with everyone who disagrees with him. Case closed.

Tang might just be one of those unique internet species that looks at this as an arena for swordplay. The psychology of that is troubling.

(07-12-2025 09:17 AM)TripleA Wrote:  I repeat. I tangle with two people here. Tanq tangles with everyone who disagrees with him. Case closed.

Nope. That problem about making **** up kind of rears its ugly head.

I am glad you think that is such the dispositive issue. Id say the underlying issue of whom starts the tangle is an issue. That seems to escape that razor sharp notice of yours.

I love how tanq accuses EVERYONE else of name calling when he is ALWAYS the one calling names.

Obviously he considers disagreeing with him as name calling.

Easy peasy tanq, quote me some posts where I called you a name. I can post dozens of the posts where you called me a name. Pretty much EVERY post where you address me.

You are nothing more than a serial liar.

(07-12-2025 09:34 AM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  I love how tanq accuses EVERYONE else of name calling when he is ALWAYS the one calling names.

Obviously he considers disagreeing with him as name calling.

Not at all, good buddy. But please feel free to continue to pull items out of thin air.

Serial liar.

(07-12-2025 09:36 AM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  Easy peasy tanq, quote me some posts where I called you a name. I can post dozens of the posts where you called me a name. Pretty much EVERY post where you address me.

You are nothing more than a serial liar.

I wouldn't necessarily say barteet is offensive ... I'd buy you a beer or 12 on the stink teat ... all it would take is another bet with tanq to cover 'that' tab ...

I'm not always offensive at least.

(07-12-2025 09:36 AM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  Easy peasy tanq, quote me some posts where I called you a name. I can post dozens of the posts where you called me a name. Pretty much EVERY post where you address me.

You are nothing more than a serial liar.

Dude, every single post re: me you throw out there when you decide to do your 'stalk every post' thingy throws shade at me.

And oh good lordy, when I return the tone and tenor you flip out even more in your manic mode. Lolz.

Just like today, mind you. Double Lolz.

Does anyone have any respect for you in real life? I find that hard to believe. Internet personas and all that aside, you seem like quite a dick.