(02-06-2022 10:46 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(02-06-2022 09:56 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(02-06-2022 09:15 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(02-05-2022 11:15 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(02-05-2022 10:16 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I would have been happy to not interact with you tonight, but you asked me a question. I answered. Then you asked me another. I answered the second one. So all the interacting has been at your instigation.

Got it. So you are reserving the right to say dickish things unprompted. Duly noted.

Quote:Your “fix” doesn’t change my point. We have elected and appointed many flawed people to many posts over many years. I think if the Judge did this, it would not be a problem with the appointment.

Yes, an attack would make a difference. That hasn’t happened yet.

From the article that you posted: “ Godi, working under the username "H2rty," made more than 20 edits to Wikipedia pages for Jackson and her potential rivals vying for a spot on the Supreme Court, according to the Politico report.”

Makes it sound like she was trying to sully the reputation of her ex-boss’ competition.

A. Seems to be a right you enjoy. (Example: As opposed to other instances, this time I believe that you actually did what you said you did.). Why not me?

B. Missed that part. If Godi was working on instructions, that would make me think less of the judge, but if she were Biden’s choice, it would not be an obstacle. She would be confirmed.

Because Tanq and I have a very special relationship that involves being dickish to each other. You don't share that very special relationship, homie.

Joking aside... he was being dickish and I responded back in kind.

Yours was unprompted (hence my comment).

I do like you clamoring at OO about '[his] being the victim' in another post.

I guess you dont remember the back and forth of ---

OO -- do you have a point?

93: Oh grumpy internet guy... it's so fulfilling to devote any slice of my weekend to interacting with you.

OO; I would have been happy to not interact with you tonight, but you asked me a question. I answered. Then you asked me another. I answered the second one. So all the interacting has been at your instigation.

93: Got it. So you are reserving the right to say dickish things unprompted. Duly noted.

Yep, you had *zero* to do with any progression up the dickish comments being tossed out, nada, zilch, zip. Lolz.

Not sure why you feel the need to intercede on OO's behalf here but OK... Go Team! I guess.

It's funny that you accurately transcribed everything but OO's original comment.

I was simply responding to something that he posted with my own thoughts (nothing dickish, mind you). My last comment on the issue was "Obviously my point has nothing to do with boxes checked or unchecked."

His response was "You had a point?"? Dickish, you know? It wasn't "do you have a point?". Subtle but different.

Anyway... this is exactly the tedious bickering that #'s mentioned. Go Team!