(07-16-2021 08:59 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 08:20 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 08:06 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 12:31 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 12:25 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  Hahaha... have you met GoodOwl? You guys have a lot to discuss.

Actually, I have met GoodOwl - at halftime of the Liberty Bowl. I think he considers me somewhat of a liberal, and hoo-boy, do we ever have different opinions on Bailiff. But I think he is a good man and a good parent, and like you and me, is entitled to his opinions, some of which I share and some of which I don't, and some of which I think the jury is still out on. I have had more discussion with him than with you. And even though we disagree - mightily - on many things, he has never been disrespectful of me as you have been.

Respect is a two-way street, homie.

I think I have given you a lot of respect. What specifically makes you feel disrespected?

Probably your constant inferences that I am lying about being busy/just spending time on non-Quad activities so that I can avoid answering your tough questions.

Quote:That I ask you questions about Democrat policies and actions? I try to remain respectful. I would never tell you to sod off, although I appreciate the genteel Brit-speak. I ask again, who should I ask those questions of?

How about when I tell you "I don't know... I'm not familiar enough with the details of this issue" to leave it at that. I don't know who else you should ask. It's not my responsibility.

Quote: GoodOwl? I want the views of those who support the Democrat policies and actions, and nobody here comes closer than you and Lad. If I am asking about BLM, or cancel culture, or current news such as the Democratic hide and seek, who should I be asking?

If you feel you need extensive research to answer, that is on you. I don't ask for it.

Again... not everything is intuitive. I can't explain every POV on every issue out there off the top of my head.

Quote: I don't need a map of the city to ask somebody how to get to Hermann Park. I respect that you may be up to your ass in alligators at work, since I did the same thing for over three decades, juggling three businesses with parenting three boys and social and civic responsibilities, a lot of the time as a single parent. Just tell me you are busy. No need to tell me to sod off. I would settle for the same respect I give you.

Homie?

Again... your constant inferences that I am lying about how I choose to spend my free time doesn't feel especially respectful. Just yesterday you said something like "I think I'll pull a 93 and claim busyness".

I WAS busy. That's why I left the forum for several hours. Do you think I was lying?

I had to take a friend to a doctor's appointment, after which I had a car problem and went to the dealership, where I waited several hours. Most of yesterday's postings were from the waiting room there. Then I went home for few hours before leaving for a social engagement. Back late last night. Hope this qualifies as busyness for you. Since I don't have a job or business to run, it will have to do.

FTR, I will be going out of town this weekend, back Tuesday. I will be posting at odd hours from my IPAD, but there will be long stretches in which I shall be incommunicado.

The so-called inference that you are lying is a perception in your mind, not a perception in mine. I have never once thought you told me or anybody else an untruth. Same for Lad and all the other posters here, left or right.

I do think sometimes you are avoiding questions. Hard to tell the difference between dodging and working, when the only clue is nonresponsiveness, but I never once thought you were lying.

Why would I ask the opinion of somebody I thought would lie?

But I will avoid asking your opinion from now on. 93 has no insights that could be of use or interest shall be my new attitude. If you choose to respond to me, though, be civil.

Hope your problems work out.

(07-16-2021 08:15 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-15-2021 09:28 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-15-2021 09:09 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-15-2021 07:39 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-15-2021 05:52 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  More honestly, what the Harris County clerk did, via multiple avenues, was to try and gin up as much Democratic vote in a manner that violated state law and the Texas Constitution. That is the inherent problem with partisan politics in the County Clerk offices.

There were three actions put into place by Hudspeth with the specific goal of pure partisan turnout.

1. Instituting drive through voting -- the one aspect that ws absolutely legal mind you.

2. Mailing ballots to voters --- a direct, specific, and explicit violation of the Texas Election Code. The Code spells out specifically what must occur to have a ballot mailed to a person. Notwithstanding, Hudspeth simply flouted that law directly in this proposal.

3. 24 hour polling --- State law at the time (and currently) states that early voting takes place in the hours between the open and close of the clerk's office. It is now amended to between set hours.

Hudspeth deemed the office would be 'always open'. Dodgy at best. But the veneer isnt deep since even though the office was 'open', no county business could be transacted during those 'open hours'. On its face and practice it was a sham.

In addition to the very obvious problem in the facts with the Texas Election Code, it was probably violative of several provisions of the Texas Constitution dealing with the rights of voters across the state.

So please, stop with the 'the clerk was just doing what an elected official was elected to do.'

No state official is elected to violate voting laws, or the equal protection aspects of the Texas Constitution. Not even in a ham handed effort to gin up one side's vote.

But, at least call it what it is and what the actions stood for.

Hudspeth has now learned the perils of trying to short circuit both the explicit law and the intent of the law. I heard that Harris County shelled out close to million to defend their actions in the district and appellate courts.

And, they invoked the legislature to fully remove much of the discretion afforded to local clerks, since it is now obvious that the more political ones will absolutely abuse it. The clerks will not longer be treated as apolitical officers of the state simply carrying out non-discretionary duties by the lege. Hope you are happy with that outcome.

But, at least tell the full story behind it, and the intentional violation of state law as well as the Texas Constitution instead of 'awww, you have a gripe against a county official doing her job' schtick that you promulgate above.

What actions did the clerk take in Harris county that were not extended to Republican voters of the county or discouraged said voters to vote?

You misconstrue what I said. Ginning up high numbers of votes in Harris means ginning up large number of D votes.

If you want to do that on the up and up -- more power to them.

But the actions of the Harris County clerk were partisan actions to gin up the vote in a very high D county. So get off your misperception of my comment re: Republicans.

Quote:What if - hear me out - they felt their job was to try and make voting as easy and efficient as possible for their constituents? No way someone whose job it was to administer elections would do that, right?

What if Charles Manson felt he was doing the right thing.

Put your real world cap on, lad. Collins had a long history of partisan politics. I misidentified the clerk as Hudspeth, as I had some business in that office just recently. His resume, save for the interim post which he embarked on the above, is "Democratic Party Official" and "Personal Injury Attorney".

Even the Houston Chronicle reported on his ascension as "Texas Democratic Party official appointed interim Harris County clerk".

His tenure was such a shitfest that the county moved the operation of elections to the Harris County Election Administrator’s Office.

But, wish all you want to about fairy tale dragonflies and ginger snap unicorns.

The dude was a political appointment through and through. Not even elected. And he bolted right after the 2020 Nov elections. Doesnt sound like the self-torturing and selfless soul on the brave 'elected official' that seems to be the perception.

I feel like this is typically where you come in yelling about being all knowing or whatever your tag line is when I make similar arguments about potential motives. Lol.

You are correct that the interim clerk, with zero experience in the function of the clerk’s office, could have motives as pure as the driven snow.

The facts surrounding his appointment, the fact that an adjutant to the previous clerk (I.e a professional in the role) was not selected, and Collins sole experience being a ‘Democratic Party official’ all seem to tilt to the other side.

When one looks at that tableaux, and the events that came from it, and the responses to those events, a quite rational and convincing case that Collins was installed solely to gin up Democratic votes in a place that has a lot of them. Considering 2 of the 3 methods to do so were and are either illegal under the Texas Election Code and/or the Texas Constitution also adds to that perception and rationale.

On the other hand we have one person opining that an elected official was simply doing the best to serve their constituency (an objectively false statement) and another saying ‘maybe, just maybe, the upper level highly partisan Democratic Party official whom was appointed over actual professionals in the office, the appointment which was done in divisive partisan split vote amongst the Commissioners, and in a time when the stated goal of the Texas Democrat Party was to leverage massive turnout in Harris to flip Texas’. Oh, not to mention the single minded methods employed by that interim clerk / Democratic official to do the same, even if it meant violating the Texas Election Code.

According to quantum mechanics, a perfect copy of the Eiffel Tower could assemble in my hayfield. So your view, even with all the items above actually is possible.

But I would suggest you stop and look over the above points before defending it Iwo Jima like. But again, as stated before, you are free not to as well.

What is it you usually say? Is this your 'omniscient godlike knowledge' thingy rearing its head once again? Or are you passing your omniscient judgement without bothering to look at the job description?

O man, I could keep going on with cut and pastes from previous posts where you used "omniscient" to chastise me for drawing a conclusion from a contextual situation. This is too rich.

Could the county clerk have ONLY done these things to increase overall Dem turnout? Sure. But could the county clerk have also done these things to increase all turnout because it was a pandemic and there was worries that more voters would stay home? Sure. Could they have also been interested in expanding voting access to all constituents of Harris County because their job was to run elections? Sure.

Could it be a combination of things? Sure.

Or you could defend the idea like you're at Iwo Jima. I think the real smoking gun for your claim would have been if the clerk had favored heavily Dem portions of Harris County and not the heavily Republican areas. Or if they had done something to try and suppress Republican voters. Any evidence of specifically targeting either party?

(07-16-2021 09:00 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 08:23 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 08:06 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 12:31 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 12:25 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  I
Hahaha... have you met GoodOwl? You guys have a lot to discuss.

Actually, I have met GoodOwl - at halftime of the Liberty Bowl. I think he considers me somewhat of a liberal, and hoo-boy, do we ever have different opinions on Bailiff. But I think he is a good man and a good parent, and like you and me, is entitled to his opinions, some of which I share and some of which I don't, and some of which I think the jury is still out on. I have had more discussion with him than with you. And even though we disagree - mightily - on many things, he has never been disrespectful of me as you have been.

Respect is a two-way street, homie.

So the guy who rails on manners decides to respond to a comment lacking in direct ad Homs and on the subject of respect.

That comment could have been limited to “Respect is a two way street”.

Instead, Mr Manners decides to respond with “Respect is a two way street, HOMIE”.

Rich. Absolutely rich. <slow clap>

Would you be so offended if I had said "Respect is a two-way street, my friend?"

Because it means the same thing.

I would assume my friend is being used to try and ease tension.

Homie just sounds like being a dick. Especially in the context of your response to a comment on respect.

Neither here nor there to me; just a good chuckle about a person who makes a great deal of sanctimonious hay on manners dropping an explicit smarmy ad hom when there was none to respond to.

(07-16-2021 09:26 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 09:00 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 08:23 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 08:06 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 12:31 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Actually, I have met GoodOwl - at halftime of the Liberty Bowl. I think he considers me somewhat of a liberal, and hoo-boy, do we ever have different opinions on Bailiff. But I think he is a good man and a good parent, and like you and me, is entitled to his opinions, some of which I share and some of which I don't, and some of which I think the jury is still out on. I have had more discussion with him than with you. And even though we disagree - mightily - on many things, he has never been disrespectful of me as you have been.

Respect is a two-way street, homie.

So the guy who rails on manners decides to respond to a comment lacking in direct ad Homs and on the subject of respect.

That comment could have been limited to “Respect is a two way street”.

Instead, Mr Manners decides to respond with “Respect is a two way street, HOMIE”.

Rich. Absolutely rich. <slow clap>

Would you be so offended if I had said "Respect is a two-way street, my friend?"

Because it means the same thing.

I would assume my friend is being used to try and ease tension.

Homie just sounds like being a dick. Especially in the context of your response to a comment on respect.

Neither here nor there to me; just a good chuckle about a person who makes a great deal of sanctimonious hay on manners dropping an explicit smarmy ad hom when there was none to respond to.

Thanks for the comment.

I am super-clear that you give yourself a complete pass to use ad homs here (douche) but you are outraged by their use by Lad and me.

(07-16-2021 09:13 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 08:59 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 08:20 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 08:06 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 12:31 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Actually, I have met GoodOwl - at halftime of the Liberty Bowl. I think he considers me somewhat of a liberal, and hoo-boy, do we ever have different opinions on Bailiff. But I think he is a good man and a good parent, and like you and me, is entitled to his opinions, some of which I share and some of which I don't, and some of which I think the jury is still out on. I have had more discussion with him than with you. And even though we disagree - mightily - on many things, he has never been disrespectful of me as you have been.

Respect is a two-way street, homie.

I think I have given you a lot of respect. What specifically makes you feel disrespected?

Probably your constant inferences that I am lying about being busy/just spending time on non-Quad activities so that I can avoid answering your tough questions.

Quote:That I ask you questions about Democrat policies and actions? I try to remain respectful. I would never tell you to sod off, although I appreciate the genteel Brit-speak. I ask again, who should I ask those questions of?

How about when I tell you "I don't know... I'm not familiar enough with the details of this issue" to leave it at that. I don't know who else you should ask. It's not my responsibility.

Quote: GoodOwl? I want the views of those who support the Democrat policies and actions, and nobody here comes closer than you and Lad. If I am asking about BLM, or cancel culture, or current news such as the Democratic hide and seek, who should I be asking?

If you feel you need extensive research to answer, that is on you. I don't ask for it.

Again... not everything is intuitive. I can't explain every POV on every issue out there off the top of my head.

Quote: I don't need a map of the city to ask somebody how to get to Hermann Park. I respect that you may be up to your ass in alligators at work, since I did the same thing for over three decades, juggling three businesses with parenting three boys and social and civic responsibilities, a lot of the time as a single parent. Just tell me you are busy. No need to tell me to sod off. I would settle for the same respect I give you.

Homie?

Again... your constant inferences that I am lying about how I choose to spend my free time doesn't feel especially respectful. Just yesterday you said something like "I think I'll pull a 93 and claim busyness".

I WAS busy. That's why I left the forum for several hours. Do you think I was lying?

I had to take a friend to a doctor's appointment, after which I had a car problem and went to the dealership, where I waited several hours. Most of yesterday's postings were from the waiting room there. Then I went home for few hours before leaving for a social engagement. Back late last night. Hope this qualifies as busyness for you. Since I don't have a job or business to run, it will have to do.

FTR, I will be going out of town this weekend, back Tuesday. I will be posting at odd hours from my IPAD, but there will be long stretches in which I shall be incommunicado.

The so-called inference that you are lying is a perception in your mind, not a perception in mine. I have never once thought you told me or anybody else an untruth. Same for Lad and all the other posters here, left or right.

I do think sometimes you are avoiding questions. Hard to tell the difference between dodging and working, when the only clue is nonresponsiveness, but I never once thought you were lying.

But I will avoid asking your opinion from now on. 93 has no insights that could be of use or interest shall be my new attitude. If you choose to respond to me, though, be civil.

Cool. I'm good with that. I'll comment as I see fit and you will no longer complain when I don't. I love it.

Quote:Hope your problems work out.

???

(07-16-2021 09:38 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 09:13 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 08:59 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 08:20 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 08:06 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  Respect is a two-way street, homie.

I think I have given you a lot of respect. What specifically makes you feel disrespected?

Probably your constant inferences that I am lying about being busy/just spending time on non-Quad activities so that I can avoid answering your tough questions.

Quote:That I ask you questions about Democrat policies and actions? I try to remain respectful. I would never tell you to sod off, although I appreciate the genteel Brit-speak. I ask again, who should I ask those questions of?

How about when I tell you "I don't know... I'm not familiar enough with the details of this issue" to leave it at that. I don't know who else you should ask. It's not my responsibility.

Quote: GoodOwl? I want the views of those who support the Democrat policies and actions, and nobody here comes closer than you and Lad. If I am asking about BLM, or cancel culture, or current news such as the Democratic hide and seek, who should I be asking?

If you feel you need extensive research to answer, that is on you. I don't ask for it.

Again... not everything is intuitive. I can't explain every POV on every issue out there off the top of my head.

Quote: I don't need a map of the city to ask somebody how to get to Hermann Park. I respect that you may be up to your ass in alligators at work, since I did the same thing for over three decades, juggling three businesses with parenting three boys and social and civic responsibilities, a lot of the time as a single parent. Just tell me you are busy. No need to tell me to sod off. I would settle for the same respect I give you.

Homie?

Again... your constant inferences that I am lying about how I choose to spend my free time doesn't feel especially respectful. Just yesterday you said something like "I think I'll pull a 93 and claim busyness".

I WAS busy. That's why I left the forum for several hours. Do you think I was lying?

I had to take a friend to a doctor's appointment, after which I had a car problem and went to the dealership, where I waited several hours. Most of yesterday's postings were from the waiting room there. Then I went home for few hours before leaving for a social engagement. Back late last night. Hope this qualifies as busyness for you. Since I don't have a job or business to run, it will have to do.

FTR, I will be going out of town this weekend, back Tuesday. I will be posting at odd hours from my IPAD, but there will be long stretches in which I shall be incommunicado.

The so-called inference that you are lying is a perception in your mind, not a perception in mine. I have never once thought you told me or anybody else an untruth. Same for Lad and all the other posters here, left or right.

I do think sometimes you are avoiding questions. Hard to tell the difference between dodging and working, when the only clue is nonresponsiveness, but I never once thought you were lying.

But I will avoid asking your opinion from now on. 93 has no insights that could be of use or interest shall be my new attitude. If you choose to respond to me, though, be civil.

Cool. I'm good with that. I'll comment as I see fit and you will no longer complain when I don't. I love it.

Quote:Hope your problems work out.

???

Are we agreed that I am no longer allowed to ask your opinion? That asking you a question is an assault on your privacy, and asking makes me a baaaaaad man. I will put you on Ignore if you would like that.

You intimated (in another thread?) that your problems extended beyond work. I just hope everything works out for you, regardless.

(07-16-2021 09:40 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 09:38 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 09:13 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 08:59 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 08:20 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I think I have given you a lot of respect. What specifically makes you feel disrespected?

Probably your constant inferences that I am lying about being busy/just spending time on non-Quad activities so that I can avoid answering your tough questions.

Quote:That I ask you questions about Democrat policies and actions? I try to remain respectful. I would never tell you to sod off, although I appreciate the genteel Brit-speak. I ask again, who should I ask those questions of?

How about when I tell you "I don't know... I'm not familiar enough with the details of this issue" to leave it at that. I don't know who else you should ask. It's not my responsibility.

Quote: GoodOwl? I want the views of those who support the Democrat policies and actions, and nobody here comes closer than you and Lad. If I am asking about BLM, or cancel culture, or current news such as the Democratic hide and seek, who should I be asking?

If you feel you need extensive research to answer, that is on you. I don't ask for it.

Again... not everything is intuitive. I can't explain every POV on every issue out there off the top of my head.

Quote: I don't need a map of the city to ask somebody how to get to Hermann Park. I respect that you may be up to your ass in alligators at work, since I did the same thing for over three decades, juggling three businesses with parenting three boys and social and civic responsibilities, a lot of the time as a single parent. Just tell me you are busy. No need to tell me to sod off. I would settle for the same respect I give you.

Homie?

Again... your constant inferences that I am lying about how I choose to spend my free time doesn't feel especially respectful. Just yesterday you said something like "I think I'll pull a 93 and claim busyness".

I WAS busy. That's why I left the forum for several hours. Do you think I was lying?

I had to take a friend to a doctor's appointment, after which I had a car problem and went to the dealership, where I waited several hours. Most of yesterday's postings were from the waiting room there. Then I went home for few hours before leaving for a social engagement. Back late last night. Hope this qualifies as busyness for you. Since I don't have a job or business to run, it will have to do.

FTR, I will be going out of town this weekend, back Tuesday. I will be posting at odd hours from my IPAD, but there will be long stretches in which I shall be incommunicado.

The so-called inference that you are lying is a perception in your mind, not a perception in mine. I have never once thought you told me or anybody else an untruth. Same for Lad and all the other posters here, left or right.

I do think sometimes you are avoiding questions. Hard to tell the difference between dodging and working, when the only clue is nonresponsiveness, but I never once thought you were lying.

But I will avoid asking your opinion from now on. 93 has no insights that could be of use or interest shall be my new attitude. If you choose to respond to me, though, be civil.

Cool. I'm good with that. I'll comment as I see fit and you will no longer complain when I don't. I love it.

Quote:Hope your problems work out.

???

Are we agreed that I am no longer allowed to ask your opinion?

Of course you are allowed to ask me my opinion if you want. If I tell you that I don't know perhaps we could leave it at that without the constant "93 can't admit the truth!".

(07-16-2021 09:48 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 09:40 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 09:38 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 09:13 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 08:59 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  Probably your constant inferences that I am lying about being busy/just spending time on non-Quad activities so that I can avoid answering your tough questions.


How about when I tell you "I don't know... I'm not familiar enough with the details of this issue" to leave it at that. I don't know who else you should ask. It's not my responsibility.


Again... not everything is intuitive. I can't explain every POV on every issue out there off the top of my head.


Again... your constant inferences that I am lying about how I choose to spend my free time doesn't feel especially respectful. Just yesterday you said something like "I think I'll pull a 93 and claim busyness".

I WAS busy. That's why I left the forum for several hours. Do you think I was lying?

I had to take a friend to a doctor's appointment, after which I had a car problem and went to the dealership, where I waited several hours. Most of yesterday's postings were from the waiting room there. Then I went home for few hours before leaving for a social engagement. Back late last night. Hope this qualifies as busyness for you. Since I don't have a job or business to run, it will have to do.

FTR, I will be going out of town this weekend, back Tuesday. I will be posting at odd hours from my IPAD, but there will be long stretches in which I shall be incommunicado.

The so-called inference that you are lying is a perception in your mind, not a perception in mine. I have never once thought you told me or anybody else an untruth. Same for Lad and all the other posters here, left or right.

I do think sometimes you are avoiding questions. Hard to tell the difference between dodging and working, when the only clue is nonresponsiveness, but I never once thought you were lying.

But I will avoid asking your opinion from now on. 93 has no insights that could be of use or interest shall be my new attitude. If you choose to respond to me, though, be civil.

Cool. I'm good with that. I'll comment as I see fit and you will no longer complain when I don't. I love it.

Quote:Hope your problems work out.

???

Are we agreed that I am no longer allowed to ask your opinion?

Of course you are allowed to ask me my opinion if you want. If I tell you that I don't know perhaps we could leave it at that without the constant "93 can't admit the truth!".

I think it best to just put you on Ignore. I am getting the vibe that any future interaction will be both unwelcome and useless.

I had a lot of hope when you first appeared here that you could provide valuable insights. My mistake.

Fare well, sir.

(07-16-2021 09:54 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 09:48 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 09:40 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 09:38 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 09:13 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I WAS busy. That's why I left the forum for several hours. Do you think I was lying?

I had to take a friend to a doctor's appointment, after which I had a car problem and went to the dealership, where I waited several hours. Most of yesterday's postings were from the waiting room there. Then I went home for few hours before leaving for a social engagement. Back late last night. Hope this qualifies as busyness for you. Since I don't have a job or business to run, it will have to do.

FTR, I will be going out of town this weekend, back Tuesday. I will be posting at odd hours from my IPAD, but there will be long stretches in which I shall be incommunicado.

The so-called inference that you are lying is a perception in your mind, not a perception in mine. I have never once thought you told me or anybody else an untruth. Same for Lad and all the other posters here, left or right.

I do think sometimes you are avoiding questions. Hard to tell the difference between dodging and working, when the only clue is nonresponsiveness, but I never once thought you were lying.

But I will avoid asking your opinion from now on. 93 has no insights that could be of use or interest shall be my new attitude. If you choose to respond to me, though, be civil.

Cool. I'm good with that. I'll comment as I see fit and you will no longer complain when I don't. I love it.

Quote:Hope your problems work out.

???

Are we agreed that I am no longer allowed to ask your opinion?

Of course you are allowed to ask me my opinion if you want. If I tell you that I don't know perhaps we could leave it at that without the constant "93 can't admit the truth!".

I think it best to just put you on Ignore. I am getting the vibe that any future interaction will be both unwelcome and useless.

I had a lot of hope when you first appeared here that you could provide valuable insights. My mistake.

Fare well, sir.

What a hilarious back and forth.

93: Go ahead and ask for my opinion, but don't extrapolate too far if I say I don't know or have one.

OO: well, looks like I should put you on ignore since I can't yell at you for lying.

Seriously, 93 (and I frankly) are asking is to not be pilloried as if we are not individuals, but instead representatives of the DNC, progressives, or whatever liberal designation you want. The last few days have repeatedly seen you ask for us to defend positions of others.

(07-16-2021 09:40 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 09:38 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 09:13 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 08:59 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 08:20 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I think I have given you a lot of respect. What specifically makes you feel disrespected?

Probably your constant inferences that I am lying about being busy/just spending time on non-Quad activities so that I can avoid answering your tough questions.

Quote:That I ask you questions about Democrat policies and actions? I try to remain respectful. I would never tell you to sod off, although I appreciate the genteel Brit-speak. I ask again, who should I ask those questions of?

How about when I tell you "I don't know... I'm not familiar enough with the details of this issue" to leave it at that. I don't know who else you should ask. It's not my responsibility.

Quote: GoodOwl? I want the views of those who support the Democrat policies and actions, and nobody here comes closer than you and Lad. If I am asking about BLM, or cancel culture, or current news such as the Democratic hide and seek, who should I be asking?

If you feel you need extensive research to answer, that is on you. I don't ask for it.

Again... not everything is intuitive. I can't explain every POV on every issue out there off the top of my head.

Quote: I don't need a map of the city to ask somebody how to get to Hermann Park. I respect that you may be up to your ass in alligators at work, since I did the same thing for over three decades, juggling three businesses with parenting three boys and social and civic responsibilities, a lot of the time as a single parent. Just tell me you are busy. No need to tell me to sod off. I would settle for the same respect I give you.

Homie?

Again... your constant inferences that I am lying about how I choose to spend my free time doesn't feel especially respectful. Just yesterday you said something like "I think I'll pull a 93 and claim busyness".

I WAS busy. That's why I left the forum for several hours. Do you think I was lying?

I had to take a friend to a doctor's appointment, after which I had a car problem and went to the dealership, where I waited several hours. Most of yesterday's postings were from the waiting room there. Then I went home for few hours before leaving for a social engagement. Back late last night. Hope this qualifies as busyness for you. Since I don't have a job or business to run, it will have to do.

FTR, I will be going out of town this weekend, back Tuesday. I will be posting at odd hours from my IPAD, but there will be long stretches in which I shall be incommunicado.

The so-called inference that you are lying is a perception in your mind, not a perception in mine. I have never once thought you told me or anybody else an untruth. Same for Lad and all the other posters here, left or right.

I do think sometimes you are avoiding questions. Hard to tell the difference between dodging and working, when the only clue is nonresponsiveness, but I never once thought you were lying.

But I will avoid asking your opinion from now on. 93 has no insights that could be of use or interest shall be my new attitude. If you choose to respond to me, though, be civil.

Cool. I'm good with that. I'll comment as I see fit and you will no longer complain when I don't. I love it.

Quote:Hope your problems work out.

???

Are we agreed that I am no longer allowed to ask your opinion? That asking you a question is an assault on your privacy, and asking makes me a baaaaaad man. I will put you on Ignore if you would like that.

You are clearly being intentional dense about this. Whatever. When I tell you I don't know about a topic you continue to beat the drum of "This guy just can't admit the obvious truth." I'm not offended by your query as to my opinion (obviously). Don't be childish.

Put me on ignore if you want. It's your choice.

Quote:You intimated (in another thread?) that your problems extended beyond work. I just hope everything works out for you, regardless.

I think I intimated that I have a lot of outside interests that take precedence over posting on the Quad. Either way I'm good but I appreciate the sentiment.

(07-16-2021 09:34 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 09:26 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 09:00 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 08:23 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 08:06 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  Respect is a two-way street, homie.

So the guy who rails on manners decides to respond to a comment lacking in direct ad Homs and on the subject of respect.

That comment could have been limited to “Respect is a two way street”.

Instead, Mr Manners decides to respond with “Respect is a two way street, HOMIE”.

Rich. Absolutely rich. <slow clap>

Would you be so offended if I had said "Respect is a two-way street, my friend?"

Because it means the same thing.

I would assume my friend is being used to try and ease tension.

Homie just sounds like being a dick. Especially in the context of your response to a comment on respect.

Neither here nor there to me; just a good chuckle about a person who makes a great deal of sanctimonious hay on manners dropping an explicit smarmy ad hom when there was none to respond to.

Thanks for the comment.

I am super-clear that you give yourself a complete pass to use ad homs here (douche) but you are outraged by their use by Lad and me.

Outraged? Far from it.

Looking at sanctimony turned hypocrisy? I find that rather amusing.

Viewing the words of the preacher of manners and decorum telling another, in the absence of a first ad hom, to “sod off”? Chuckle inducing.

Looking at the preacher of manners and decorum, again in the absence of an ad hom, dropping in a smarmy comment? Outright comedy.

Not outrage as you so claim, just the benefit of laughter at that very interesting juxtaposition of preaching and action.

(07-16-2021 10:13 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 09:34 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 09:26 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 09:00 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 08:23 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  So the guy who rails on manners decides to respond to a comment lacking in direct ad Homs and on the subject of respect.

That comment could have been limited to “Respect is a two way street”.

Instead, Mr Manners decides to respond with “Respect is a two way street, HOMIE”.

Rich. Absolutely rich. <slow clap>

Would you be so offended if I had said "Respect is a two-way street, my friend?"

Because it means the same thing.

I would assume my friend is being used to try and ease tension.

Homie just sounds like being a dick. Especially in the context of your response to a comment on respect.

Neither here nor there to me; just a good chuckle about a person who makes a great deal of sanctimonious hay on manners dropping an explicit smarmy ad hom when there was none to respond to.

Thanks for the comment.

I am super-clear that you give yourself a complete pass to use ad homs here (douche) but you are outraged by their use by Lad and me.

Outraged? Far from it.

Looking at sanctimony turned hypocrisy? I find that rather amusing.

Viewing the words of the preacher of manners and decorum telling another, in the absence of a first ad hom, to “sod off”? Chuckle inducing.

Preacher of manners? You seem to jump in and accuse others of ad homs all the time.

Quote:Looking at the preacher of manners and decorum, again in the absence of an ad hom, dropping in a smarmy comment? Outright comedy.

Funny... you also jump in to accuse others of smarmy comments all the time. Who is the preacher? Are we both preachers?

Quote:Not outrage as you so claim, just the benefit of laughter at that very interesting juxtaposition of preaching and action.

Back at you, homie.

(07-16-2021 10:29 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 10:13 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 09:34 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 09:26 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 09:00 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  Would you be so offended if I had said "Respect is a two-way street, my friend?"

Because it means the same thing.

I would assume my friend is being used to try and ease tension.

Homie just sounds like being a dick. Especially in the context of your response to a comment on respect.

Neither here nor there to me; just a good chuckle about a person who makes a great deal of sanctimonious hay on manners dropping an explicit smarmy ad hom when there was none to respond to.

Thanks for the comment.

I am super-clear that you give yourself a complete pass to use ad homs here (douche) but you are outraged by their use by Lad and me.

Outraged? Far from it.

Looking at sanctimony turned hypocrisy? I find that rather amusing.

Viewing the words of the preacher of manners and decorum telling another, in the absence of a first ad hom, to “sod off”? Chuckle inducing.

Preacher of manners? You seem to jump in and accuse others of ad homs all the time.

Quote:Looking at the preacher of manners and decorum, again in the absence of an ad hom, dropping in a smarmy comment? Outright comedy.

Funny... you also jump in to accuse others of smarmy comments all the time. Who is the preacher? Are we both preachers?

Quote:Not outrage as you so claim, just the benefit of laughter at that very interesting juxtaposition of preaching and action.

Back at you, homie.

Oh sweet hosannas. Mr Manners replies with another drop in ad hom! Lmao.

Must be a bad hair day or somefink over there. But, the sanctimonious are absolutely endearing when they jump off the bandwagon, aren’t they? Even richer when they are seemingly tossed out for mere ***** and giggles. Double rofl.

(07-16-2021 10:37 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 10:29 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 10:13 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 09:34 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 09:26 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  I would assume my friend is being used to try and ease tension.

Homie just sounds like being a dick. Especially in the context of your response to a comment on respect.

Neither here nor there to me; just a good chuckle about a person who makes a great deal of sanctimonious hay on manners dropping an explicit smarmy ad hom when there was none to respond to.

Thanks for the comment.

I am super-clear that you give yourself a complete pass to use ad homs here (douche) but you are outraged by their use by Lad and me.

Outraged? Far from it.

Looking at sanctimony turned hypocrisy? I find that rather amusing.

Viewing the words of the preacher of manners and decorum telling another, in the absence of a first ad hom, to “sod off”? Chuckle inducing.

Preacher of manners? You seem to jump in and accuse others of ad homs all the time.

Quote:Looking at the preacher of manners and decorum, again in the absence of an ad hom, dropping in a smarmy comment? Outright comedy.

Funny... you also jump in to accuse others of smarmy comments all the time. Who is the preacher? Are we both preachers?

Quote:Not outrage as you so claim, just the benefit of laughter at that very interesting juxtaposition of preaching and action.

Back at you, homie.

Oh sweet hosannas. Mr Manners replies with another drop in ad hom! Lmao.

Must be a bad hair day or somefink over there.

Ad hom? Not quite.

Smarmy? Yep.

You might as well get your accusations right.

Is "Mr. Manners" smarmy or an ad hom? It seems smarmy.

(07-16-2021 10:44 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 10:37 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 10:29 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 10:13 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 09:34 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  Thanks for the comment.

I am super-clear that you give yourself a complete pass to use ad homs here (douche) but you are outraged by their use by Lad and me.

Outraged? Far from it.

Looking at sanctimony turned hypocrisy? I find that rather amusing.

Viewing the words of the preacher of manners and decorum telling another, in the absence of a first ad hom, to “sod off”? Chuckle inducing.

Preacher of manners? You seem to jump in and accuse others of ad homs all the time.

Quote:Looking at the preacher of manners and decorum, again in the absence of an ad hom, dropping in a smarmy comment? Outright comedy.

Funny... you also jump in to accuse others of smarmy comments all the time. Who is the preacher? Are we both preachers?

Quote:Not outrage as you so claim, just the benefit of laughter at that very interesting juxtaposition of preaching and action.

Back at you, homie.

Oh sweet hosannas. Mr Manners replies with another drop in ad hom! Lmao.

Must be a bad hair day or somefink over there.

Ad hom? Not quite.

Smarmy? Yep.

You might as well get your accusations right.

Is "Mr. Manners" smarmy or an ad hom? It seems smarmy.

It emphasizes the exhibited hypocrisy, sir. Glad to help you refine the point.

But for today you seemingly have a solid lead on the ‘unwarranted path to dhead du jour’ that you seemingly preach incessantly on. Commands a measure of respect in its own right. Congrats!

(07-16-2021 10:50 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 10:44 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 10:37 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 10:29 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 10:13 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  Outraged? Far from it.

Looking at sanctimony turned hypocrisy? I find that rather amusing.

Viewing the words of the preacher of manners and decorum telling another, in the absence of a first ad hom, to “sod off”? Chuckle inducing.

Preacher of manners? You seem to jump in and accuse others of ad homs all the time.

Quote:Looking at the preacher of manners and decorum, again in the absence of an ad hom, dropping in a smarmy comment? Outright comedy.

Funny... you also jump in to accuse others of smarmy comments all the time. Who is the preacher? Are we both preachers?

Quote:Not outrage as you so claim, just the benefit of laughter at that very interesting juxtaposition of preaching and action.

Back at you, homie.

Oh sweet hosannas. Mr Manners replies with another drop in ad hom! Lmao.

Must be a bad hair day or somefink over there.

Ad hom? Not quite.

Smarmy? Yep.

You might as well get your accusations right.

Is "Mr. Manners" smarmy or an ad hom? It seems smarmy.

It emphasizes the exhibited hypocrisy, sir. Glad to help you refine the point.

I forgot. You don't recognize your own smarm or ad homs. Just other people's. You know... hypocrisy!

This is dumb. I'm sorry I took the bait.

(07-16-2021 10:54 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 10:50 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 10:44 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 10:37 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 10:29 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  Preacher of manners? You seem to jump in and accuse others of ad homs all the time.


Funny... you also jump in to accuse others of smarmy comments all the time. Who is the preacher? Are we both preachers?


Back at you, homie.

Oh sweet hosannas. Mr Manners replies with another drop in ad hom! Lmao.

Must be a bad hair day or somefink over there.

Ad hom? Not quite.

Smarmy? Yep.

You might as well get your accusations right.

Is "Mr. Manners" smarmy or an ad hom? It seems smarmy.

It emphasizes the exhibited hypocrisy, sir. Glad to help you refine the point.

I forgot. You don't recognize your own smarm or ad homs. Just other people's. You know... hypocrisy!

This is dumb. I'm sorry I took the bait.

I fully recognize my own smarm *and* ad Homs, good sir. We have this guy who preaches it to us incessantly. But it looks like he took a gainer off that high horse recently.

(07-16-2021 11:00 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 10:54 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 10:50 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 10:44 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 10:37 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  Oh sweet hosannas. Mr Manners replies with another drop in ad hom! Lmao.

Must be a bad hair day or somefink over there.

Ad hom? Not quite.

Smarmy? Yep.

You might as well get your accusations right.

Is "Mr. Manners" smarmy or an ad hom? It seems smarmy.

It emphasizes the exhibited hypocrisy, sir. Glad to help you refine the point.

I forgot. You don't recognize your own smarm or ad homs. Just other people's. You know... hypocrisy!

This is dumb. I'm sorry I took the bait.

I fully recognize my own smarm *and* ad Homs, good sir. We have this guy who preaches it to us incessantly. But it looks like he took a gainer off that high horse recently.

What's so dumb about this whole thing is that the only times I tend to point out smarm/ad homs is when you are busy accusing us of the same. It's ridiculously hypocritical.

(07-12-2021 10:39 AM)MerseyOwl Wrote:  We don't have ID cards issued by any governmental unit here in the UK (save for PASS cards issued by the Bracknell Forest and Milton Keynes Councils). The Tories tried to push it, but the general public (especially everyone not Tory) were firmly against it. So they scrapped the plan in 2011.
Too much paranoia!!! --> You have to understand if a police officer stops you they basically can't ask you for identification unless they intend to charge you with an offence.

Instead we use our passports or driver's licences. There's also the aforementioned PASS (Proof of Age Standards Scheme) card (for verification of age and identity). PASS cards are issued by a number of organisations mainly private. The motivation here is primarily for 18 year olds (and above) to purchase alcohol and tobacco or play the lottery. Also identification is required to apply for a new job, rent a new home, visit premises (like prison), access services like transport, housing services or claiming benefits. Not everyone in their majority has a need for a driver's licence (or a passport). You 'simply' have to fill out a form, pay a fee, and have a referee vouch that they know you as said person and confirmed from 'official records'.

Next election I'll ask what happens if you don't have a passport, driver's licence, or PASS card. I generally just show my driver's licence that has my address along with the postcard I received as notification of a pending election.

Appreciate the insight on this, MO. Some stuff I didn't fully know about. Seems like most people have some form of ID, and there is a sloution for the few who might not (the voucher form). I persoanlly don't know anyone without some form of ID, but then, I'm a minority.

(07-16-2021 11:08 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 11:00 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 10:54 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 10:50 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-16-2021 10:44 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  Ad hom? Not quite.

Smarmy? Yep.

You might as well get your accusations right.

Is "Mr. Manners" smarmy or an ad hom? It seems smarmy.

It emphasizes the exhibited hypocrisy, sir. Glad to help you refine the point.

I forgot. You don't recognize your own smarm or ad homs. Just other people's. You know... hypocrisy!

This is dumb. I'm sorry I took the bait.

I fully recognize my own smarm *and* ad Homs, good sir. We have this guy who preaches it to us incessantly. But it looks like he took a gainer off that high horse recently.

What's so dumb about this whole thing is that the only times I tend to point out smarm/ad homs is when you are busy accusing us of the same. It's ridiculously hypocritical.

Funny, you state categorically about the only times you point out smarms and homs is in response to me. I guess you have obliquely forgotten this sub thread itself. Lolz. The comedy just progresses unabated......