Breaking News
Comcast Close To Buying NBC
Please take my blog reader survey!
Please take this reader survey so I and advertisers who want to line my pocket with money know who you are, plus it gives the world a better idea of who’s reading what, etc. So take it, please.
Kristy Sanchez-Trujillo
T-Mobile Outage
T-Mobile
Megan Gale
Sylvie Van Der Vaart
Clash Of The Titans
Ashley Neufeld
Afton Williamson
Kyrstin Gemar
Tesla Coil
Xperia X10
Cany Vossough
Reza Vossough
Ninel Conde
Julia Louis Dreyfus
Guardians of Childhood
Botox
Chase Utley
Prince Of Persia Sands Of Time
Cherokee
Christopher Lee
Prince Charles
Prince William
Prince Harry
Cleveland Browns
Ernie Accorsi
Reina Flynn
Reid Gray
Cole Hamels
Brett Myers
Quinn Gray
SEPTA
Burlington Northern
Star Wars The Old Republic
Nightmare On Elm Street
Gerard Butler
Amrit Dhaliwal
Louise Linton
Gwen Stefani
Curtis Lavelle Vance
Anne Pressly
H1N1 Vaccine
Melody Ross
Oasis Of The Seas
Disney Cruise
Selita Ebanks
Anthony Sowell
JJ Redick
Axe Body Spray
Christopher Walken
Dragon Age Origins
I thought the evil George Soros was paying you. Now you expect me to take a boring survey?
I will when I get my check from the evil mastermind and not before.
Do you shop at WalMart. They left off “hell no!”
My check arrived.
George Bush is a coward and a moron. So are 28% of the electorate.
merlallen is:
a. Brain dead. Plug should be pulled
b. Brain dead. Should be left on life support
c. Brain dead. Should be used as a piñata in a Mexican prison
That’s right, Frank. You are the victim here and never try and start anything.
Poor, poor Frank. Why won’t those evil bullies leave you alone.
I love that “Do you floss regularly” followed by whether or not you shop at Walmart.
Does this:
your e-mail address will be the property of the blogger and any further e-mails you receive will be at the bloggers’ discretion.
mean that O-Dub is now filtering my email? Let through the stuff selling fake Rolexes, ok, Oliver? I’m looking for a good Fathers Day present.
CSS: And you never start anything, either, I suppose?
Like this was any of your concern…
Are you the WWW MP?
“And you never start anything, either, I suppose?”
I’m not the one complaining when people insult me.
Kos beat you to the punch, sorry.
Kos beat you to the punch, sorry.
Did it.
I’m not the one taking time out to write, “I’m not the one complaining when people insult me”.
I’m not the one taking time out to write, “I’m not the one complaining when people insult me”.
Um…yes, actually you are.
No, actually you’re the one taking the time out to write, “I’m not the one taking time out to write, ‘I’m not the one complaining when people insult me’”.
Dude, we could do this all day.
OK, I took it.
“Dude, we could do this all day.”
Nothing would make him happier.
Two things wrong with the Survey:
1) In the “Shows watched” area, “FOX and Friends” was left out.
2) In the Political Organizations area, the Concerned Women of America, which has more members than the National Organization of Women, was left out.
Could you please prove that assertion? Because I think it’s crap. There are a lot of righty groups with more members than their lefty version, but I highly doubt CWA is one of them.
It’s kind of funny that frank knew I was referring to him.
merlallen: I didn’t know you were referring to me. I just made the call based on your usual comments.
Oliver,NOW claims 500,000 “Contributing members”; CWA does not publish membership numbers, but external estimates range between 250,000 and 750,000, depending upon how membership is defined
Both statements from WikiPedia; neither organization publishes membership at the web site (cue CSS to roll into action)
I knew somebody was going to question it.
So, NOW publishes a clear number, CWA doesn’t admit to a certain number yet somehow CWA has more members? How the heck does that logic work?
When you make a blanket assertion, considering your track record, it’s gonna be challenged.
Oliver, NOW doesn’t define “contributing members”.
As far as somebody challenging it, I knew that CWA has more “member” members than the NOW.
I knew someone was going to challenge it because they COULD.
You may not have noticed, but the new game being played is that everything I say is now being challenged by a team, usually led by C.S. Strowbridge.
It’s almost as if they’re thinking, “Make a comment of my own? Nah! I want to talk about what Frank said”!
“You may not have noticed, but the new game being played is that everything I say is now being challenged by a team, usually led by C.S. Strowbridge.”
Woo hoo! I am the KING!
Seriously, (nearly) everything you say is being challenged because you are wrong so often.
However, not every claim you make is challenged:
http://www.oliverwillis.com/2007/05/is_it_time.html
Last post says it all.
You: “Well, that does it. Now, if I made a statement like that, you guys would be screaming for links and “evidence” and recordings and videotape. But will I? No, sir.”
Me: “I would like to point out that you made the exact same claims we made, and no one demand links or evidence. I guess that makes you a liar.”
When you don’t do what you most often do, that makes you inconsistent, not me a liar.
Now find me another unchallenged statement.
It is you who are the true troll, because most of your posts are not contributory, they are argumentative, gainsaying, and petty.
“When you don’t do what you most often do, that makes you inconsistent, not me a liar.”
Oh my god.
How can you be this stupid?
1.) You made claim A
2.) We made claim B, which was a mirror image of claim A
3.) You said if you made a claim like claim B we would challenge you for links and evidence.
HOWEVER…
In Step 1 you made a claim like claim B and no demand for links or evidence was given.
It’s not like you made a prediction that turned out to be wrong some point in the future, you made a claim that was wrong based on what had happened earlier in the same thread.
You are just trying to pretend you are the victim here. You have a persecution complex and paranoid tendencies. And no, I’m not going tilt at the windmills of your mind; delusions can’t be fought with facts.
CSS: It won’t work this time.
The game is over.
You might as well go away. Now that you have lost the ability to bait me, you have no purpose here.
Buh – bye.
“It won’t work this time.”
What won’t work? The facts?
The facts rarely work with you.
However, others can clearly see that you made a claim that was wrong based on what had previously happened in the same thread you made that claim. No one who is willing to look at the truth believes your victim stories.
“Now that you have lost the ability to bait me,”
I don’t bait you, Frank. I don’t need to bait you. You want to get into internet argument because… well, I don’t actually know why. I don’t want to know why. But the way you act is your responsibility, not others.
However, others can clearly see that you made a claim that was wrong based on what had previously happened in the same thread you made that claim
You couldn’t explain what that means in 10 comments, you prolix, verbose poseur!
“You couldn’t explain what that means in 10 comments, you prolix, verbose poseur!”
Are you kidding me?