Also, I know you’re not typing anything, just to head that off. I have no idea what I’m talking about.

“No, you really don’t, hnice.” There. That one’s out of the way.

Also, “Yes, you’ve got it all figured out.” Cross that off the list.

In closing, “More proof that you’re obsessed,” “Very grown up, hnice!,” and “This is the face of the New Left?”

Did I leave any out? I heart Dennis! More of Him, NOW!!!!

Not for me, Dennis. I think about you constantly. There’s no time of day too early or late to think about Dennis — Dennis in the shower, Dennis mowing the lawn, Dennis purchasing dental tape, Dennis googling for torrents of Remington Steele episodes.

You’ve got us all figured out, D! It’s not that you’re so blindingly shit-blisteringly stupid that we can’t seem to look away — it’s that we’re obsessed with you. And not like, ‘you’. I mean, You: the platonic D — the one that we know exists and of which mundane D is just a shadow. See, because you’re like a guy in a Cave! A Cave full of awesome, who’s so right about all things that I FOR ONE CANNOT STOP IMAGINING YOU SWIMMING IN HOT FUDGE.

Yeah, Dennis. It’s because of our collective obsession with You — not because of the ass-hattery that you keep typing — just because of You.

Yeah, it might show that she was involved in a cooperative that tried to help people, failed to do so as well as it wanted, yet persevered despite the state and federal governments working against it and ultimately won a judgment showing that.

Yeah, that kind of scrutiny she doesn’t need.

If you actually read further down the article you link to:

If confession is good for the soul, then Mrs. Sherrod took a first step toward her redemption by admitting the error of her ways in her earlier attitudes toward poor white farmers. Mrs. Sherrod says she began to see poverty as more central than race. So, should indigent black child farm laborers warrant less reflection by Mrs. Sherrod? What lessons does she have to share from her tenure as management when she had power over her own people working under deplorable conditions at the same New Communities, Inc.(NCI) identified in the current issue? <b?Shirley Sherrod could have included this chapter of her history in the same confession speech.

So the main objection is that Sherrod wasn’t repentant enough. “Oh sure. She apologized for her attitude toward white farmers, but didn’t publicly flay herself enough over her attitude toward black farmers. We’re shocked, shocked!”

Oh, please.

And this about a position she held over 30 years ago. Not to argue that mere passage of time should make things irrelevant, but this is really digging into the distant past in an effort to find something, ANYthing to complain about. With the recent attempt to misrepresent her as a racist so completely backfired this is part of a desperate effort to find SOMEthing to point to a cry “Ah ha! See, we were right after all. She ISN’T a perfect person. Told ya!”

Note also the reference to the Sherrods being awarded $300,000 following a discrimination lawsuit, suggesting they got theirs while NCI and it’s workers got nothing. Conveniently left out is the $12,489,162 (yes, nearly 12 and a half million) that NCI did receive. A lawsuit won because Governor Maddox blocked funding for NCI and the USDA refused to allow them to restructure their loans, a typical business activity NCI was not allowed to do.

So, were conditions for workers bad? Quite possibly so. Was it the result of Sherrod playing Simon Legree so she could walk off with $300k? Of course not.

But don’t let the existence of all the actual facts stop you from promoting a distorted one-sided view. After all, gotta preserve that narrative!

“What most of Mrs. Sherrod’s supporters are not aware of is the elitist and anti-black-labor role that she and fellow managers of New Communities Inc. (NCI) played. These individuals under-paid, mistreated and fired black laborers–many of them less than 16 years of age–in the same fields of southwest Georgia where their ancestors suffered under chattel slavery.”

http://www.counterpunch.org/wilkins08022010.html

In any event, the last time was just you, as non sequitor as usual, directly telling me (specifically, again) that you’re at a party.

I guess I should know better by now than to take what you write to actually mean what you wrote. I know how taking your literal comments literally bothers you.

Sean, again, you are late to the meeting and completely clueless. I didn’t go to a party. It was Jaim who declared “I’m going to a party!” With an exclamation point, no less.

Wake up and smell the coffee, my clueless friend.

Let’s see. Nothing better to do at a party than post here. Nothing better to do at breakfast than post here.

Dennis, why are you so obsessed with us? I mean, posting at odd moments like that. Must be obsession, right? you’re not going to argue the opposite of what you argued last week, are you?

Waitamimmit. Didn’t you just say that you WEREN’T addressing us specifically??

Your claiming reality is something it just simply ain’t, however? That’s pretty identical to what you do whenever it’s shown that you’re a liar and coward.

Mr. Late and Clueless.

Maroon.

Nice to see you’re so obsessed with me you’re compelled to reply from a party.

(Whatta maroon!)

As for obsession, I realize you could teach me a lot in that area, but when I see that it gets you no results other than mockery around here……………………………..

You’re such a little weenie, Sean. You and douchebag “I’m going to a party! Jaim both had just previously mentioned discovery, so I addressed you both specifically. The ‘you guys’ in the statement ‘you guys said the exact same thing’ was generic. End of story.

That is, it would be the end of story if not for you having argued exactly the opposite against me a few weeks ago when mambo made a claim against me where it certainly did read like he was accusing me of something I didn’t do:

Can I make it easy for Dennis?

For example: the Creation Museum in Kentucky, homeopathic medicine, and your famed comment citing “tenets of the Laffer Curve”, amongst many.

Only one of those items was specifically attributed to you, Dennis. But don’t let that stop you from claiming someone said something they didn’t and then taking offense at it.

You want it both ways, Sean. Like fafaroo, you will argue just for argument’s sake, regardless of having taken the opposite stance on an identical argument just a short while ago.