OMG THIS ASSHOLE IS SOOOOOOOOOOO ANNOYING. BAN HIM!!!

please do

Ban Misery and this woman may just take her top off
Attachments:

Not that hard...
search for "people who deserve to be banned"
And DO IT!

LOLOL!!!!

open eyez Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> LOLOL!!!!


HAHAHAHA!!!

What the fuck is so funny Conie?

.....honestly, I haven't seen him acting too out of line today, really. I mean, compared to how out of control he's been in the past a few times. So what....a few threads about some "Straw Pull" and one about what your favorite thing about Fall is? What's the big deal? There's no rule against posting a lot. He'll go away. The little shit head always does.

Con-EEE Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What the fuck is so funny Conie?


nothing eesh

can't stand the guy, but....... Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> .....honestly, I haven't seen him acting too out
> of line today, really. I mean, compared to how out
> of control he's been in the past a few times. So
> what....a few threads about some "Straw Pull" and
> one about what your favorite thing about Fall is?
> What's the big deal? There's no rule against
> posting a lot. He'll go away. The little shit head
> always does.


Don't people get banned for flooding? Isn't that what happened to him last time?

 

friskydingo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> can't stand the guy, but....... Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > .....honestly, I haven't seen him acting too
> out
> > of line today, really. I mean, compared to how
> out
> > of control he's been in the past a few times.
> So
> > what....a few threads about some "Straw Pull"
> and
> > one about what your favorite thing about Fall
> is?
> > What's the big deal? There's no rule against
> > posting a lot. He'll go away. The little shit
> head
> > always does.
>
>
> Don't people get banned for flooding? Isn't that
> what happened to him last time?


that's the common misconception. He wasn't banned for "flooding", as such. It was really for flooding his own thread, that stupid FFU After Dark thing of his.....I think he just went a little too far and just started mashing keys over and over and just posting literally nonsense, hundreds and hundreds of posts in a row like that. And also he got a little out of line calling people names in the General forum.

but it wasn't really "flooding" in the traditional sense. He just got so weird and manic mashing keys in his own thread that Cary finally noticed and got irritated enough to ban his ass. Kind of a unique situation. Other than that, he'll post a lot sometimes and bump some of his older threads without good reason, but that usually doesn't go too terribly far. I think Cary knows this.

I still hate the guy, though. He's a turd.

nope... Wrote:


> ---- He's a turd.

I always heed and respect the advice given by anyone who uses the word "turd".

A Minor Threat

Agreed. However, what is to prevent him from registering another account?

The only sure way to guard against this is to use the ignore function on the greasemonkey script, and barring that, to ignore his threads and posts.

Id love to see that chick topless however she needs to remove that HIDEOUS lip stud from her face.

JBass Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Id love to see that chick topless however she
> needs to remove that HIDEOUS lip stud from her
> face.

No, you wouldn't. She's Asbury Suicide, from the Suicide Girls Web site, which means she's likely got tattoos and other marks of self-mutilation all over her pale, skinny body.

BAN BAN BAN

I'll defend my 'so much food in the grocery store' series of threads until the day I die. I defy you or anyone else to tell me each one is not unique and unto itself. Each version of this thread has a unique point of view and unique content. The only thing they have in common is the title, 'so much food in the grocery store'. And more than that, all of these threads overall combine to make a very coherent point: that there IS such a thing as TOO MANY CHOICES. I created these threads, over time, for the sole purpose of fooling Harry Tuttle, Master of Logic, into agreeing with me that he is DISGUSTED in the face of an unecessary number of choices. He has done this. He has officially complained that there are too many 'so much food in the grocery store threads', hence, he believes there are too many to CHOOSE from. That some are UNECESSARY. That is my point. I have tricked him into making my point for me.

I win.


I win.

Mis youre funny!

Ban Ban Ban!

admit it, this was a brilliant ploy to fool the Master of Logic at his own game. There's no way to deny it, dude.......I have made a LEGITIMATE, IRREFUTABLE POINT. You can't take that away, Harry. You can't. I have MADE A POINT.

....whereas Eli just comes on and bumps a shit-ton of threads for no reason, without even being amusing, funny or thought-provoking.


I am the opposite of that, as much as you hate me.

the sad fact is that someone cannot be banned for being annoying. if that were the case, conie would have been gone a long time ago (conie, this does not give you reason to PM me). even creating "crap" threads is not grounds for banning. the rules here are pretty simple.... dont fuck with the format of the forum, dont flood the forum, and dont release personal information of others without their consent. if any of the rules are broken simply report the issue directly to cary instead of creating threads and whining about it. thank you for your professionalism.

                       love <3 blisters

Attachments:

everyone sucks here except for Tuttles and Misery. This place would suck without them.I SAY NO TO ANY BANS. ONLY CONIE CAN BE BANNED.

Mr. Misery Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ....whereas Eli just comes on and bumps a shit-ton
> of threads for no reason, without even being
> amusing, funny or thought-provoking.
>
>


Isn't that what this site is all about?

Eli,

Why did you PM me your phone number the other night ??

He Is Delusional Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Eli,
>
> Why did you PM me your phone number the other
> night ??


he wanted to hear more about your epic incident on the road the other day.... you know the one.

Attachments:

bloody blisters Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> He Is Delusional Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Eli,
> >
> > Why did you PM me your phone number the other
> > night ??
>
>
> he wanted to hear more about your epic incident on
> the road the other day.... you know the one.


He looked at her bumper stickers dude!!!

 

He Is Delusional Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Eli,
>
> Why did you PM me your phone number the other
> night ??


You didn't get any pm's from me with my phone number.

Don't be stupid, dummy....

I didn't complain that there were too many "food in the grocery store" threads...

I complained that you've done the whole "too many choices, wah!" bit before and we'd already talked about it.... I complained about your re-runs...

That's why your thread was garbage... because it was illogical and hackneyed...

Not because there are too many choices...

Later, boner...

Mr. Misery Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'll defend my 'so much food in the grocery store'
> series of threads until the day I die. I defy you
> or anyone else to tell me each one is not unique
> and unto itself. Each version of this thread has a
> unique point of view and unique content. The only
> thing they have in common is the title, 'so much
> food in the grocery store'. And more than that,
> all of these threads overall combine to make a
> very coherent point: that there IS such a thing as
> TOO MANY CHOICES. I created these threads, over
> time, for the sole purpose of fooling Harry
> Tuttle, Master of Logic, into agreeing with me
> that he is DISGUSTED in the face of an unecessary
> number of choices. He has done this. He has
> officially complained that there are too many 'so
> much food in the grocery store threads', hence, he
> believes there are too many to CHOOSE from. That
> some are UNECESSARY. That is my point. I have
> tricked him into making my point for me.
>
> I win.
>
>
> I win.

Signatures are for fags

Harry Tuttle Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Don't be stupid, dummy....
>
> I didn't complain that there were too many "food
> in the grocery store" threads...
>
> I complained that you've done the whole "too many
> choices, wah!" bit before and we'd already talked
> about it.... I complained about your re-runs...
>
> That's why your thread was garbage... because it
> was illogical and hackneyed...
>
> Not because there are too many choices...
>
> Later, boner...
>
> Mr. Misery Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I'll defend my 'so much food in the grocery
> store'
> > series of threads until the day I die. I defy
> you
> > or anyone else to tell me each one is not
> unique
> > and unto itself. Each version of this thread has
> a
> > unique point of view and unique content. The
> only
> > thing they have in common is the title, 'so
> much
> > food in the grocery store'. And more than that,
> > all of these threads overall combine to make a
> > very coherent point: that there IS such a thing
> as
> > TOO MANY CHOICES. I created these threads, over
> > time, for the sole purpose of fooling Harry
> > Tuttle, Master of Logic, into agreeing with me
> > that he is DISGUSTED in the face of an
> unecessary
> > number of choices. He has done this. He has
> > officially complained that there are too many
> 'so
> > much food in the grocery store threads', hence,
> he
> > believes there are too many to CHOOSE from.
> That
> > some are UNECESSARY. That is my point. I have
> > tricked him into making my point for me.
> >
> > I win.
> >
> >
> > I win.


Fuck you, dick-face. You are such a douche bag sometimes. You can't admit that you're wrong, ever. And you're being too literal. By complaining that I'm in 'reruns' or that we've covered the same ground before, it's the same as complaining that there's too much of one thing. Too many choices of a single type of thing, all of which are unessecary in your humble estimation. It's not about MAKING choices. That's not the point at all. It's about finding the plurality of choices, to a nauseating extent, to be personally objectionable. You have expressed your objection to the plurality of 'so much food in the grocery store' threads. It's the redundancy and the inefficiency of such a large number of variations, or choices, on one SIMPLE thing that I'm talking about. YOU ARE SUCH A DUMMY SOMETIMES. YOU ARGUE JUST TO ARGUE.

...and, have you not caught on yet? Do you not realize that a large part of my repertoire lies in exploiting redundancy? Exploitation to the point of absurdity. How many GOD DAMN times have I written "where's (blank) at?" or "this is what I believe" or "it's not hot, it's spicy"? You know what you're doing. You're smart enough to see what I'm talking about. You're provoking me.


I'll post the WWE Royal Rumble sign, I swear..

Misery youre such a selfish twat. Its always about you you you.24 hours a day. Shut the fuck up and shove a butternut squash up your asshole with no lube.

"As the number of options increases, the costs, in time and effort, of gathering the
information needed to make a good choice also increase. The level of certainly people
have about their choice decreases. And the anticipation that they will regret their choice
increases. All of these factors can lead to decision paralysis. And then, if and when
people finally do choose, they will likely be less satisfied with the results of the choice
than they would have been had there been fewer options."
- Barry Schwartz, Can There Ever Be Too Many Flowers Blooming?


See also:

"The Paradox of Choice," a book-length study of the issue by the same author.

Available here: http://tinyurl.com/TuttleFail-Again

waso

In Defense of Miz, aka Eat It, Tuttle Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "As the number of options increases, the costs, in
> time and effort, of gathering the
> information needed to make a good choice also
> increase. The level of certainly people
> have about their choice decreases. And the
> anticipation that they will regret their choice
> increases. All of these factors can lead to
> decision paralysis. And then, if and when
> people finally do choose, they will likely be less
> satisfied with the results of the choice
> than they would have been had there been fewer
> options."
> - Barry Schwartz, Can There Ever Be Too Many
> Flowers Blooming?
>
>
> See also:
>
> "The Paradox of Choice," a book-length study of
> the issue by the same author.
>
> Available here:
> http://tinyurl.com/TuttleFail-Again



THANK YOU.









not so smart now, are you Tuttle? That's coming from a book author. A BOOK AUTHOR disagrees with you. Hey bud, Tony Robbins and Sammy Davis Jr. can only get you so far...

stfu miz

EIi 2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> stfu miz


I agree

You said it wasn't about making the wrong decision...

The book author seems to imply it is... The anxiety caused by a surplus of choices... that isn't as prevalent with fewer choices...

I'm not going to say that making choices is easy... and I do wish it were easier...

But I'm glad I have so many options... and I wish I had more...

And IDM AKA EIT,

Go do something to yourself with a large rubber phallus that is black in color...

Mr. Misery Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> In Defense of Miz, aka Eat It, Tuttle Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > "As the number of options increases, the costs,
> in
> > time and effort, of gathering the
> > information needed to make a good choice also
> > increase. The level of certainly people
> > have about their choice decreases. And the
> > anticipation that they will regret their choice
> > increases. All of these factors can lead to
> > decision paralysis. And then, if and when
> > people finally do choose, they will likely be
> less
> > satisfied with the results of the choice
> > than they would have been had there been fewer
> > options."
> > - Barry Schwartz, Can There Ever Be Too Many
> > Flowers Blooming?
> >
> >
> > See also:
> >
> > "The Paradox of Choice," a book-length study of
> > the issue by the same author.
> >
> > Available here:
> > http://tinyurl.com/TuttleFail-Again
>
>
>
> THANK YOU.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> not so smart now, are you Tuttle? That's coming
> from a book author. A BOOK AUTHOR disagrees with
> you. Hey bud, Tony Robbins and Sammy Davis Jr. can
> only get you so far...

Signatures are for fags

Mr. Misery Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Fuck you, dick-face. You are such a douche bag
> sometimes. You can't admit that you're wrong,
> ever.

Sure I can... Can you?

> And you're being too literal. By complaining
> that I'm in 'reruns' or that we've covered the
> same ground before, it's the same as complaining
> that there's too much of one thing.

No, I disagree... I was complaining that we have been through the entire process of arguing about too many or too few choices (only instead of "choices", I believe we used the word "freedom")... Remember that? We went ALL OUT... We went down to the wire... We both ran out of steam... We decided to agree to disagree....

I was not complaining about "too much of one thing" I was complaining about you asking me to debate you about the same thing again... You already knew my position on that... We've had the discussion... I know how it's going to end... I'm not going to do it again...

Too many
> choices of a single type of thing, all of which
> are unessecary in your humble estimation. It's not
> about MAKING choices. That's not the point at all.
> It's about finding the plurality of choices, to a
> nauseating extent, to be personally objectionable.

That's fine... if too many choices make you anxious... I can understand... but let's talk about why... Don't be dishonest about it... There's a reason you don't like all those choices... why not try to figure out what that reason is...?

Personally, I like having the ability to make choices...

> You have expressed your objection to the plurality
> of 'so much food in the grocery store' threads.

Incorrect... The food in the grocery store bit is one of my favorites... I expressed objection to your invitation to engage in a debate that we've already had...


> It's the redundancy and the inefficiency of such a
> large number of variations, or choices, on one
> SIMPLE thing that I'm talking about.

What is it about the redundancy and inefficiency that bothers you?

YOU ARE SUCH
> A DUMMY SOMETIMES. YOU ARGUE JUST TO ARGUE.

You are just trying to provoke me... The bottom line is:

I did not help you prove any point.

Signatures are for fags

AND YOU!!!

OH! The rank duplicity of it all!

I never said that I don't understand how having an abundance of choices can make a person anxious... In fact, I hinted that I understood by implying that Miz was worried about making the wrong choice....

Sure... having a lot of choices can be stressful... but I wouldn't trade in having "too many" choices for "not enough"...

I'm glad that I can choose from a lot of different things... and I would bet that you are too...

In short:

No, YOU EAT IT, BITCH!

In Defense of Miz, aka Eat It, Tuttle Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "As the number of options increases, the costs, in
> time and effort, of gathering the
> information needed to make a good choice also
> increase. The level of certainly people
> have about their choice decreases. And the
> anticipation that they will regret their choice
> increases. All of these factors can lead to
> decision paralysis. And then, if and when
> people finally do choose, they will likely be less
> satisfied with the results of the choice
> than they would have been had there been fewer
> options."
> - Barry Schwartz, Can There Ever Be Too Many
> Flowers Blooming?
>
>
> See also:
>
> "The Paradox of Choice," a book-length study of
> the issue by the same author.
>
> Available here:
> http://tinyurl.com/TuttleFail-Again

Signatures are for fags

I believe you are wrong, Harry. You are wrong because you believe you are always right, or that at least, there is always another 'angle'.....there isn't. You're just wrong. I've found often when debating you that once your argument begins to look shallow or run out of some steam, you will simply switch 'angles' and insist that "no, I wasn't even talking about THAT......I meant THIS the whole time...." you know what I'm talking about. You try to flip the Monopoly board over when the other player's back is turned, then rearrange the pieces so that they work more in your favor. You know DAMN WELL you do this. Admit it. You drift between angles, between points of view and stances in an argument to better fit the winning position. You know DAMN WELL what I'm talking about. You take semantics to a level of absurdity. It is damn near pointless to seriously debate something with you. You will constantly insist that "No, I didn't even MEAN that.....I was referring to THIS...." and vice versa, ad nauseum......I suppose you think you're clever. You're not. You're just unwilling to seriously acknowledge another point of view without at the same time attempting to completely discredit it with some hackneyed bastardization of the Socratic method you think you remember reading maybe sometime a long time ago, maybe, during a Tony Robbins seminar.

I love you man, but I think you're full of shit.

can't stand the guy, but....... Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> .....honestly, I haven't seen him acting too out
> of line today, really. I mean, compared to how out
> of control he's been in the past a few times. So
> what....a few threads about some "Straw Pull" and
> one about what your favorite thing about Fall is?
> What's the big deal? There's no rule against
> posting a lot. He'll go away. The little shit head
> always does.


Yeah da Miz man be solid wit Black Adam. DA man somtime be makin me LMFBAO.
Onlyist thin he be doin bad waz when he waz makin 400 posts every nite an be cloggin up da whol board. But he dont do dat no mo so he allrite by me.

Yours in Christ
Black Adam

no offense, I don't really mean "YOU'RE FULL OF SHIT", like that. I mean I think you're not quite as open-minded and unflappable all the time as you believe you may be. I think sometimes you just go into defense mode and switch strategies......it's human....we all do it.....it's just that you can come off as just a little bit condescending, honestly. I don't believe I'm that far gone that absolutely everything I say simply makes no sense....I think you're trying to challenge me in some way, but it's frustrating and I think unnecessary often. You are not a swami. And I understand more than you might think I do. Let's face it: you and I have a fundamental difference of philosophy in life. You're Martin Luther King, Jr., I'm Malcolm X. You're Professor X, I'm Magneto. You're Seneca, I'm Nietsche. Respect my dour outlook on life, son.

Black Adam Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> can't stand the guy, but....... Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > .....honestly, I haven't seen him acting too
> outhu
> > of line today, really. I mean, compared to how
> out
> > of control he's been in the past a few times.
> So
> > what....a few threads about some "Straw Pull"
> and
> > one about what your favorite thing about Fall
> is?
> > What's the big deal? There's no rule against
> > posting a lot. He'll go away. The little shit
> head
> > always does.
>
>
> Yeah da Miz man be solid wit Black Adam. DA man
> somtime be makin me LMFBAO.
> Onlyist thin he be doin bad waz when he waz makin
> 400 posts every nite an be cloggin up da whol
> board. But he dont do dat no mo so he allrite by
> me.


Your shtick is so much lamer than misery's, eesh.

Harry Tuttle Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> AND YOU!!!

Moi?

Moi??

(innocent expression) What did I do now?


> OH! The rank duplicity of it all!

I didn't know the whole thorny backstory about the to-the-mat freedom argument, much less that said argument was a proxy for the current too-many-choices argument.


> I never said that I don't understand how having an
> abundance of choices can make a person anxious...
> In fact, I hinted that I understood by implying
> that Miz was worried about making the wrong
> choice....

Okay, fair enough.


> Sure... having a lot of choices can be
> stressful... but I wouldn't trade in having "too
> many" choices for "not enough"...

I don't have a dog in this fight. It just seemed to me, upon an admittedly rather cursory read of your remarks, that you were somewhat shortchanging the gravamen of Miz's point. That said, I may well have missed the nuances in *your* point... perhaps deliberately... looking forward to the make-up sex.


> I'm glad that I can choose from a lot of different
> things... and I would bet that you are too...

I'm glad there's at least one Harry Tuttle to choose from, he whispered, from deep inside the closet.


> In short:
>
> No, YOU EAT IT, BITCH!

LYLAS, brah.

/gay

This entire post is one huge ad hominem...

No offense, bro... But if you want to have a real debate, you need to forget who you're talking to and focus on what I actually wrote.

Your position is that I was offended by the surplus of grocery store threads. Is it not? I challenge you to point to a post of mine that says that.

If you can't do that, your argument holds no water and you will have to try again.

Sure, I called your thread a garbage thread (using a picture of a band I used to really like)... I was just talking about that one thread...

There are tons of mountain dew knock-offs... If I don't like mountain lightning, it doesn't mean I am offended by the number of choices when it comes to mountain dew-like beverages... I just think mountain lightning tastes like garbage.. And I don't want to drink it again...

Isn't it possible that you misunderstood me? Try not to jump to conclusions...

Mr. Misery Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I believe you are wrong, Harry. You are wrong
> because you believe you are always right, or that
> at least, there is always another
> 'angle'.....there isn't. You're just wrong. I've
> found often when debating you that once
> argument begins to look shallow or run out of some
> steam, you will simply switch 'angles' and insist
> that "no, I wasn't even talking about THAT......I
> meant THIS the whole time...." you know what I'm
> talking about. You try to flip the Monopoly board
> over when the other player's back is turned, then
> rearrange the pieces so that they work more in
> your favor. You know DAMN WELL you do this. Admit
> it. You drift between angles, between points of
> view and stances in an argument to better fit the
> winning position. You know DAMN WELL what I'm
> talking about. You take semantics to a level of
> absurdity. It is damn near pointless to seriously
> debate something with you. You will constantly
> insist that "No, I didn't even MEAN that.....I was
> referring to THIS...." and vice versa, ad
> nauseum......I suppose you think you're clever.
> You're not. You're just unwilling to seriously
> acknowledge another point of view without at the
> same time attempting to completely discredit it
> with some hackneyed bastardization of the Socratic
> method you think you remember reading maybe
> sometime a long time ago, maybe, during a Tony
> Robbins seminar.
>
> I love you man, but I think you're full of shit.

Signatures are for fags

LYLAS, baby girl!

Signatures are for fags

Harry Tuttle Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Your position is that I was offended by the
> surplus of grocery store threads. Is it not? I
> challenge you to point to a post of mine that says
> that.

You stated here, in Miz's second (November 3) "so much food in the grocery store" thread:

> "By the way, this is a re-runs thread... Therefore..."

Which remark was followed by a prominent and rather noisome image stating "garbage."

How else can your remark and the accompanying illustration be interpreted other than that you were offended by a surplus of grocery store threads?

To wit: (1) You pointed out it was a "re-runs thread" (i.e., surplus), and that (2) *therefore* the thread was equivalent to GARBAGE.

(3) Surely equating the thread to garbage suggests you were offended by it.

It follows then that Miz's position (or at least the position you ascribe to Miz) is indeed established and vindicated by your patently insulting "garbage" post.

Thus Miz has met your challenge.

Thus he wins.

And thus you fail.

"Snap" (that's the sound of your bullshit argument exploding)

Time to rub the jelly donut in your face.

"Buh-buh-but," protests Mr. Semantics, "by 're-runs thread' I was NOT referring to the OTHER grocery store thread, but rather to our earlier 'freedom' argument."

Sorry, that argument (if you were so bold, or foolish, as to make it) fails given that "re-runs" could only logically refer to the previous (October 18) grocery store thread with the exact same title.

A re-run signifies the rebroadcast of identically titled material (e.g., a November 3 thread titled "so much food in the grocery store" following upon a prior, October 18 thread titled "so much food in the grocery store"). Thus, for example, no one would describe a rebroadcast of "McCloud" as a "re-run" of "Columbo" (although they are both detective shows, and thus deal with similar issues and themes).

It would strain logic and even your questionable semantics/ethics to the breaking point to posit that by "re-runs" you referred not to the earlier, identically titled grocery store thread, but rather to an entirely different thread about a different subject.

Such a bizarre perversion of language could only be justified by SHEER STUPIDITY, in which case you owe Miz an apology for BEING A BIG, STUBBORN STUPID.

annoymous misery post

The Miz Advocacy Group, LLC Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Harry Tuttle Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Your position is that I was offended by the
> > surplus of grocery store threads. Is it not? I
> > challenge you to point to a post of mine that
> says
> > that.
>
> You stated here, in Miz's second (November 3) "so
> much food in the grocery store" thread:
>
> > "By the way, this is a re-runs thread...
> Therefore..."
>
> Which remark was followed by a prominent and
> rather noisome image stating "garbage."
>
> How else can your remark and the accompanying
> illustration be interpreted other than that you
> were offended by a surplus of grocery store
> threads?
>
> To wit: (1) You pointed out it was a "re-runs
> thread" (i.e., surplus), and that (2) *therefore*
> the thread was equivalent to GARBAGE.
>
> (3) Surely equating the thread to garbage suggests
> you were offended by it.
>
> It follows then that Miz's position (or at least
> the position you ascribe to Miz) is indeed
> established and vindicated by your patently
> insulting "garbage" post.
>
> Thus Miz has met your challenge.
>
> Thus he wins.
>
> And thus you fail.
>
> "Snap" (that's the sound of your bullshit argument
> exploding)
>
> Time to rub the jelly donut in your face.
>
> "Buh-buh-but," protests Mr. Semantics, "by
> 're-runs thread' I was NOT referring to the OTHER
> grocery store thread, but rather to our earlier
> 'freedom' argument."
>
> Sorry, that argument (if you were so bold, or
> foolish, as to make it) fails given that "re-runs"
> could only logically refer to the previous
> (October 18) grocery store thread with the exact
> same title.
>
> A re-run signifies the rebroadcast of identically
> titled material (e.g., a November 3 thread titled
> "so much food in the grocery store" following upon
> a prior, October 18 thread titled "so much food in
> the grocery store"). Thus, for example, no one
> would describe a rebroadcast of "McCloud" as a
> "re-run" of "Columbo" (although they are both
> detective shows, and thus deal with similar issues
> and themes).
>
> It would strain logic and even your questionable
> semantics/ethics to the breaking point to posit
> that by "re-runs" you referred not to the earlier,
> identically titled grocery store thread, but
> rather to an entirely different thread about a
> different subject.
>
> Such a bizarre perversion of language could only
> be justified by SHEER STUPIDITY, in which case you
> owe Miz an apology for BEING A BIG, STUBBORN
> STUPID.


I endorse this massage.


Harry, he's right. You are smart, but I believe you are falling back on semantics here. First I say "too many" choices. You take that to mean I am a frail little man without a spine, scared to death of having to make any choices in life, and even go so far as to insinuate that by saying there are "too many choices", followed by my thoughts on sameness versus individuality (re: Metropolis, one size fits all uniforms, etc.), that I naturally must be so weak as to desire surrender of individuality and identity for the sole purpose of not having to make any choices whatever, and that by desiring surrender of the burden of decision-making, it implies an intrinsic lack of accountability or the ability to take responsibility for anything on my part, as a man. Which is all to say, quite simply, you believe me weak, cowardly, spineless.....a weasel.

but, I'll look past that.

the point is, you took the semantic phrasing of "too many choices" and ran with it like a man on fire. Did it never occur to you that "too many choices", and my musings on the lesser of two evils nature of that scene from Metropolis might imply more than what you assumed? You fail to see the nuance, the subtext, the possibility of subtext, even. And furthermore, when I go so far as to amend my point that the multiplicity of choices, or variations, or what have you (more semantics) as not something necessarily that stems from a fear of making the "wrong" choice, or something that stems from the fear of having to may ANY choice whatever, and suggesting the word "disgust" as clarification, you run with that, like a man on fire, and even now, you use the word "offense" instead.....one can only wonder what wild goose chase of a direction your argument may take, now that the semantic term in question---all of which amount to the same thing---has changed yet again.

Truly, Tuttle, you are a learned man. But your intelligence and superior logic are the very same thing that cause you to lose your way in semantic loopholes and down overly pedantic alleyways.

In short, you may wish to recalibrate your own estimation of logic. Perhaps you have misunderstood---jumped to conclusions as well? Or perhaps you would do well to improve your critical reading skills. Hmmm?
Attachments:

Neutral third-party observer here.

I don't have a dog in this fight, but reading over Mr. Tuttle's tortured, disastrous 'pretzel logic'
argument reminds me of nothing so much as this:





I sense, as well, that if Mr. Tuttle's massive, bloated ego continues to sail blithely "full speed ahead,"
he may be in for a rather nasty surprise...

The Titanicsize>

History has a way of repeating itself!

You're worth every penny that Miz is paying you... You sunnuva bitch...

The Miz Advocacy Group, LLC Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You stated here, in Miz's second (November 3) "so
> much food in the grocery store" thread:
>
> > "By the way, this is a re-runs thread...
> Therefore..."
>
> Which remark was followed by a prominent and
> rather noisome image stating "garbage."

This is true... I'm not even going to argue the point that the garbage picture could've been meant as a compliment... because it was one of my favorite bands... (which I could've gotten away with)... the truth is, I was calling his thread trash...

>
> How else can your remark and the accompanying
> illustration be interpreted other than that you
> were offended by a surplus of grocery store
> threads?
>
> To wit: (1) You pointed out it was a "re-runs
> thread" (i.e., surplus),

I disagree that calling the thread a re-run suggests that it is a surplus... That's quite a stretch... It's not "too much of a thing"... it's simply the rebroadcasting of the same thing... If I didn't like the thing after trying it the first time, and I still don't like the thing after the second time... It doesn't mean I dislike surplus... or choices... I just dislike that one thing... still..

and that (2) *therefore*
> the thread was equivalent to GARBAGE.

That pesky "therefore" really did me in...

>
> (3) Surely equating the thread to garbage suggests
> you were offended by it.

I don't see how you can deduce that... Can't someone express their opinion about the quality (or lack thereof) of a certain thing without being offended?

>
> It follows then that Miz's position (or at least
> the position you ascribe to Miz) is indeed
> established and vindicated by your patently
> insulting "garbage" post.

I just don't agree...

As I mentioned before... My assessment of that thread was independent from the other grocery store threads... If it had anything to do with the SURPLUS of grocery store threads, why is it that I've only called one of them garbage...? Why didn't I make a comment about "Grocery Store threads"? Even more coincidentally, as I'm sure you chalk it up to coincidence, the thread I call garbage was a thread that was a repeat of a discussion Miz and I had already had... a Re-Run...

It was not about surplus. I was concerned with a lack of progress... a regression... a futile process (which I had already experienced) that I wished to avoid. I called this attempted regression "garbage".

>
> Thus Miz has met your challenge.

No... YOU have met my challenge... and only by twisting my words and introducing a new definition of "re-run"..

>
> Thus he wins.
>
> And thus you fail.

Why does one have to fail if the other wins? Because you say so?

>
> "Snap" (that's the sound of your bullshit argument
> exploding)
>
> Time to rub the jelly donut in your face.
>
> "Buh-buh-but," protests Mr. Semantics, "by
> 're-runs thread' I was NOT referring to the OTHER
> grocery store thread, but rather to our earlier
> 'freedom' argument."
>
> Sorry, that argument (if you were so bold, or
> foolish, as to make it)

I had already made that argument... and it seemed to clear things up for you, based on your earlier post about this topic...

> fails given that "re-runs"
> could only logically refer to the previous
> (October 18) grocery store thread with the exact
> same title.

Really? I'm about to challenge your definition of re-run...


>
> A re-run signifies the rebroadcast of identically
> titled material (e.g., a November 3 thread titled
> "so much food in the grocery store" following upon
> a prior, October 18 thread titled "so much food in
> the grocery store").


> Thus, for example, no one
> would describe a rebroadcast of "McCloud" as a
> "re-run" of "Columbo" (although they are both
> detective shows, and thus deal with similar issues
> and themes).

NO ONE!? How can you prove that claim?

Allow me challenge your first claim that re-runs have to be identically titled...

"Good Morning, Miss Bliss"... "Saved by the Bell: The Junior High Years"

Was it not a re-run when Good Morning Miss Bliss was repackaged and then RE-BROADCAST as "Saved by the Bell: The Junior High Years"?

It would follow, based on your criteria, that an identical show being re-broadcast under a different name would not be considered a re-run? How is that?

It is my position that the term "re-run", especially in the sense that Miz and I use in the forum, has nothing to do with the title of the content (because, really, what's in a title?) and only with the content itself...

See the following examples:
http://www.fairfaxunderground.com/forum/read/40/710462/710477.html#msg-710477
http://www.fairfaxunderground.com/forum/read/40/611843/611867.html
http://www.fairfaxunderground.com/forum/read/40/201559/550670.html#msg-550669

And, finally, the birth of the "re-run" gag... Yes, that is Mr. Misery playing along... Your eyes do not deceive you...

EDIT TO ADD: NSFW

Notice how all of the "re-runs" share identical (or even very similar) content with another thread of a DIFFERENT name...


It would make no sense to refer to his garbage thread as a re-run by comparing it with his other grocery store threads since, even by Miz's accounts, they are completely different threads... How could one "show" be a "re-run" of a completely different show?


>
> It would strain logic and even your questionable
> semantics/ethics to the breaking point to posit
> that by "re-runs" you referred not to the earlier,
> identically titled grocery store thread, but
> rather to an entirely different thread about a
> different subject.

It wasn't a different thread about a different subject... That would be dumb, dummy... It was a different thread about the same subject...

In summation:

My opinion of the garbage thread was based on the premise that it was an unoriginal regression... covering no new ground... something that I had tried before and disliked the results of trying... I even asked if it was an attempt to "troll" me... because we had "already been over this"...

It had nothing to do with the many grocery store threads (each with it's own unique content)....

I would like to reiterate that disliking any singular "product" does not necessitate any correlation to a dislike of "surplus".

And FINALLY (getting back to my ORIGINAL position)...

I do not agree that there is such a thing as "too many choices" or "too much freedom"... In other words, I would never say "I wish I couldn't do as many things as I can"...



>
> Such a bizarre perversion of language could only
> be justified by SHEER STUPIDITY, in which case you
> owe Miz an apology for BEING A BIG, STUBBORN
> STUPID.

I really do love you... I'd get naked with you, regardless of your gender...

Signatures are for fags



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/04/2011 08:16PM by Harry Tuttle.

Now, this is a re-run that I like...

HT go BOOM! Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Neutral third-party observer here.
>
> I don't have a dog in this fight, but reading over
> Mr. Tuttle's tortured, disastrous 'pretzel logic'
>
> argument reminds me of nothing so much as this:
>
>
>
>
>
> I sense, as well, that if Mr. Tuttle's massive,
> bloated ego continues to sail blithely "full speed
> ahead,"
> he may be in for a rather nasty surprise...
>
>
> The Titanic
>
> History has a way of repeating itself!

Signatures are for fags

Harry Tuttle Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You're worth every penny that Miz is paying you...
> You sunnuva bitch...
>
> The Miz Advocacy Group, LLC Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > You stated here, in Miz's second (November 3)
> "so
> > much food in the grocery store" thread:
> >
> > > "By the way, this is a re-runs thread...
> > Therefore..."
> >
> > Which remark was followed by a prominent and
> > rather noisome image stating "garbage."
>
> This is true... I'm not even going to argue the
> point that the garbage picture could've been meant
> as a compliment... because it was one of my
> favorite bands... (which I could've gotten away
> with)... the truth is, I was calling his thread
> trash...
>
> >
> > How else can your remark and the accompanying
> > illustration be interpreted other than that you
> > were offended by a surplus of grocery store
> > threads?
> >
> > To wit: (1) You pointed out it was a "re-runs
> > thread" (i.e., surplus),
>
> I disagree that calling the thread a re-run
> suggests that it is a surplus... That's quite a
> stretch... It's not "too much of a thing"... it's
> simply the rebroadcasting of the same thing... If
> I didn't like the thing after trying it the first
> time, and I still don't like the thing after the
> second time... It doesn't mean I dislike
> surplus... or choices... I just dislike that one
> thing... still..


that's a decent point....



>
> and that (2) *therefore*
> > the thread was equivalent to GARBAGE.
>
> That pesky "therefore" really did me in...
>
> >
> > (3) Surely equating the thread to garbage
> suggests
> > you were offended by it.
>
> I don't see how you can deduce that... Can't
> someone express their opinion about the quality
> (or lack thereof) of a certain thing without being
> offended?
>
> >
> > It follows then that Miz's position (or at
> least
> > the position you ascribe to Miz) is indeed
> > established and vindicated by your patently
> > insulting "garbage" post.
>
> I just don't agree...
>
> As I mentioned before... My assessment of that
> thread was independent from the other grocery
> store threads... If it had anything to do with the
> SURPLUS of grocery store threads, why is it that
> I've only called one of them garbage...? Why
> didn't I make a comment about "Grocery Store
> threads"? Even more coincidentally, as I'm sure
> you chalk it up to coincidence, the thread I call
> garbage was a thread that was a repeat of a
> discussion Miz and I had already had... a
> Re-Run...
>
> It was not about surplus. I was concerned with a
> lack of progress... a regression... a futile
> process (which I had already experienced) that I
> wished to avoid. I called this attempted
> regression "garbage".
>
> >
> > Thus Miz has met your challenge.
>
> No... YOU have met my challenge... and only by
> twisting my words and introducing a new definition
> of "re-run"..
>
> >
> > Thus he wins.
> >
> > And thus you fail.
>
> Why does one have to fail if the other wins?
> Because you say so?
>
> >
> > "Snap" (that's the sound of your bullshit
> argument
> > exploding)
> >
> > Time to rub the jelly donut in your face.
> >
> > "Buh-buh-but," protests Mr. Semantics, "by
> > 're-runs thread' I was NOT referring to the
> OTHER
> > grocery store thread, but rather to our earlier
> > 'freedom' argument."
> >
> > Sorry, that argument (if you were so bold, or
> > foolish, as to make it)
>
> I had already made that argument... and it seemed
> to clear things up for you, based on your earlier
> post about this topic...
>
> > fails given that "re-runs"
> > could only logically refer to the previous
> > (October 18) grocery store thread with the
> exact
> > same title.
>
> Really? I'm about to challenge your definition of
> re-run...
>
>
> >
> > A re-run signifies the rebroadcast of
> identically
> > titled material (e.g., a November 3 thread
> titled
> > "so much food in the grocery store" following
> upon
> > a prior, October 18 thread titled "so much food
> in
> > the grocery store").
>
>
> > Thus, for example, no one
> > would describe a rebroadcast of "McCloud" as a
> > "re-run" of "Columbo" (although they are both
> > detective shows, and thus deal with similar
> issues
> > and themes).
>
> NO ONE!? How can you prove that claim?
>
> Allow me challenge your first claim that re-runs
> have to be identically titled...
>
> "Good Morning, Miss Bliss"... "Saved by the Bell:
> The Junior High Years"
>
> Was it not a re-run when Good Morning Miss Bliss
> was repackaged and then RE-BROADCAST as "Saved by
> the Bell: The Junior High Years"?
>
> It would follow, based on your criteria, that an
> identical show being re-broadcast under a
> different name would not be considered a re-run?
> How is that?
>
> It is my position that the term "re-run",
> especially in the sense that Miz and I use in the
> forum, has nothing to do with the title of the
> content (because, really, what's in a title?) and
> only with the content itself...
>
> See the following examples:
> http://www.fairfaxunderground.com/forum/read/40/71
> 0462/710477.html#msg-710477
> http://www.fairfaxunderground.com/forum/read/40/61
> 1843/611867.html
> http://www.fairfaxunderground.com/forum/read/40/20
> 1559/550670.html#msg-550669
>
> And, finally, the birth of the "re-run" gag...
> Yes, that is Mr. Misery playing along... Your eyes
> do not deceive you...
>
> EDIT TO ADD: NSFW
>
> Notice how all of the "re-runs" share identical
> (or even very similar) content with another thread
> of a DIFFERENT name...
>
>
> It would make no sense to refer to his garbage
> thread as a re-run by comparing it with his other
> grocery store threads since, even by Miz's
> accounts, they are completely different threads...
> How could one "show" be a "re-run" of a completely
> different show?
>
>
> >
> > It would strain logic and even your
> questionable
> > semantics/ethics to the breaking point to posit
> > that by "re-runs" you referred not to the
> earlier,
> > identically titled grocery store thread, but
> > rather to an entirely different thread about a
> > different subject.
>
> It wasn't a different thread about a different
> subject... That would be dumb, dummy... It was a
> different thread about the same subject...
>
> In summation:
>
> My opinion of the garbage thread was based on the
> premise that it was an unoriginal regression...
> covering no new ground... something that I had
> tried before and disliked the results of trying...
> I even asked if it was an attempt to "troll" me...
> because we had "already been over this"...
>
> It had nothing to do with the many grocery store
> threads (each with it's own unique content)....
>
> I would like to reiterate that disliking any
> singular "product" does not necessitate any
> correlation to a dislike of "surplus".
>
> And FINALLY (getting back to my ORIGINAL
> position)...
>
> I do not agree that there is such a thing as "too
> many choices" or "too much freedom"... In other
> words, I would never say "I wish I couldn't do as
> many things as I can"...
>
>
>
> >
> > Such a bizarre perversion of language could
> only
> > be justified by SHEER STUPIDITY, in which case
> you
> > owe Miz an apology for BEING A BIG, STUBBORN
> > STUPID.
>
> I really do love you... I'd get naked with you,
> regardless of your gender...


the rest of it........
/
Attachments:

how do you know you don't like men, Harryo? How can you say you're not gay if you've never tried both flavors of ice cream-o? If you've never had sex, you have no sexual identity..

.
Attachments:

1. If a re-run is "rebroadcasting of the same thing," and you don't like that "same thing" (as you clearly *didn't* like the "garbage" thread), then it's evidently "too much of a thing," i.e., surplus.



2. Re-run is a synonym for surplus ESPECIALLY when your "inside joke" meaning is applied. Your inside joke use of the term is actually closer to the definition of surplus ("being more than or in excess of what is needed or required") than "re-run" strictly defined.



3. The disdainful manner in which you expressed your opinion shows beyond a reasonable doubt that you were offended (in addition, I might add, to being offensive!).



4. "If it had anything to do with the SURPLUS of grocery store threads, why is it that I've only called one of them garbage...?"

Significantly, you only called the *second* one - the repeat, the re-run - garbage.

Thus its status as a "garbage" thread clearly rests on its being a so-called "re-run" or surplus thread.

Lawyers call a remark like this "an admission against interest."

Another word for it is "fail."



5. "It was not about surplus. I was concerned with a lack of progress... a regression... a futile process (which I had already experienced) that I wished to avoid. I called this attempted regression 'garbage'."

Geez, is it any wonder folks call you "Mr. Semantics" ?

"Regression" and "futile process" are just fancy ways of saying re-run.

Moreover, your own words betray you.

You say the thread was a "regression" or "futile process" because you "had already experienced" it, i.e., because it was a re-run.



6. "Why does one have to fail if the other wins? Because you say so?"

Yes.



7. Any and all arguments based on Saved by the Bell constitute inadmissible evidence in this court.



8. A surprise link to the heretofore unseen - and now can't be unseen - eesh thread constitutes contempt of court, and warrants, under principles of the punishment fitting the crime, my directing the bailiff to have your eyes gouged out.



9. A hint for our budding barrister: The repetition of unpersuasive arguments in more long-winded fashion fails to make them persuasive.



10. "an unoriginal regression... covering no new ground..."

Or, in other words, a re-run, i.e., surplus.



11. In conclusion, I don't know how to get through to you.

There's not much more that I can do.

We're on separate planes, different trains.

However, if nothing else, perhaps we can agree on this:

is he calling me a barrister

Mr. Misery Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> is he calling me a barrister


That was directed at our nememsis, the Tuttster, aka Kidd Faggatron, i.e., the guy who pisses down your leg and tells you it's raining tapas.

NOTE: This is not too long.

It is precisely the right length.

Only morons will disagree.

Kid Stardust on the Porterhouse

my luck was down again and I was too nervous at this time from excessive wine-
drinking; wild-eyed, weak; too depressed to find my usual stop-gap, rest-up job
as shipping clerk or stock boy, so I went down to the meat packing plant and
walked into the office.

haven't I seen you before? the man asked.

no, I lied.

I'd been there 2 or 3 years before, gone through all the paper work, the medical
and so forth, and they had led me down steps, 4 floors down and it had gotten
colder and colder and the floors had been covered with a sheen of blood, green
floors, green walls. I had been explained my job - which was to push a button
and then through this hole in the wall there was a noise like the crushing of
fullbacks or elephants falling in lay, and here it came - something dead, a lot
of it, bloody, and he showed me, you take it and throw it on the truck and then
push the button and another one comes along, then he walked away, when he
did I took off my smock, my tin hat, my boots (issued 3 sizes too small) and
walked up the stairway and out of there. now I was back, struck down again.

you look a little old for the job.

I want to toughen up. I need hard work, good hard work, I lied.

can you handle it?

I'm nothing but guts. I used to be in the ring. I've fought the best.

oh, yes?

yeah.

ummm, I can see by your face, you must have been in some fierce ones.

never mind my face. I had fast hands. still have. I had to take some dives, had
to make it look good.

I follow boxing. I don't recall your name.

I fought under another name, Kid Stardust.

Kid Stardust? I don't recall a Kid Stardust.

I fought in South America, Africa, Europe, the islands. I fought in the tank
towns. that's why there's all these gaps in my employment records - I don't
like to put down boxer because people think I am kidding or lying. I just leave
the blanks and to hell with it.

all right, show up for your med. at 9:30 a.m. tomorrow and we'll put you
to work, you say you want hard work?

well, if you have something else...

no, not right now. you know, you look close to 50 years old. I wonder if
I'm doing the right thing? we don't like you people to waste our time.

I'm not people - I'm Kid Stardust.

o.k., kid, he laughed, we'll put you to WORK!

I didn't like the way he said it.

2 days later I walked through the passgate into the wooden shack where I
showed an old man my slip with my name on it: Henry Charles Bukowski, Jr.,
and he sent me on to the loading dock I was to see Thurman. I walked on
over, there were a row of men sitting on a wooden bench and they looked
at me as if I were a homosexual or a basket case.

I looked at them with what I imagined to be easy disdain and drawled in
my best back-alley fashion.

where's Thurman. I'm supposed to see that guy.

somebody pointed.

Thurman? I'm workin' for ya.

yeah?

yeah.

he looked at me.

where's yor boots?

boots?

got none, I said.

he reached under the bench and handed me a pair. an old hardened stiff pair.
I put them on. same old story: 3 sizes too small. my toes were crushed and
bending under.

then he gave me a bloody smock and a tin helmet. I stood there while he lit a
cigarette, or as the English might say: while he lighted his cigarette. he threw
away the match with a calm and manly flourish.

come on.

they were all Negroes and when I walked up they looked at me as if they
were Black Muslims. I was nearly six feet but they were all taller than I, and
if not taller then 2 or 3 times as wide.

Charley! Thurman hollered.

Charley, I thought. Charley, just like me. that's nice. I was already sweating
under the tin helmet.

put 'im to WORK!!

jesus christ o jesus christ. what happened to the sweet and easy nights?
why doesn't this happen to Walter Winchell who believes in the American Way?
wasn't I one of the most brilliant students in Anthropology? what happened?

Charley took me over and stood me in front of an empty truck a half block long
that stood in the dock.

wait here.

then several of the Black Muslims came running up with wheel-barrows painted a
scabby and lumpy white, like white was mixed in with henshit. and each wheel-
barrel was loaded with mounds of hams that floated in a thin and watery blood.
no, they didn't float in the blood, they sat in it, like lead, like cannonballs,
like death.

one of the boys jumped into the truck behind me and the other began throwing the
hams at me and I caught them and threw them to the guy behind me who turned and
threw the ham into the back of the truck. the hams came fast FAST and they were
heavy and they got heavier, as soon as I threw one ham and turned another was
already on the way to me through the air. I knew that they were trying to break
me. I was soon sweating sweating as if faucets had been turned loose, and my back
ached, my wrists ached, my arms hurt, everything hurt and was down to the last
impossible ounce of limp energy. I could barely see, barely summon myself to
catch one more ham and throw it, one more ham and throw it. I was splashed in
blood and kept getting the soft dead heavy FLUMP in my hands, the ham giving a
little like a woman's butt, and I'm too weak to talk and say, hey, what the HELL'S
the matter with you guys? The hams are coming and I am spinning, nailed, like a
man on a cross under a tin helmet, and they keep running up barrows full of hams
hams hams and at last they are all empty, and I stand there swaying and breathing
the yellow electric light. it was night in hell. well, I always liked night work.

they took me into another room. up in the air through a large hole high in the
far wall one half a steer, or it might have been a whole one, yes, they were
whole steers, thinking of it, all four legs, and one of them came out of the hole
on a hook, having just been murdered, and the steer stopped right over me, it
hung right over me there on that hook.

they've just killed it, I thought, they've killed the damn thing. how can they
tell a man from a steer? how do they know that I am not a steer?

ALL RIGHT - SWING IT!

swing it?

that's right - DANCE WITH IT!

what?

for christ's sake! GEORGE come here!

George got under the dead steer. he grabbed it. ONE. he ran forward. TWO. he
ran backwards. THREE. he ran far forward. the steer was almost parallel to the
ground. somebody hit a button and he had it. he had it for the meatmarkets
of the world. he had it for the gossiping cranky well-rested stupid housewives of
the world at 2 o'clock in the afternoon in their housesmocks, dragging red-
stained cigarettes and feeling almost nothing. they put me under the next steer.

ONE.

TWO.

THREE.

I had it. its dead bones against my living bones, its dead flesh against my living
flesh, and the bone and the weight cut in, I thought of operas by Wagner, I
thought of cold beer, I thought of sexy cunt sitting across from me on a couch
with her legs crossed high and I have a drink in my hand and am slowly and surely
talking my way toward and into the blank mind of her body, and Charley hollered
HANG HER IN THE TRUCK!

I walked toward the truck. out of the shame of defeat taught me in American
schoolyards as a boy I knew that I must not drop the steer to the ground because
this would show that I was a coward and not a man and that I didn't therefore
deserve much, just sneers and laughs and beatings, you had to be a winner in
America, there wasn't any way out, and you had to learn to fight for nothing,
don't question, and besides if I dropped the steer I might have to pick it up.
besides it will get dirty. I don't want it to get dirty, or rather - they don't want
it to get dirty.

I walked it into the truck.

HANG IT!

the hook which hung from the roof was dull as a man's thumb without a
fingernail, you let the bottom of the steer slide back and went for the top,
you poked the top part against the hook again and again but the hook
would not go through. MOTHER ASS!!! it was all gristle and fat, tough, tough.

COME ON! COME ON!

I gave it my last reserve and the hook came through, it was a beautiful sight, a
miracle, that hook coming through, that steer hanging there by itself completely
off my shoulder, hanging for the housedresses and butchershop gossip.

MOVE ON!

a 285 pound Negro, insolent, sharp, cool, murderous, walked in, hung his meat
with a snap, looked down at me.

we stays in line here!

o.k., ace.

I walked on in front of him. Another steer was waiting for me. each time I loaded
one I was sure that was the last one I could handle but I kept saying

one more
just one more
then I
quit.
fuck
it.

they were waiting for me to quit, I could see the eyes, the smiles when
they thought I wasn't looking. I didn't want to give them victory. I went for
another steer. the player one last lunge of the big-time washed-up player
I went for the meat.

2 hours went on then somebody hollered BREAK.

I had made it. a ten minute rest, some coffee, and they'd never make me quit. I
walked out behind them toward a lunch wagon that had drawn up. I could see the
steam rising in the night from the coffee; I could see the doughnuts and cigarettes
and coffee-cakes and sandwiches under the electric lights.

HEY, YOU!

It was Charley. Charley like me.

yeah, Charley?

before you take your break, get in that truck and move it out and over to stall 18.

it was the truck we had just loaded, the one half a block long. stall 18 was across
the yard.

I managed to open the door and get up inside the cab. It had a soft leather seat
and the seat felt so good that I knew if I didn't fight it I would soon be asleep.
I wasn't a truck driver. I looked down and it looked like a half-dozen gear shifts,
brakes, pedals and so forth. I turned the key and managed to start the engine. I
played with pedals and gear shifts until the truck started to roll and then I drove
it across the yard to stall 18, thinking all the while - by the time I get back the
lunch-wagon will be gone. this was tragedy to me, real tragedy. I parked the truck,
cut the engine and sat there a minute feeling the soft goodness of that leather
seat. then I opened the door and got out. I missed the step or whatever was
supposed to be there and I fell to the ground in my bloody smock and christ tin
helmet like a man shot. It didn't hurt, I didn't feel it. I got up just in time to see
the lunch-wagon driving off through the gate and on down the street. I saw them
walking back in toward the dock laughing and lighting cigarettes.

I took off my boots I took off my smock, I took off my tin helmet and walked to
the shack at the yard entrance. I threw the smock, helmet and boots across
the counter. the old man looked at me:

what? you quittin' this GOOD job?

tell 'em to mail me my check for 2 hours or tell 'em to stick it up their ass,
I don't give a damn!

I walked out. I walked across the street to a Mexican bar and drank a beer
and then got a bus to my place.

the American schoolyard had beat me again.

MR. MISERY AND HARRY TUTTLE'S ACT IS GETTING VERY OLD AND TIRESOME. IT'S NOT FUNNY ANYMORE. A FIFTH GRADER COULD COME UP WITH SOMETHING MORE AMUSING. I CANT BELIEVE THIS IS WHAT TWO GROWN MEN DO ALL DAY LONG. GET A LIFE LOSERS.

GETTING SICK OF THEM Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> MR. MISERY AND HARRY TUTTLE'S ACT IS GETTING VERY
> OLD AND TIRESOME. IT'S NOT FUNNY ANYMORE. A FIFTH
> GRADER COULD COME UP WITH SOMETHING MORE AMUSING.
> I CANT BELIEVE THIS IS WHAT TWO GROWN MEN DO ALL
> DAY LONG. GET A LIFE LOSERS.


The American schoolyard beat you too, I see.......................

.
Attachments:

Misery is a pedophile. I have my intuition. Some one go please check his basement and for any underground bunkers where girls maybe chained to a wood slab some place. God help us all.

BAN DIS NIGGA MISERY MAN

Did someone say BAN-ANA?



 

I love that banananahhh!!! So cute

this thread is sooo 2010. where's the forum gimp?