Re: OT: How I filter posts. Was: "socialist" when describing Hillary Clinton
- From: WolfRat <fred@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 12:41:34 -0500
It's no coincidence that Hillary's staff has always consisted mostly of adoring women, with nerdy or geeky guys forming an adjunct brain trust. Hillary's rumored hostility to uniformed military men and some Secret Service agents early in the first Clinton presidency probably belongs to this pattern. And let's not forget Hillary, the governor's wife, pulling out a book and rudely reading in the bleachers during University of Arkansas football games back in Little Rock.
Hillary's disdain for masculinity fits right into the classic feminazi package, which is why Hillary acts on Gloria Steinem like catnip. Steinem's fawning, gaseous New York Times op-ed about her pal Hillary this week speaks volumes about the snobby clubbiness and reactionary sentimentality of the fossilized feminist establishment, which has blessedly fallen off the cultural map in the 21st century. History will judge Steinem and company very severely for their ethically obtuse indifference to the stream of working-class women and female subordinates whom Bill Clinton sexually harassed and abused, enabled by look-the-other-way and trash-the-victims Hillary.
Tina wrote:
I must be missing something obvious here..
The google groups reader I most often use lists topics and those
responding in several formats: either sorted by reply, or by date. If
there's something by MX followed by our troll in chief, one can be
sure the almost reflexive Bertie post isn't adding to the general
aviation knowledge of the group, but offering an opinion as to MX's
general worth. Think of it as a Q (MX) as being most often followed by
a U (without a four letter word prefex).
Why is there a concern about kill filing those messages? Isn't it true
that all you need do is not read postings that don't appeal to you?
.
On Jan 9, 1:42 pm, Jim Logajan <Jam...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:"Jay Honeck" <jjhon...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:Bertie became my new rump ranger when I called him on his obsessionHmmm. I'd have to disagree to the modest extent that he hasn't destroyed
over MX. His pathological need to respond to every, single post MX
makes with brilliant comebacks like "fuckwit" has made him far more
destructive to this group than MX could ever be.
the group for me.
I found that if I ignore the posts by Bertie that are followups to
Mxsmanic, that the bulk of the remainder of his posts are topical and
generally standard fair that could have been posted by any presumably
experienced pilot. Bertie's M.O. is relatively consistent, so I've been
able to bypass most of his personal attacks.
(Now of course I need to bypass Bertie's replies to you, Jay. :-) )
All three people explicitly mentioned above (you, Bertie, and Mxsmanic)
seem to have a fair number of, um, "different" opinions than I on various
subjects. So sometimes it's more scary to see one of you post an opinion
that happens to agree with mine than not! ;-)
Lastly I will fully admit that this post contains the seeds of a self-
referential contradiction: I'm trying to influence ("control") someone's
posting or reading habits by "complaining" about that person's attempt to
influence ("control") a third person's posting or reading habits.
Logic says that I should not have made this post because of the inherent
contradiction. But I'm not feeling logical today.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Prev by Date: Re: OT: How I filter posts. Was: "socialist" when describing Hillary Clinton
- Next by Date: Re: Skycather's not TOO ugly, just needs tailwheel
- Previous by thread: Re: OT: How I filter posts. Was: "socialist" when describing Hillary Clinton
- Next by thread: Re: OT: How I filter posts. Was: "socialist" when describing Hillary Clinton
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
