XPost: alt.usenet.kooks, soc.men   
   From: dawgface@ten.hut   
      
   "Kali"  wrote in message   
   news:fu5gtu$nqd$8@blackhelicopter.databasix.com...   
   > In , Frank dawgface@ten.hut said:   
   >>   
   >>"marcia"  wrote in message   
   >>news:bb5ed41c-9d24-4229-8424-7fae10ebd849@a22g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...   
   >>> On Apr 15, 2:25 am, "Frank"  wrote:   
   >>>> Since someone reposted your real name I did a little web search on   
   >>>> you.   
   >>>> It was sad, real sad.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Seems everyone is dissing you from some psychology doctor on down   
   >>>> to   
   >>>> the   
   >>>> bottom of the barrel.   
   >>>   
   >>> Sigh. We all have our detractors, Frank. Kali's have been almost   
   >>> exclusively kooks and trolls, not regular, contributing members of   
   >>> spp.   
   >>>   
   >>> Further, if the "some psychology doctor" you're referring to is   
   >>> "Wyatt   
   >>> Ehrenfels," he belongs to the genus *K0okus Gargantous Bitterus*,   
   >>> and   
   >>> had problems with quite a few people around here. (I've never been   
   >>> fully convinced WE wasn't Brad Jesness in disguise.)   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >>A rather long commentary about her mentioned a name like Ehrenfels, I   
   >>don't remember there being a Wyatt attached.   
   >   
   > Gerald Giarmo, aka Whyatt Ehrenfels. Given the fact that you   
   > have your nose shoved firmly up Linda's skirt, you should know   
   > who that is.   
   >   
      
   All I know is that Hoofprints mentioned several times about an Ehrenfels   
   being afraid of scary Linda.   
   Nose shoved up a skirt? LOL, You know better than that, but heh, a   
   chance for you to get in a personal dig that you always deny doing.   
      
   >>> SPP has a long and convoluted history that doesn't fully reveal   
   >>> itself   
   >>> in the posting archives. I've had difficulty figuring out what   
   >>> happened during my absence (even knowing a few of the players), and   
   >>> can easily imagine how you could get the wrong impression from what   
   >>> you've read. The reality is, Kali has been--or *was,* when this   
   >>> group   
   >>> was actually populated by academics and intellectuals--a highly   
   >>> respected and valued member. A lot of people like her.   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >>It is amazing how many don't, it's huge out there.   
   >   
   > Just can't please all the people all of the time.   
   >   
      
   Gross understatement   
      
   >>>> And there you are sitting in a self appointed cat birds seat   
   >>>> touting   
   >>>> your intellectualism. You might consider yourself an elitist but   
   >>>> few   
   >>>> else.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Sad, really sad.   
   >>>   
   >>> She's never struck me as someone who considers herself elitist, but   
   >>> one can hardly fault her for enjoying a well-reasoned and   
   >>> supportable   
   >>> discussion. I think, if you look a little harder, you'll find she's   
   >>> at   
   >>> least as silly as she is intellectual, and not the way you've   
   >>> portrayed her at all.   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >>She came off as a thoroughbred elitist snob   
   >   
   > "Thoroughbred elitist snob"? lol   
   >   
      
   Yes, seems you have a long history of this type of behavior.   
      
   >> her with nothing to   
   >>substantiate any claims.   
   >   
   > My claims were well substantiated. You snipped out all the   
   > evidence and ran away from the thread.   
   >   
      
   Again? If you restate a revisionist comment often enough it becomes   
   truth?   
   BS. I told you originally I was not replying to a thread due to your   
   repetitive boring arguments, I also reminded you of that just recently   
   and yet here again. Talk about lack of reading comprehension!   
      
   I then ignored all the rest of your posts in that thread, never read   
   them. Fact is I don't remember what the thread was about, just remember   
   you had nothing to say.   
      
   >> On the Web there were some comments about   
   >>unfinished masters degree in something, and a couple schools were   
   >>mentioned. Nothing in a positive light.   
   >>   
   >>Her own comments to threads here in the last few days spoke of someone   
   >>who thinks more of themselves than they ought. An intellectual, a   
   >>scientist, lol, I think not and anyone who would discount a true   
   >>intellectual like Bill Buckley   
   >   
   > Where did I do that? Evidence, please. note bene: Your lack of   
   > reading comprehension skills don't count, here.   
   >   
      
   Just do a search with his name over the last week or so. It'll show up,   
   I cannot understand why you feel so sensitive about it now?   
      
   >> is not very bright, not intelligent. One   
   >>does not have to agree with a persons political beliefs to recognize   
   >>well founded idea's and intelligent reasoning. Even Bills counterparts   
   >>respected him and thought well of him. Unless you speak of   
   >>progressives   
   >>and they are all to agendized to see any truth anywhere and reasoning   
   >>has no place in their speech.   
   >   
   > Poor Frank.   
   >   
      
   Pitiful copy catting.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)