"bulka" > wrote in message
...
> On Sep 5, 8:54 pm, "cybercat" > wrote:
>> "Paul M. Cook" > wrote in
>> ...
>>
>>
>>
>> > "cybercat" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >> Because so many of you are so incredibly stupid and malicious on any
>> >> given topic.
>>
>> >> Consider me converted.
>>
>> > The on topic posts get pretty malicious, too.
>>
>> That's true. But some of the political views that have come out in these
>> latest threads have completely changed the way I think about a number of
>> people who post here. While many would say that I do not suffer fools
>> gladly, I now believe that I give people wayyyy too much credit. I must
>> because I am continually surprised when they show their idiocy.
>
> In defense of OTs
>
> Sure, we could take our political/social rants to a more appropriate
> site, full of strangers. Here,we are at least aquaintences. We've
> talked about soup and rice and dog nose what else. We have some
> context (Even if, I confess, I can't always keep straight who said
> what)
>
> Better spew from an idiot you sorta know than spew from a random,
> annonymous idiot.
>
> Think globally, argue locally.
>
> And, we are generally polilte enough to make separate threads. Don't
> read 'em if you don't want to.
>

You read me wrong. I don't hate the OT posts, I am disgusted with the
idiots. Jay writes that "muslims are scary." Omelet writes that "affirmative
action gets you a free education." George thinks Obama stands for power
flowing from the goverment to the people and not the other way around.
"Chatty Cathy" thinks you have to have borne a child to understand anything
about children. The foam-flecked ****williger assumes that those who support
Obama "get more from the system than they pay into it." And "Goomba," where
to even begin? She thinks, among other unbelievably asinine things, that the
girl's room and the boy's locker room count as sex education.

Ob food, I'll have whatever these dickfaces are NOT having.