Author Topic: drifty (Read 1035 times)

Mr Big · « **on:** June 06, 2006, 09:41:37 PM »

Is there a way to post rebutals to Drifty's site? He'd be easy to have fun with.

this post was meant as a reply, not a new post. Can't delete it.

Nash · « **Reply #1 on:** June 06, 2006, 10:00:25 PM »

d r i f t g l a s s

Yeah Nuke - in the comments button thingy under each post. You just select "anonymous" as your username and away you go. No signing up, no nothing. Yer able to post a comment, like, now.

DiabloTX · « **Reply #2 on:** June 06, 2006, 10:33:27 PM »

Well, ya managed to get it locked. Ya happy now? How about another "Gay Marriage - Why I really hate the Repubs" double thread?

That was cool.

Let's do it again!!!

Nash · « **Reply #3 on:** June 06, 2006, 10:34:39 PM »

I did?...

It's amazing how two people can see the exact same thing and....

DiabloTX · « **Reply #4 on:** June 06, 2006, 10:37:09 PM »

Well, not because of you...but the double entendre thing you did with the thread. Titled "Gay Marriage..." but was really a knock on the Pres doing a misdirection. And then 3 pages of utter chaos. Man, it was a good ride...sorta.

Bronk · « **Reply #5 on:** June 06, 2006, 10:43:12 PM »

DiabloTX ehh don't think you wanna say gay marriage and good ride in the same reply.... Do ya?

Bronk

DiabloTX · « **Reply #6 on:** June 06, 2006, 10:45:35 PM »

Eh, why not...another double entendre....OMG

I am not...am I?

runs away....

Nash · « **Reply #7 on:** June 06, 2006, 10:46:02 PM »

It was called "Gay marriage - why"..... which was a thread about asking the "whys" of this gay marriage debate - why it was happening again, and why it was happening now. Which I did, while trying to give my own interpretation

Others started delving into the whole "is it even kosher" thing which has been done a million times. That's fine, but just because that's where it ended up going doesn't mean that's where it started.

It sounds like you're trying to accuse me of trying to hyjack my own thread, from my very first post. That would be one hell of a first.

Bronk · « **Reply #8 on:** June 06, 2006, 10:46:19 PM »

Bronk

Edit: meant for diablo's reply.

rpm · « **Reply #9 on:** June 06, 2006, 10:49:25 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Nash
It sounds like you're trying to accuse me of trying to hyjack my own thread, from my very first post. That would be one hell of a first.

DiabloTX · « **Reply #10 on:** June 06, 2006, 10:50:30 PM »

Quote

All of a sudden, out of nowhere, and apropos of nothing, same-sex marriage is once again on the agenda, and Bush starts giving speeches on teh ghey today, pressing for the Senate to amend the constitution to define marriage as the union between a man and a woman

That's the very FIRST sentence of your post. The title of which is "Gay Marriage - Why?"

So what is it? Gay marriage or Bush? (shut up Bronk!)

Surely you can see how it could be seen as both a politcial AND a social comment on your behalf?

Nash · « **Reply #11 on:** June 06, 2006, 10:56:18 PM »

Is this really that hard to understand?

If I had a problem with gay marriage, I'd say:

"I think it's terrible that...."

If I thought gay marriage was the bestest, I'd say:

"What is so wrong with...."

And if I wanted to comment on the day's events, namely Bush stirring up an amendment to the Constitution barring gay marriages, I might say:

"All of a sudden, out of nowhere, and apropos of nothing, same-sex marriage is once again on the agenda, and Bush starts giving speeches on teh ghey today, pressing for the Senate to amend the constitution to define marriage as the union between a man and a woman."

Whoah...

That's exactly what I did say.....

Bronk · « **Reply #12 on:** June 06, 2006, 10:56:54 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by DiabloTX

So what is it? Gay marriage or Bush?

Well my choice would be Bush.

Sorry couldn't resist.

Bronk

Nash · « **Reply #13 on:** June 06, 2006, 10:59:33 PM »

Thanks rpm.

I like the look of that thing.

Cheers.

DiabloTX · « **Reply #14 on:** June 06, 2006, 11:00:48 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Nash
Is this really that hard to understand?

If I had a problem with gay marriage, I'd say:

"I think it's terrible that...."

If I thought gay marriage was the bestest, I'd say:

"What is so wrong with...."

And if I wanted to comment on the day's events, namely Bush stirring up an amendment to the Constitution barring gay marriages, I might say:

"All of a sudden, out of nowhere, and apropos of nothing, same-sex marriage is once again on the agenda, and Bush starts giving speeches on teh ghey today, pressing for the Senate to amend the constitution to define marriage as the union between a man and a woman."

Whoah...

That's exactly what I did say.....

Ummm, ok. I see your point (SHUDDUP BRONK!!!!!!!!!!!!)

But here's mine.

The way you stated it with that first sentence, to me, seemed to be you were saying Bush acknowledges a certain amount of bad media coverage (insert war on terrorism/immigration/constitutionality of anit-terrorism techniques) and decides to do a misdirection by, out of nowhere, bring up the gay marriage issue. It's probably just me but that's the way I saw it.