posted on Feb, 7 2003 @ 03:49 AM
Well mirrorsparadise, you see now the problems that associate with trying to deal with a 'Net Troll, like MT69: He can't remember (or doesn't care)
about the lies he tells from one person to another (or one thread to another); Emotion-meter stuck permanently on "verbally puree everything &
everybody"; Reads only half of what people say that refers to him (& puts an automatically negative connotation on the other half that he makes up);
Has no creativity, originality or even an opinion of his own (that hasn't been brainwashed into him by the rest of the world--ie: an intellectual
doormat) & has to denegrate anyone who shows any signs of having any mind, will or opinion of their own; Immediately follows the party line to the
point of fanaticism as long as the sound bites are good; The maturity of a grade-school kid (Actually, I've seen more mature behavior from *some*
grade-schoolers than MT displays); Unable to tell when someone has been purposely yanking *his* chain to make him display all of those symptoms of
Now that he's been caught with his participles dangling (figuratively speaking), the best advice I've heard for dealing with a troll involves two
things: If the board is moderated (which this one is), inform them of the troll's presence so he can be investigated & banned (The U2U function here
come in *really handy* for that); Then simply ignore the ignorant...
So, back to the topic: IMO, Regan was an actor before the Oval Office, acted his way into the Oval Office & even now considers his sagging career to
be his biggest concern. When it was Carter, the whole country was working for peanuts. With Bush in the White House (any Bush...it doesn't matter
which), they pretend that the American Citizens are shrubs & start pissing on the country.
As far as I'm concerned anybody who *wants* to assume a position in the Oval Office must be insane: Compare photos of any President during his
Inauguration Ceremony (In which he takes a vow to uphold the Constitution, then blatently uses it to wipe his @$$ in front of the public during the
rest of his term) with photos taken at the end of his 4 year term...Doesn't it seem that 4 years *in* office visably ages the man a full 10 years or
more? Anyone who *wants* a job that does that to him *must* be insane...And therefore rendering him mentally unfit for that office, by default.
At any rate, my next vote is going to go the same way it has for the past 23 years..."No Confidence in Any Candidate for Any Office". Unless, of
course, there's actually a candidate that appears to see the position as a *duty*, rather than an *opportunity*...I won't be holding my breath
waiting for such a person to show up, though.
[Edited on 7-2-2003 by MidnightDStroyer]