Ken Pitts What do you think
in [Golf]
|
From: Dinosaur_Sr on 18 Apr 2010 19:44 On Apr 18, 7:40 pm, Howard Brazee <how...(a)brazee.net> wrote: > On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 10:16:23 -0700 (PDT), Dinosaur_Sr > > <frostb...(a)dukesofbiohazard.com> wrote: > >JMHO, but if someone claimed that person was all that is good in golf, > >Ken would make an issue of the club throwing. > > Has anybody claimed that *anything* or *anyone* was all that is good > in golf? > > -- > "In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found, > than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace > to the legislature, and not to the executive department." > > - James Madison You don't think such claims have been made about Tiger Woods, and cultivated by him as part of his IMG management? Part of Ken's issue is that Tiger Woods is held up in such a manner...or at least was!
From: Howard Brazee on 18 Apr 2010 19:44 On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 12:31:28 -0500, bknight(a)conramp.net wrote: >You claim that your definition of "begging the question" is right, >but Noah Webster, and all logicians are wrong. I don't know what his claim was, but us pedantics have lost this fight. While the original meaning will stick around, the implied new meaning will be around also. I've been noticing a newer meaning of "problematic" winning as well. -- "In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found, than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace to the legislature, and not to the executive department." - James Madison
From: Dinosaur_Sr on 18 Apr 2010 19:44 On Apr 18, 7:39 pm, Alan Baker <alangba...(a)telus.net> wrote: > In article > <69febfd4-3cf8-429a-b0df-876d630c6...(a)j17g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>, > > Dinosaur_Sr <frostb...(a)dukesofbiohazard.com> wrote: > > On Apr 18, 6:35 pm, bkni...(a)conramp.net wrote: > > > snippitall.. > > > You prove my point with every post you make. You have zero ability to > > comprehend what other people say. > > > FWIW, who cares who comes to your funeral? > > You apparently did... ...a moment ago. > > > It's the difference you > > actually make in people's lives while you are on the topside that > > counts. In any event, I suspect a number of people might show up at my > > funeral if such an event were to happen, although I specifically don't > > want one. They are a total waste of time and money. Living people have > > better things to do than worry about dead people. Nothing dumber than > > being so consumed with your social popularity that you obsess over how > > many people will show up at your funeral. > > Nice deflection there... > > ...you were the one that brought it up as if it said something. > > -- > Alan Baker > Vancouver, British Columbia > <http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg> ....another ray of sunshine chimes in.......
From: bknight on 18 Apr 2010 20:07 On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 16:31:43 -0700 (PDT), Dinosaur_Sr <frostback(a)dukesofbiohazard.com> wrote: >On Apr 18, 6:35�pm, bkni...(a)conramp.net wrote: > >snippitall.. > >You prove my point with every post you make. You have zero ability to >comprehend what other people say. > >FWIW, who cares who comes to your funeral? BIG TIME WHOOSH!!! And you say that I have comprehension problems? You called me Eleanor Rigby. You don't even know what the meaning of the lyrics are. >It's the difference you actually make in people's lives while you are on the topside that >counts. > In any event, I suspect a number of people might show up at my >funeral if such an event were to happen, although I specifically don't >want one. They are a total waste of time and money. Living people have >better things to do than worry about dead people. Nothing dumber than >being so consumed with your social popularity that you obsess over how >many people will show up at your funeral. Good God. You really don't have a clue do you? > >All you have ever offered on RSG is hostility, and you continue to >offer it. I make numerous assertions, and am more than willing to >discuss them, and that is what these newsgroups are supposed to be >about, and I have learned a lot from people who do in fact see things >differently than I. You, OTOH, enter legitimate discussions with the >idea of taking the sides of your virtual "friends", and destroy the >threads. You offer nothing substantive, and do nothing but drive up >the negativity meter on any and all discussions, and I know many, many >people who have left here because of that negativity. I have been part >of that, BTW, and admitted and apologized for it (which is the >principal reason you direct hostility my way), but you are it's >personification. Lots more words, but nothing substantive here Rob, all disguised by a show of hubris. Now circling your toe and meekly stating that you have learned so much from others here, when you have acted the know-it all for years. That's funny. I have no hostility towards you, just pity now. This started by your comparing Baker and I. Are we both being mean to you? LOL >If you didn't make hostile comments, in general, about other people, >you wouldn't have much to say about anything. Your record on this >board speaks for itself. All anyone has to do is search for "Bobby >Knight" and start reading. In general? I'm very specific. Hostility is what you post to Clark. I just tweak your pompous side. > I am no angel, and I should not respond to your hostility at all, because the responses themselves are hostile, >but that would be like telling a bully you aren't going to fight back...just invites the bully to be more of a bully. > Poor Rob. One would think that a person who thinks he is so well versed in life couldn't be bullied. Few here can be, but I'm sorry you feel picked on....and you know that it can't all be pointed to me. If you'd just backed off your pomposity it might never have happened. But you'll continue to respond because you don't know when you've been had. You're really fun. BK
From: Alan Baker on 18 Apr 2010 20:21
In article <2f038c3f-46cb-4163-8b02-b409fe0c03f3(a)s9g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>, Dinosaur_Sr <frostback(a)dukesofbiohazard.com> wrote: > On Apr 18, 7:40�pm, Howard Brazee <how...(a)brazee.net> wrote: > > On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 10:16:23 -0700 (PDT), Dinosaur_Sr > > > > <frostb...(a)dukesofbiohazard.com> wrote: > > >JMHO, but if someone claimed that person was all that is good in golf, > > >Ken would make an issue of the club throwing. > > > > Has anybody claimed that *anything* or *anyone* was all that is good > > in golf? > > > > -- > > "In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found, > > than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace > > to the legislature, and not to the executive department." > > > > - James Madison > > You don't think such claims have been made about Tiger Woods, I haven't read any such claims here, no. > and > cultivated by him as part of his IMG management? Part of Ken's issue > is that Tiger Woods is held up in such a manner...or at least was! What people choose to believe is not Tiger's responsibility. -- Alan Baker Vancouver, British Columbia <http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg> |