From: William Clark on
In article <MPG.25e314d4883cfd59989bc1(a)news.giganews.com>,
BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote:

> In article <4b7893f6$0$5103$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com>,
> nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com says...
> >
> > On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 18:56:24 -0500, BAR wrote:
> > > In article <4b784131$0$4856$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com>,
> > > nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com says...
> > >> On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 10:15:02 -0800, dene wrote:
> > >>> "Carbon" <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
> > >>> news:4b75eb36$0$5121$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com...
> > >>>> On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 07:36:08 -0600, MNMikeW wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> No, Mike. According to the ceaseless Fox News narrative, Obama is
> > >>>>>> helpless without a teleprompter. He debated the GOP for over an
> > >>>>>> hour, all of them lined up with prepared questions. Not only did
> > >>>>>> he not fall apart, he gave no ground whatsoever. In fact he did
> > >>>>>> very well. It's that simple. The entire narrative is ridiculous
> > >>>>>> and stupid.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I said he did very well. He by no means "drubbed" anyone.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I'm glad you conceded that much. Most of your fellow travelers are
> > >>>> in denial. As for how well he did, I'm 100% certain that the GOP
> > >>>> will never, ever invite Obama to another unscripted live television
> > >>>> debate. Read into that what you will.
> > >>>
> > >>> My read is that it's been the highlight of his presidency.
> > >>
> > >> It might seem that way to anyone who believed the narrative that he
> > >> can't speak without a teleprompter.
> > >
> > > Obama is toast. His favorability will be in the 30's before too long.
> >
> > You haven't commented on Obama's performance in the recent live
> > televised debate. Why is that? Could it be that you're so desperate to
> > believe Obama is helpless without a teleprompter that you block out all
> > evidence to the contrary? Perhaps your obvious bias is influencing your
> > predictions about Obama's favorability ratings.
>
> Ok, I'll play. It was not a debate. It was a ask a quesiton and receive
> an answer session.
>
> But, keeping giving yourself a one-handed accolade if that's what makes
> you happy.

One handed, because you need the other hand to write notes on like
PalmPalin?
From: William Clark on
In article <hlbhvm$ogd$1(a)speranza.aioe.org>,
"Moderate" <no_spam_(a)no_mail.com> wrote:

> "John B." <johnb505(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:8aa022fe-a1f8-4dab-9e6f-f5117a10e0bb(a)f8g2000vba.googlegroups.com...
> On Feb 12, 5:39 pm, William Clark <cl...(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio-
> state.edu> wrote:
> > In article <hl4fqq$ht...(a)speranza.aioe.org>,
> >
> > No, Tancredo's remark was about ways of denying minorities the vote.
>
> No, Mod's right. Tancredo said Obama owed his election to people who
> couldn't read or write. I had no idea that illiterates made up 52% of
> eligible voters! Learn something new every day.
>
> ******************************************************
>
> Of course I am right. Clark is an idiot.

And you are clearly incapable of rational extrapolation. If you can't
see through the code, then you are even thicker than I thought.
From: Moderate on

"William Clark" <clark(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio-state.edu> wrote in message
news:clark-C8DC8A.09483015022010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu...
> In article <hlbhvm$ogd$1(a)speranza.aioe.org>,
> "Moderate" <no_spam_(a)no_mail.com> wrote:
>
>> "John B." <johnb505(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:8aa022fe-a1f8-4dab-9e6f-f5117a10e0bb(a)f8g2000vba.googlegroups.com...
>> On Feb 12, 5:39 pm, William Clark <cl...(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio-
>> state.edu> wrote:
>> > In article <hl4fqq$ht...(a)speranza.aioe.org>,
>> >
>> > No, Tancredo's remark was about ways of denying minorities the vote.
>>
>> No, Mod's right. Tancredo said Obama owed his election to people who
>> couldn't read or write. I had no idea that illiterates made up 52% of
>> eligible voters! Learn something new every day.
>>
>> ******************************************************
>>
>> Of course I am right. Clark is an idiot.
>
> And you are clearly incapable of rational extrapolation. If you can't
> see through the code, then you are even thicker than I thought.

You have lost your mind.


From: Dinosaur_Sr on
On Feb 13, 12:23 pm, William Clark <wcla...(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com>
wrote:
> In article
> <b33ef4c0-206d-44a8-a5b2-84e3e97cc...(a)h2g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>,
>
>
>
>  Dinosaur_Sr <frostback2...(a)att.net> wrote:
> > On Feb 13, 10:39 am, William Clark <wcla...(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com>
> > wrote:
> > > In article
> > > <6ea6aa0b-dd0f-4933-bfd0-2b763861e...(a)b2g2000yqi.googlegroups.com>,
>
> > >  Dinosaur_Sr <frostback2...(a)att.net> wrote:
> > > > On Feb 12, 2:01 pm, William Clark <cl...(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio-
> > > > state.edu> wrote:
> > > > > In article <7tljlbFg5...(a)mid.individual.net>,
>
> > > > >  "dene" <d...(a)remove.ipns.com> wrote:
> > > > > > "William Clark" <cl...(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio-state.edu> wrote in
> > > > > > message
> > > > > >news:clark-13ED1E.09503912022010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu....
> > > > > > > In article <hl3k94$33...(a)speranza.aioe.org>,
> > > > > > >  "Moderate" <no_spam_(a)no_mail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > "dene" <d...(a)remove.ipns.com> wrote in message
> > > > > > > >news:7tjvqjFuvU1(a)mid.individual.net...
>
> > > > > > > > > "William Clark" <wcla...(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> wrote in
> > > > > > > > > message
> > > > > > > > >news:wclark2-C14662.20553411022010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.ed
> > > > > > > > >u...
>
> > > > > > > > >> Oh, bullshit, Jack. We've been over that again and again -
> > > > > > > > >> he's as
> > > > > > dumb
> > > > > > > > >> as paint.
>
> > > > > > > > > Hmmm....what does that say about the intelligence of Gore,
> > > > > > > > > Kerry, or
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > American electorate who elected this dummy.
>
> > > > > > > > I always enjoy watching idiots like Clark talk about other
> > > > > > > > people's
> > > > > > > > intelligence.  What a boob.
>
> > > > > > > Yu and Intelligence don;t belong in the same sentence. Go find
> > > > > > > some.
>
> > > > > > I'm waiting for an intelligent answer to my question, Clark.
>
> > > > > > -Greg
>
> > > > > Well, Bush is the one they elected (supposedly), so it is a frightening
> > > > > indictment of the Americn electorate.
>
> > > > Hardly in the same league as electing any Labour Party candidate in
> > > > any context!
>
> > > Get back on your meds - quickly.
>
> > So you agree with me that electing Labour party candidates is a
> > frightening indictment of the British electorate.
>
> No, I agree that you need to start taking your medication again. You are
> becoming delusionally schizophrenic.

What qualifications do you presume to have to make such a diagnosis?
From: Dinosaur_Sr on
On Feb 13, 12:26 pm, William Clark <wcla...(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com>
wrote:
> In article
> <b8033c9b-c8e1-42a5-9512-80e740b82...(a)15g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>,
>
>
>
>  Dinosaur_Sr <frostback2...(a)att.net> wrote:
> > On Feb 13, 10:43 am, William Clark <wcla...(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com>
> > wrote:
> > > In article <4b75eca0$0$5077$9a6e1...(a)unlimited.newshosting.com>,
>
> > >  Carbon <nob...(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 18:06:19 -0500, BAR wrote:
> > > > > In article <clark-EDF568.17402212022...(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-
> > > > > state.edu>, cl...(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio-state.edu says...
> > > > >> In article <MPG.25df7e125badc04a989...(a)news.giganews.com>,
> > > > >>  BAR <sc...(a)you.com> wrote:
>
> > > > >>> Literate and poor or ignorant and rich?
>
> > > > >> Well, you are ignorant, but I doubt you are rich.
>
> > > > > You'd be surprised how much this dumb ignorant idiot has.
>
> > > > You think money makes you a better person? Guess what, Paris Hilton
> > > > agrees with you.
>
> > > And bragging about (supposedly) having money is a sign of no class. Like
> > > pretending to have proof that your soul mate published in journals in a
> > > field he doesn't know anything about.
>
> > Kinda like some fool claiming that he is an accomplished person
> > because of the name of the school that gave him a degree. I, OTOH,
> > have actually published in the area of materials science, and that
> > fact for some reason bothers you...which can only mean you are envious!
>
> No, you have not. Fourth author in a chemistry proceedings of a
> conference you didn't even go to is absolutely NOT a materials science
> publication. Any more than mine in the IADR Proceedings makes me a
> dentist. Poor effort on your part.
>
> You suffer from a serious inferiority complex, that means your life is
> devoted to trying (unsuccessfully) to tear down anyone with even modest
> achievements in life. How very sad.

I see, so you found the ACS Symposium series presentation and
publication! Nope, doesn't make me a chemist, nor a seamstress (-
ster!) but silk is a material and the work done was in materials
science. There is one other publication in a much more significant
journal and another presentation at an international conference...I
even have a picture of me with everyone at the conference!

In any event, it remains interesting that you are so consumed by the
fact that I have done a bit of work in the area of materials science!