John Knight wrote:
>> "Bob LeChevalier" <lojbab at lojban.org> wrote in message
> news:jtaemu4j79pp24mu19m3jol2ebrru9l8m6 at 4ax.com...>> > His obsessions are multiple; he has expressed hatred for everyone who
> > is Jewish, female, black (but he uses the N word), the "mud" races,
> > liberals, feminists, scientists who accept evolution and probably a
> > few others that I'm forgetting.
> >
>> This is what makes you a "liberal", lojbab. It's also proof that you're a
> woman because it's pure "women's intuition"--and you certainly have some
> appreciation for just how "accurate" *that* is by now [read: 32% of American
> 12th grade girls' responses were not statistically significant, 23% were
> statistically significant because they scored lower than if they'd just
> guessed, and of the 45% that was statistically significant, the amount by
> which they scored lower than boys was statistically significant on 24.4%, by
> which they scored higher than boys was statistically significant on 2.6%,
> and the difference between boys and girls was not stastically significant on
> 18%"].
>> "Women's intuition" couldn't be further off the mark than that if you tried,
> could it?
>> Just because someone thinks your sex idol Marie Curie was a lab flunky
> doesn't mean they "hate" her, nor does it mean that they "hate" you for
> continuing to propogate that LIE even long after she's been debunked. Just
> because someone notes that the trainers of Koko the Gorilla claimed that she
> was more "intelligent" than the niggers [something not even I agree with]
> doesn't mean they "hate" niggers. The refusal of "liberals" and feminazis
> to understand what this welfare system has done to nigger families is a sure
> fire way to demonstrate their "hate" for niggers.
>> The zionists and jews just love it when you protect your little feminazi
> cocoon so effectively by throwing out all these Pavlovian responses, because
> it's proof that their brainwashing of you feminazis and "liberals", through
> TalmudVision and the public "school" system, has been a raving success.
>> As Tom pointed out, you have never *once* addressed a debate issue properly.
> Instead, you reacted like Pavlov's Dog, every time. You almost got the
> Gallup sample size issue correct, but then zinged off into left field with
> another "hate" diatribe and never even completed the thought. This was an
> important point, but you never made it properly, and even follow ups to your
> posts were rejected as if though they were pointless.
>> It must really be miserable to live your whole life "thinking" that anyone
> who disagrees with you "hates" you? It sure seems to waste a lot of energy.
>> John Knight
pot. kettle. black.
