Hi -- New here.

Got69ed said:
No different than you leaving comment after comment after comment about how wordy she is. Pot meet kettle. You could say in one comment what you have said in a dozen.
Click to expand...

I don't recall liberals gushing over SG like Joe Biden gushing over Obama.

Some think the sock is clean and articulate. The sock sucks.
 
Oneuli said:
I won't claim to be a gifted writer. As I've mentioned, I'm a math person. But as to the charge of long-windedness, I'm typically dealing in just a few paragraphs with a topic that could easily be done at book length.

Paging back through this thread, I see that most of my replies have been pretty brief -- e.g., two short sentences each in #992 and #980, three each in #977 and #962. Just one in #961. If I page back far enough, I see that 137 posts back in the thread, I had a longer one: post #856. That included 357 words from me. An average newspaper op-ed is about twice that. So if I'm trying people's patience here, I can only imagine their reaction when they try to tackle the "big boy papers."
Click to expand...

If I had to hazard a guess, I bet most of the complainers and the silent lurkers here don't read anything over 140 characters in length, or get their current events information in anything over 30-second sound bites. Anything more than that is just too hard.

What's really going on, of course, is that you are making them feel inferior about themselves (in their minds) because you are well-informed, eloquent, grammatical, interesting, and very, very intelligent. The monkeys can't have you climbing higher than they, so they're verbally trying to pull you back down.
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
StarGeezer is too dull to realize how the constant whining about the length of someone's post(s) is making her look incredibly petty, envious, and most of all stupid. If there's one thing she can do well, it's stupid.
Click to expand...

In the post you quoted, I attempting to inform her...using both brevity and clarity.
 
Controlled Opposition said:
No, "Russophobia" is paranoia about Russia. It's that simple.
Click to expand...

As should now be clear, then, I don't suffer from Russophobia, by your definition. What I suffer from is a non-distorted vision of the Kremlin's role in our 2016 election -- a view that reflects both the publicly disclosed evidence and the conclusions of our nation's intelligence services based on classified information. For those who find such facts politically uncomfortable, it's tempting to attack anyone who mentions them as a Russophobe, in hopes that a personal attack will help them avoid a substantive discussion. I'd recommend resisting that temptation and dealing with reality.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top