That’s the lamest shit ever in the history of lame lameness. When you have to use nonsense words to create a rhyme, you’re already fucked. Unless you’re Lewis Carroll, which Allahpundit (sic) clearly is not. Assbiter.

on this post of Patterico’s:

Comment on Sadly, No! Publishes the Most Clueless Blog Post Ever …2 hours ago
Fascinating how “Marcotte offends Catholics� devolves into more tired blather
about Palestinians Arabs. Talk about wasted breath……
Comments for Patterico’s Pontifications – http://patterico.com
[ More results from Comments for Patterico's Pontifications ]

Comment # 20, Is this someone commenting and Patterico answering he/she, and referring to me?

Thanks,

MarioGeorgeNitrini111
mariogeorgenitrini111
______________________
The OJ Simpson Case

NN has totally been pwning Patty and friends over there, btw. Example:

“but Stephen Colbert is not really a hateful right-winger. Hes actually a leftist. He just pretends to be a hateful right-winger.”

Comment by NN — 2/9/2007 @ 3:23 pm

I bolded Patty response. Double awesome.

He hires a conservative to do that for him.

Karol, this is Gary Ruppert. Gary, this is Karol.

Now play nicely.

don’t they know that baby jebus gets mad at the godbags every time some one uses the word fuck.

He does raise a good point. Only posting someone else’s post complete and unabridged means you have to think and follow a logical progression to figure out what you are trying to say. The practical upshoot of this is that people like Malkin and Paterco, etc. who are not able to think in logical progression will not understand what you are trying to say and said post will seem incoherent. (However, if you try to add interpretation, they you clearly are smearing someone.)

February 9, 2007 at 20:34

Face it, you guys lost this one. “Move on,� as one of your patron saints likes to say….

Yes, in the manner that the Democratic party ‘lost’ the 2006 elections.

Satire:

1.a. A work or composition in prose or verse which (usu. humorously) exposes prevailing vices or follies or ridicules an (esp. prominent) individual; a lampoon; a performance or broadcast of a similar nature…

1.b. An object, fact, or circumstance that brings ridicule on some person or thing.

2. A satirical person, a satirist.

3.a. The branch of literature etc. constituted by satires…

3.b. The use of sarcasm, irony, ridicule, etc., to expose vice or folly or to lampoon an individual.

Parody: 1. A prose, verse, or other artistic composition in which the characteristic themes and the style of a particular work, author, etc., are exagerrated or applied to an inappropriate subject, esp. for the purpose of ridicule…

Words mean things, Patterico.

You have been saying “satire� when you clearly mean “parody.�

That is all.

Ha ha! You’re stupid!

So, well played TheManTheMyth. I’d hate to see TheReality if this is the best you have to offer.

I’m not sure which game you were watching, but my scorecard reads: Amanda & Melissa remain employed, and Malkin & Preston, et al., still look like doofuses. Oh, OK, let’s call it a draw. We’re way up in standings anyway.

Dude! I thought I was the only one!

When you hear that someone’s been “smeared,� what do you think has happened? Do you think

a) someone took something the person in question said entirely out of context and mischaracterized it; or
b) someone took something the person in question said and just quoted it, word for word?

Clearly, historically, a) is for conservatives and republicans,
b) is for liberals and democrats.

“That’s not pie. ”

Oh… it looked like chocolate …