[quote]vroom wrote:
Joe, Joe, Joe. You know damned well that PMS is a women’s issue. You also know damned well accusing someone around here of having PMS is an insult.
Don’t try to backpedal your way out of it…
Own up to it. Be proud of your style of insulting me at every single opportunity you have, whether or not it is supposedly a joke at times.
Now, if you wouldn’t complain that I’m attacking you all the time, I’d simply strike back and attack you for it.
As it is, I’m reduced to simply pointing this out, because you, Sasquatch and Zeb are in a mode where you think it is interesting to the world to point out “my behavior” instead of discussing issues.
So be it.[/quote]
Who are you kidding? You don’t allow for discussion. Go back and read Veg’s comments. Every thread is the same. I even gave you the opportunity tonight to stop and get back on topic. I explained to you that your attitude had just changed the thread and you had 2 choices at that time.
Instead of manning up, you chose your usual path. Then you are so quick to spin and throw the attack card. Joe’s initial comment was obviously a joke and instead of owning up to your negative outburst you carried on. So be it. Just accept your responsibility once for your, quite obvious, attention craving attitude and move on.
But I know I live in this idyllic world, so alas, your need to get in the last word will preclude any progress that could be made.
[quote]Joe Weider wrote:
cap’nsalty wrote:
I don’t see why this surprises anyone. If you have the connections and the money to become president, it doesn’t really matter what your grades are. You’ll go to a top college, and if you want to you can go to a top grad school after that. There is no incentive to do well.
kerry didn’t really get into a top grad school…and he had connections etc.
[/quote]
Umm…yea he did. He went to Boston college law school: average LSAT is 164, average GPA is 3.61 (3.7 is an A). (Harvard’s average LSAT is 171, average GPA is 3.84). Getting into law school is a whole lot tougher than getting into undergrad.
Getting Cs at Yale means he barely tried at all, if you do some of the homework and actually show up for tests you should be able to do better than this. If someone else with no connections got Cs at Yale they would have extreme difficulty getting into ANY ABA certified law school.
There ya go chief. But I’m quite sure this doesn’t qualify me to answer any of your questions w/r/t corprate America.
Of course there exists greed, for every one you read about there are 100 who aren’t involved. The glass is half-full vroom. P.M.A. man.
And I’ve worked every rung of the ladder–legit. So take your negativity elsewhere when it comes to chopping at me.
You are but a who, my friend—
And from now on I wish for you to refer to me as Horton.
[/quote]
What does this have to do with what Vroom stated? Are you a CEO of this company? You helped make over 46 billion dollars? Do you honestly believe that all CEO’s are wonderful faithful people with nothing but generosity on their minds? Why not simply respond to what he wrote directly?
[quote]Professor X wrote:
What does this have to do with what Vroom stated? Are you a CEO of this company? You helped make over 46 billion dollars? Do you honestly believe that all CEO’s are wonderful faithful people with nothing but generosity on their minds? Why not simply respond to what he wrote directly?[/quote]
I am not and was not the CEO of a company.
In a previous post I questioned vrooms assertion that a large amount of corporate CEO’s were idiots and people undeserving of their position. That somehow, by being assholes and padding resumes and the such they ascended the corporate ladder.
His response, as is so typical was to denegrate me and then say that if he thought I had some insight that he may put more emphasis on what I had to say.
I know his assumption was to blast me, and ‘put me in my place’ so I responded with my qualifications to answer questions regarding my position.
Just like your expertise allows you to give certain information and have it taken more serious. So does mine.
So once again, remove your lips from his ass and keep up with the thread. I said million, not billion. I qualified my response–PER HIS REQUEST–and then stated that greed is indeed involved, but for every corporate horror story you read in the paper there exists 100 good honest people. So please, go back to ignoring me. Try beating on someone you have a shot with–you are the statue here and I am the pigeon.
I’m afraid you are guilty of making assumptions again. You may need to reevaluate just who is actually but a who.
Your qualifications are not all that impressive.
I don’t intend to parade out my resume so I can look overly proud of myself also, but I will say that if your criteria is size of company, in terms of employees or sales, I’ve got you beat on both.
So, my insights into corporate America, according to your own criteria, should be as valid as yours.
I think you are twisting my words a bit. Is that what I said? I think someone else switched the subject to CEO’s, so I trotted out concerns about those that are caught committing illegal acts or leading their companies into unethical activities.
I’m afraid you are guilty of making assumptions again. You may need to reevaluate just who is actually but a who.
Your qualifications are not all that impressive.
I don’t intend to parade out my resume so I can look overly proud of myself also, but I will say that if your criteria is size of company, in terms of employees or sales, I’ve got you beat on both.
So, my insights into corporate America, according to your own criteria, should be as valid as yours.
Sorry chief.[/quote]
I an soooo shocked by this response.
I had no clue what was coming.
You can’t even understand my post.
That is my reponsibility, not my company who. you must not know as much as you think to ASSUME that a Fortune 300 company would be that small. My company registered sales of $7bn last year and is global. Please stop, you’re just embarrassing yourself now.
[quote]vroom wrote:
In a previous thread I questioned vrooms assertion that a large amount of corporate CEO’s were idiots and people undeserving of their position.
I think you are twisting my words a bit. Is that what I said? I think someone else switched the subject to CEO’s, so I trotted out concerns about those that are caught committing illegal acts or leading their companies into unethical activities.[/quote]
I plead guilty to beginning the correlation of Presidents and CEO’s, but I twisted not a word. Once I made the comparison, you, of course, responded with your negative spin on CEO’s because you had no Presidents to bash. Hence my response. No twisting here vroom. Although your response is once again typical.
Look, you are very very loose with your facts when you make claims concerning previous events. You make assertions about what I did or said, that are not correct.
I don’t know what phrase you would like to use, perhaps twisting makes it sound on purpose, and you don’t want me to imply that?
Howabout simple innaccuracy? Would you accept that? Feigning an attack my ass… you are attacking all over the place. The twisting comment wasn’t an attempt to highlight one of them.
Why don’t you try focusing on the topics of discussion, instead how you perceive my actions. I’ve already told others, whether or not you like my discussion style, I’m not about to change it for you. I’m also not here to win a popularity contest.
in reference to my post, all I’m saying is that it’s obvious that the smartest of the smart are NOT leading our country. This can be most simply seen by looking at the academic averages that have been presented by this thread.
Congratulations America, we have selected one of two possible C- students to lead our country into a war and what has also amounted to be a sad economy (yes, it’s gotten better than in the last few years, but it’s still not considered very good).
My heart goes out to all my friends and the troops who are over seas who are doing their job to rebuild and maintain control in foreign countries. But I find it a shame that their lives must be put on the line because of the decisions made by a group of not-necessarily-the-most-intelligent-group-of-people that this country has to offer.
This just goes to show that y’all need to elect ME president. I may not have a silver spoon in my mouth, but I can spell. Which, evidently, is about all you guys need to show that someone is better presidential material than GWB. I can spell really well. Vote for me 2008, and you will never suffer from someone using a double negative, you will never hear the word “nucular” ever again. It’s “nuclear”. Every president who is qualified to run this country knows this. A vote for lothario 2008 is a vote for proper grammar! And punctuation. And proper sentence structure. Honestly.
I mien it, guise, right me in on the balot. It’s L-O-T-H-O-R-I-O. Thank you for you’re sopport.
[quote]cap’nsalty wrote:
Joe Weider wrote:
cap’nsalty wrote:
I don’t see why this surprises anyone. If you have the connections and the money to become president, it doesn’t really matter what your grades are. You’ll go to a top college, and if you want to you can go to a top grad school after that. There is no incentive to do well.
kerry didn’t really get into a top grad school…and he had connections etc.
Umm…yea he did. He went to Boston college law school: average LSAT is 164, average GPA is 3.61 (3.7 is an A). (Harvard’s average LSAT is 171, average GPA is 3.84). Getting into law school is a whole lot tougher than getting into undergrad.
Getting Cs at Yale means he barely tried at all, if you do some of the homework and actually show up for tests you should be able to do better than this. If someone else with no connections got Cs at Yale they would have extreme difficulty getting into ANY ABA certified law school.
[/quote]
Sure. But he tried like hell to get into Harvard and Yale and couldn’t, even with the Kennedy clan putting in a good word or two.
Dude…I’ve been living in a border state my whole life.
I know more about Just For Kerry than anyone really should.
I’m not trying to argue with you or anything, just offer you the reasons behind what I say.
[quote]vroom wrote:
Joe, Joe, Joe. You know damned well that PMS is a women’s issue. You also know damned well accusing someone around here of having PMS is an insult.
Don’t try to backpedal your way out of it…
Own up to it. Be proud of your style of insulting me at every single opportunity you have, whether or not it is supposedly a joke at times.
Now, if you wouldn’t complain that I’m attacking you all the time, I’d simply strike back and attack you for it.
As it is, I’m reduced to simply pointing this out, because you, Sasquatch and Zeb are in a mode where you think it is interesting to the world to point out “my behavior” instead of discussing issues.
So be it.[/quote]
well what would you like to have?
PMS is not only a women’s issue, btw. Men have hormonal fluctuations on a monthly basis. Look it up.
