Re: Honeyman Skater crashes in Az.
 

I don't hate him because his baby's mama says he beat her up when 6 months pregnant with thier child and she won't let him see the kid, which almost always means that he ain't paying her any child support.
I don't hate him because he's known as a crappy driver and everyone on his local lake has gone on record saying they all saw it coming and are surprized no one got killed this time.
(if it happens again and someone does die, he will undoubtedly get locked up for negligence, but who will be more negligent, him or the cops that let him continue more then once notified of his inability to saftely operate a boat?)
I hate that he aired all his dirty laundry like the worst form of self disrespecting trailer trash imaginable, with not a spec of humility but rather basked in the pitiful and monumental attenion it brought him rather then suck up this near universal disdain and learn that the comunity disapproves of his actions and he should reform, he boastfully threatens to return and continue to act like an edangering fool.

I say the penalty for such ego driven disrespect of community values should be death by public stoning, for the good of all concerned

Re: Honeyman Skater crashes in Az.
 

Phantom,

Wow, I had no idea you had that in you. My bad. Very impressive! If I ever have a debate, I'm bringing you with me! :D :D :D

Now, go get ready for your trip!!! :drink:

Re: Honeyman Skater crashes in Az.
 

Damn Nort, I've had just about enough of your rhetoric!

The topic I want to cover in this letter is big and complex, and I don't have much in the way of scientific data on it. Nor do I have a lot of hard statistics, just a number of general observations and a good bit of specific anecdotal material. There are a number of reasons Nort isn't telling us as to why he wants to work hand-in-glove with stuck-up, libidinous ivory-tower academics. In this letter, I will expose those reasons one-by-one, on the principle that if he doesn't realize that it's generally considered bad style to burn our fair cities to the ground, then he should read one of the many self-help books on the subject. I recommend he buy one with big print and lots of pictures. Maybe then, Nort will grasp the concept that I am not concerned with rumors or hearsay about him. I am interested only in ascertained facts attested by published documents, and in these primarily as an illustration that for the nonce, Nort is content to generate alienation and withdrawal. But by the end of the decade, he will twist the history, sociology, and anthropology disseminated by our mass media and in our children's textbooks. Not to be rude or anything, but Nort's eccentricity is surpassed only by his vanity. And his vanity is surpassed only by his empty theorizing. (Remember his theory that his opinions represent the opinions of the majority -- or even a plurality?) I realize that interventionism is a tremendous problem in our society, but does it constantly have to be thrown in our faces? To ask that question another way, what provoked Nort to palliate and excuse the atrocities of his satraps? The most appealing theory has to do with the way that he dreams of a time when he'll be free to perpetuate the myth that genocide, slavery, racism, and the systematic oppression, degradation, and exploitation of most of the world's people are all absolutely justified. That's the way he's planned it, and that's the way it'll happen -- not may happen, but will happen -- if we don't interfere, if we don't halt the adulation heaped upon phlegmatic misfits.

It should be clear by this point that one of the goals of pessimism is to render meaningless the words "best" and "worst". Nort admires that philosophy because, by annihilating human perceptions of quality, Nort's own mediocrity can flourish. The question that's on everyone's mind these days is, "To what lengths will he go to give voice, in a totally emotional and non-rational way, to his deep-rooted love of collectivism?" A complete answer to that question would take more space than I can afford, so I'll have to give you a simplified answer. For starters, he just reported that an open party with unlimited access to alcohol can't possibly outgrow the host's ability to manage the crowd. Do you think that that's merely sloppy reporting on Nort's part? I don't. I think that it's a deliberate attempt to take rights away from individuals on the basis of prejudice, myth, irrational belief, inaccurate information, and outright falsehood. Call me old-fashioned, but it's because of Nort's willingness to prevaricate and equivocate that his sentiments are a gangrenous putrefaction that serves only to commit senseless acts of violence against anyone daring to challenge Nort's obnoxious intimations. I know you're wondering why I just wrote that. I'll explain shortly, but first, I should state that if Nort doesn't like it here, then perhaps he should go elsewhere.

There are two kinds of people in this world: decent, honest folks like you and me and the most flippant dingbats I've ever seen like Nort. I want my life to count. I want to be part of something significant and lasting. I want to exemplify the principles of honor, duty, loyalty, and courage. I conclude this letter with an appropriate quote: "Some of the things Nort says and some of the things he stands for are so mad, it hurts to think about them." I believe we all know who said that, don't we?

Re: Honeyman Skater crashes in Az.
 

I have two orders of business regarding Leland Honeyman.

Let me begin by saying that Leland says that everyone would be a lot safer if he were to monitor all of our personal communications and financial transactions -- even our library records. Why on Earth does Leland need to monitor our library records? To turn that question around, do Leland's precepts appear reasonable to anyone other than stolid, unsympathetic savages? The answer is not obvious, because I do not appreciate being labeled. No one does. Nevertheless, Leland deeply believes that quislingism is a noble goal. Meanwhile, back on Earth, the truth is very simple: Leland is so incredibly puerile that he really ought to change his name to "Puerile McPuerile, the Puerile King of the Puerile". Now that that's cleared up, I'll continue with what I was saying before, that his maudlin preoccupation with Comstockism, usually sicklied over with such nonsense words as "dendrochronological", would make sense if a person's honor were determined strictly by his or her ability to propound ideas that are widely perceived as representing outright priggism. As that's not the case, we can conclude only that it has long been obvious to attentive observers that he uses people and destroys lives without compunction. But did you know that I know some mephitic bludgers who contend they once overheard Leland say, "I want to contravene decency sooner or later"? Leland doesn't want you to know that because he thinks it's good that his arguments glorify the worst types of antisocial, devious boors there are. It is difficult to know how to respond to such monumentally misplaced values, but let's try this: I'm at loggerheads with him on at least one important issue. Namely, Leland argues that he can scare us by using big words like "saccharomucilaginous". I take the opposite position, that Leland wants to be the one who determines what information we have access to. Yet he is also a big proponent of a particularly impertinent form of ruffianism. Do you see something wrong with that picture? What I see is that I feel that Leland has insulted everyone with even the slightest moral commitment. He obviously has none, or he wouldn't support international crime while purporting to oppose it. Leland claims that his stupid band is a benign and charitable agency. This is a very high-handed and unconstructive view and moreover, is wrong in many ways. I want to keep this brief: My long-term goal is to reinforce what is best in people. Unfortunately, much remains to be done. As you may have noticed, one could truthfully say that it is widely known and beyond dispute that anyone who thinks that Leland knows 100% of everything 100% of the time is not living in the real world. But saying that would miss the real point, which is that his apostles maintain that he has answers to everything. I say to them, "Prove it" -- not that they'll be able to, of course, but because I am reminded of the quote, "Ignorance of the law does not excuse him from the consequences of violating it." This comment is not as wanton as it seems because I normally prefer to listen than to speak. I would, however, like to remind Leland that if his plan to commit all sorts of mortal sins -- not to mention an uncountable number of venial ones -- is to be discouraged then the wisest course of action is to call for a return to the values that made this country great. Before we start down that road I ought to remind you that I admit I have a tendency to become a bit insensitive whenever I rebuke him for trying to topple society. While I am desirous of mending this tiny personality flaw, if the human race is to survive on this planet, we will have to disentangle people from the snares set by Leland and his advocates. Let's be honest here: I recently received some mail in which the writer stated, "Many of Leland's dissertations have been criticized for being slanted in favor of a particular stance." I included that quote not because it is exceptional in any way, but rather, because it is typical of much of the mail I receive. I included it to show you that I'm not the only one who thinks that Leland possesses no significant intellectual skills whatsoever and has no interest in erudition. Heck, he can't even spell or define "erudition", much less achieve it.

I mean, really. Griping about Leland will not make him stop trying to saddle the economy with crippling debt. But even if it did, he would just find some other way to shift blame from those who benefit from oppression to those who suffer from it. Almost every day, he outreaches himself in setting new records for arrogance, deceit, and greed. It's clearly breathtaking to watch him. That reminds me: Leland gives new meaning to the word "tasteless". That's clear. But Leland's perspective is that he can convince criminals to fill out an application form before committing a crime. My perspective, in contrast, is that I have a dream, a mission, a set path that I would like to travel down. Specifically, my goal is to keep the faith. Of course, because of his obsession with metagrobolism, I have a dream that my children will be able to live in a world filled with open spaces and beautiful wilderness -- not in a dark, politically incorrect world run by gruesome spongers.

It is common knowledge that I've known some segregationists who were impressively contemptuous. However, Leland is uncontrollable, and that trumps contemptuous every time. He has for a long time been arguing that he is a martyr for freedom and a victim of denominationalism. Had he instead been arguing that scores of people, just like you, have finally decided that they've had enough of his wisecracks, I might cede him his point. As it stands, the leap of faith required to bridge the logical gap in Leland's arguments is simply too terrifying for me to contemplate. What I do often contemplate, however, is how I want to halt the destructive process that is carrying our civilization toward extinction. I want to do this not because I need to tack another line onto my résumé, but because what we're involved in with him is not a game. It's the most serious possible business, and every serious person -- every person with any shred of a sense of responsibility -- must concern himself with it. A final word: I got off on a tangent.

Re: Honeyman Skater crashes in Az.
 

Sorry, but at this point I just couldn't resist :D

And since everyone seems so pedantic today. Where is Pudar when you need an editor?

Re: Honeyman Skater crashes in Az.
 

Puder

Re: Honeyman Skater crashes in Az.
 

Oh yeah........ :D :D :D :D :D :evilb: :evilb: :drink:

Re: Honeyman Skater crashes in Az.
 

You guys are not even taking time to sharpen the ax. You are just burying it! :evilb:

I don't know this guy from Adam but I do not see any accolades being thrown his way (maybe not too many life preservers in the future as well). :eek:

There has only been one person with a NEAR kind word and that has been Buggyman. Do you think this guy is an exterminator? :rolleyes:

Re: Honeyman Skater crashes in Az.
 

no, i'm a corvette tech for GM, obviously not a English teacher,
i did'nt know there was going to be a test.
i got the name from building LS1 sand rails,

Re: Honeyman Skater crashes in Az.
 

Yes but can we say Honeyman truly "exists"?