|
|
| Re: Voice of Authority? (313231) | |
 |
|
| Home > BusChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 17 of 24 |
||
|
| (315500) | |
Re: Voice of Authority? |
|
|
Posted by nostalgia on Mon Jul 4 10:26:17 2016, in response to Re: Voice of Authority?, posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Jul 4 01:03:35 2016. Never happened, Whiny Weinberg. Your writing it happened doesn't mean it happened. You're a pathological liar because you can't tell the truth. |
|
|
| (315501) | |
Re: Proof supplied but ignored |
|
|
Posted by nostalgia on Mon Jul 4 10:54:04 2016, in response to Re: Proof supplied but ignored, posted by Edwards! on Mon Jul 4 03:28:59 2016. This reminds of the Nazis using propaganda to manipulate a nation. |
|
|
| (315504) | |
Re: Voice of Authority? |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Mon Jul 4 12:10:34 2016, in response to Re: Voice of Authority?, posted by nostalgia on Mon Jul 4 10:06:53 2016. I hear you...BUT,since this is SOOO OT its not funny...why dont you take this over to where it belongs,so we can at least ENJOY the Topic headers for now? Believe me,I completely understand...but most of us,if not All of us come HERE to check out BUS DEVELOPMENT, News worty items or just shoot the shit ABOUT BUSES. I completely dig the trip..but lets not forget the reason Why we come here. To HAVE FUN talking about a hobby we love. 😀. |
|
|
| (315507) | |
Re: Voice of Authority? |
|
|
Posted by nostalgia on Mon Jul 4 12:32:43 2016, in response to Re: Voice of Authority?, posted by Edwards! on Mon Jul 4 12:10:34 2016. I agree but Whiny Weinberg will NEVER move to OT because he wants to continue terrorizing the list. |
|
|
| (315508) | |
Re: Waiting for proof |
|
|
Posted by fdtutf on Mon Jul 4 12:57:32 2016, in response to Re: Waiting for proof, posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jul 1 20:29:32 2016. Cars do not win when their travel time is slowed by 38 percent.If giving motorists their fair share of road space slows their trips that much -- and I do mean if, as I know better than to trust your figures -- then that has to be seen as an inherent defect of the automobile as a mode and not as any kind of unfairness. |
|
|
| (315509) | |
Re: Waiting for proof |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Mon Jul 4 13:53:41 2016, in response to Re: Waiting for proof, posted by BrooklynBus on Fri Jul 1 20:29:32 2016. Bus rider's do not win when their travel time is also slowed which is exactly what has happened with the exclusive bus lanes in effect during the AM peak between Furmanville and Metropolitan Avenue.Bus riders' travel time has slowed because of cars in the bus lane. As further proof of DOT's incompetence, they look at Google Maps and propose without any volumes regarding turning data, they propose banning 26 left turn movements. You have no proof of that. That is ass backwards planning. FIRST YOU COLLECT THE DATA AND THEN YOU MAKE THE PROPOSAL, not vice versa as DOT has done. Without a proposal, how do you know what data to collect? You make the proposal, you scope and collect data, and you refine the proposal based on the data collected (yes, including community outcry). That's precisely what DOT has done. |
|
|
| (315510) | |
Re: Proof supplied but ignored |
|
|
Posted by fdtutf on Mon Jul 4 15:38:14 2016, in response to Re: Proof supplied but ignored, posted by nostalgia on Mon Jul 4 10:54:04 2016. Would you care to elucidate that analogy? I'm not seeing it myself. |
|
|
| (315511) | |
Re: Are we still on? Well reef it up, you idiot! |
|
|
Posted by OCTD 2039 on Mon Jul 4 15:57:57 2016, in response to Re: Proof supplied but ignored, posted by TerrApin Station on Sun Jul 3 01:57:30 2016. Are we still on? Well bump it up, you idiot! |
|
|
| (315513) | |
Re: Proof supplied but ignored |
|
|
Posted by nostalgia on Mon Jul 4 16:15:58 2016, in response to Re: Proof supplied but ignored, posted by fdtutf on Mon Jul 4 15:38:14 2016. It's very simple. Whiny Weinberg changes what people write and then argues with them over what they didn't write. He has resorted to name calling and denigrating posters.As an example, he wrote that Gold made fun of people because of their occupations, which Gold didn't write.. Here's an example of the Nazis manipulating Germany. https://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10007657 Whiny Weinberg isn't interested in a honest discussion. All he cares about is winning. |
|
|
| (315516) | |
Re: Proof supplied but ignored |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Jul 4 17:54:55 2016, in response to Re: Proof supplied but ignored, posted by nostalgia on Mon Jul 4 16:15:58 2016. Only because you are too pathetically stupid to be able to understand. By dismissing TS as a "fired mail clerk," he is implying that mail clerks are beneath him. |
|
|
| (315518) | |
Re: Proof supplied but ignored |
|
|
Posted by nostalgia on Mon Jul 4 19:28:05 2016, in response to Re: Proof supplied but ignored, posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Jul 4 17:54:55 2016. WRONG DUMBO He's only writing about Whiny Weinberg who went even further and claimed Gold was writing about transit and blue collar workers.Did you ever pass the SAT because your reading comprehension is terrible? |
|
|
| (315523) | |
Re: Proof supplied but ignored |
|
|
Posted by TerrApin Station on Mon Jul 4 21:08:34 2016, in response to Re: Proof supplied but ignored, posted by nostalgia on Mon Jul 4 19:28:05 2016. Mail clerks are blue collar workers just like transit workers, you idiot. |
|
|
| (315524) | |
Re: Proof supplied but ignored |
|
|
Posted by nostalgia on Mon Jul 4 21:26:14 2016, in response to Re: Proof supplied but ignored, posted by TerrApin Station on Mon Jul 4 21:08:34 2016. YOU were the focus of Gold's statement. You just manipulated what he wrote to make it look like he was writing about all blue collar workers.Caught you again, Goebbels. |
|
|
| (315525) | |
Re: Proof supplied but ignored |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Jul 4 21:40:43 2016, in response to Re: Proof supplied but ignored, posted by nostalgia on Mon Jul 4 21:26:14 2016. YOU were the focus of Gold's statement. You just manipulated what he wrote to make it look like he was writing about all blue collar workers.Only because you are too pathetically stupid to be able to understand. By dismissing TS as a "fired mail clerk," he is implying that mail clerks are beneath him. |
|
|
| (315526) | |
Re: Proof supplied but ignored |
|
|
Posted by nostalgia on Mon Jul 4 21:44:59 2016, in response to Re: Proof supplied but ignored, posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Jul 4 21:40:43 2016. Goebbels, I don't believe that for a second. He was referring to YOU and only YOU.Caught you again lying about what somebody wrote. |
|
|
| (315527) | |
Re: Proof supplied but ignored |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Jul 4 21:47:14 2016, in response to Re: Proof supplied but ignored, posted by nostalgia on Mon Jul 4 21:44:59 2016. You're really stupid. There's really no hope for you. |
|
|
| (315528) | |
Re: Proof supplied but ignored |
|
|
Posted by nostalgia on Mon Jul 4 22:33:59 2016, in response to Re: Proof supplied but ignored, posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Jul 4 21:47:14 2016. Hey Goebbels! You're running out of original things to write. You must be getting a headache.I guess if I was a mail clerk, you wouldn't be making fun of me. LOL |
|
|
| (315529) | |
Re: Proof supplied but ignored |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Mon Jul 4 22:39:43 2016, in response to Re: Proof supplied but ignored, posted by nostalgia on Mon Jul 4 21:44:59 2016. He was referring to YOU and only YOU.If the statement was meant to be derogatory, please explain how it shouldn't be taken as derogatory to all mail clerks. |
|
|
| (315530) | |
Re: Proof supplied but ignored |
|
|
Posted by nostalgia on Mon Jul 4 22:45:23 2016, in response to Re: Proof supplied but ignored, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Mon Jul 4 22:39:43 2016. If you read the ORIGINAL message from Gold, he called Whiny Weinberg an immature mail boy. Gold's message was directed only to Whiny Weinberg, who I now call Goebbels.Gold NEVER extended his message beyond Goebbels. |
|
|
| (315531) | |
Re: Proof supplied but ignored |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Mon Jul 4 22:50:43 2016, in response to Re: Proof supplied but ignored, posted by nostalgia on Mon Jul 4 22:45:23 2016. If you read the ORIGINAL message from Gold, he called Whiny Weinberg an immature mail boy.I did read the original, which just says "mail boy" with no reference to maturity. |
|
|
| (315532) | |
Re: Proof supplied but ignored |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Jul 4 22:52:36 2016, in response to Re: Proof supplied but ignored, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Mon Jul 4 22:50:43 2016. own3d |
|
|
| (315533) | |
Re: Proof supplied but ignored |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Jul 4 22:52:57 2016, in response to Re: Proof supplied but ignored, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Mon Jul 4 22:39:43 2016. own3d |
|
|
| (315534) | |
Re: Proof supplied but ignored |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Jul 4 22:53:45 2016, in response to Re: Proof supplied but ignored, posted by nostalgia on Mon Jul 4 22:33:59 2016. Hey Goebbels! You're running out of original things to write. You must be getting a headache.Nope. I guess if I was a mail clerk, you wouldn't be making fun of me. LOLI wouldn't be making fun of you for being a mail clerk. |
|
|
| (315535) | |
Re: Proof supplied but ignored |
|
|
Posted by gOld_12th on Mon Jul 4 23:01:57 2016, in response to Re: Proof supplied but ignored, posted by TerrApin Station on Fri Jul 1 19:48:53 2016. Bullshit. |
|
|
| (315536) | |
Re: Proof supplied but ignored |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Jul 4 23:07:37 2016, in response to Re: Proof supplied but ignored, posted by gOld_12th on Mon Jul 4 23:01:57 2016. Not bullshit, you blue collar worker hater. |
|
|
| (315537) | |
Re: Proof supplied but ignored |
|
|
Posted by nostalgia on Mon Jul 4 23:12:50 2016, in response to Re: Proof supplied but ignored, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Mon Jul 4 22:50:43 2016. Now it's YOUR turn to explain how a reference to Whiny Weinberg refers to every mail boy. |
|
|
| (315538) | |
Re: Proof supplied but ignored |
|
|
Posted by nostalgia on Mon Jul 4 23:15:30 2016, in response to Re: Proof supplied but ignored, posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Jul 4 22:53:45 2016. Goebbels I haven't much originality recently. |
|
|
| (315539) | |
Re: Proof supplied but ignored |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Mon Jul 4 23:21:01 2016, in response to Re: Proof supplied but ignored, posted by nostalgia on Mon Jul 4 23:12:50 2016. Now it's YOUR turn to explain how a reference to Whiny Weinberg refers to every mail boy.OK, since the obvious appears to be beyond your comprehension. Trying to insult someone by calling them "mail boy" insults all mail boys. Kind of like calling someone "Jew" as a pejorative insults all Jews. |
|
|
| (315540) | |
Re: Proof supplied but ignored |
|
|
Posted by nostalgia on Mon Jul 4 23:32:37 2016, in response to Re: Proof supplied but ignored, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Mon Jul 4 23:21:01 2016. I don't agree with that analysis. |
|
|
| (315541) | |
Re: Proof supplied but ignored |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Jul 4 23:40:25 2016, in response to Re: Proof supplied but ignored, posted by nostalgia on Mon Jul 4 23:32:37 2016. We already know you don't. It's the same analysis that at least three different people have tried to explain to you to no avail. It's the only analysis there is. There's no other way to explain it. When you attack someone by making fun of some aspect of them, you are saying that that aspect is a negative aspect. So by making fun of someone because they are a mail worker, you are saying that being a mail worker is something to make fun of. This is basic stuff. |
|
|
| (315542) | |
Re: Proof supplied but ignored |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Jul 4 23:40:53 2016, in response to Re: Proof supplied but ignored, posted by nostalgia on Mon Jul 4 23:15:30 2016. Try again, this time in English? |
|
|
| (315543) | |
Re: Proof supplied but ignored |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Jul 4 23:41:41 2016, in response to Re: Proof supplied but ignored, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Mon Jul 4 23:21:01 2016. Great post. G-d, Nostalgia is stupid. |
|
|
| (315544) | |
Re: Proof supplied but ignored |
|
|
Posted by Cornell Park on Mon Jul 4 23:47:33 2016, in response to Re: Proof supplied but ignored, posted by nostalgia on Mon Jul 4 23:32:37 2016. I agree with RIPTA42. |
|
|
| (315545) | |
Re: Proof supplied but ignored |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Jul 4 23:56:09 2016, in response to Re: Proof supplied but ignored, posted by nostalgia on Mon Jul 4 21:26:14 2016. You probably didn't even know who Goebbels was until SelkirkTMO told you about him. |
|
|
| (315546) | |
Re: Proof supplied but ignored |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Jul 4 23:57:45 2016, in response to Re: Proof supplied but ignored, posted by Cornell Park on Mon Jul 4 23:47:33 2016. Thank you for your support. |
|
|
| (315547) | |
Re: Proof supplied but ignored |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Jul 4 23:59:35 2016, in response to Re: Proof supplied but ignored, posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Jul 4 23:56:09 2016. Owned!You're likely correct about that. |
|
|
| (315548) | |
Re: Proof supplied but ignored |
|
|
Posted by gOld_12th on Tue Jul 5 00:00:40 2016, in response to Re: Proof supplied but ignored, posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Jul 4 23:07:37 2016. you bullshit |
|
|
| (315549) | |
Re: Proof supplied but ignored |
|
|
Posted by nostalgia on Tue Jul 5 00:23:53 2016, in response to Re: Proof supplied but ignored, posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Jul 4 23:57:45 2016. Goebbels, you're really hard up for support if you need him. |
|
|
| (315550) | |
Re: Proof supplied but ignored |
|
|
Posted by nostalgia on Tue Jul 5 00:24:18 2016, in response to Re: Proof supplied but ignored, posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Jul 4 23:40:53 2016. Goebbels: don't you speak German? |
|
|
| (315551) | |
Re: Proof supplied but ignored |
|
|
Posted by nostalgia on Tue Jul 5 00:26:04 2016, in response to Re: Proof supplied but ignored, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Mon Jul 4 23:21:01 2016. It's so amusing how much I worked you up and played you like a fiddle.I knew I could get to you. |
|
|
| (315552) | |
Re: Proof supplied but ignored |
|
|
Posted by nostalgia on Tue Jul 5 00:28:20 2016, in response to Re: Proof supplied but ignored, posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Jul 4 23:59:35 2016. You and Pig are idiots. I knew about Goebbels when I learned world history in high school. I wonder what other historical personages you remind me of. Goebbels is enough for now. |
|
|
| (315553) | |
Re: Proof supplied but ignored |
|
|
Posted by Cornell Park on Tue Jul 5 00:41:32 2016, in response to Re: Proof supplied but ignored, posted by nostalgia on Tue Jul 5 00:23:53 2016. He doesn't need my support. Then on the other hand, there is you, and there isn't a chance. |
|
|
| (315554) | |
Re: Proof supplied but ignored |
|
|
Posted by Cornell Park on Tue Jul 5 00:45:20 2016, in response to Re: Proof supplied but ignored, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Mon Jul 4 23:21:01 2016. Explain it to him in crayon, that might work. |
|
|
| (315556) | |
Re: Proof supplied but ignored |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Jul 5 01:01:35 2016, in response to Re: Proof supplied but ignored, posted by nostalgia on Tue Jul 5 00:28:20 2016. And yet you never once mentioned Goebbels before SelkirkTMO did. And your persistent references to him don't even make any sense. You just think it makes you sound informed. It's comical. |
|
|
| (315557) | |
Re: Again, are we still on? Well reef it up, you idiot!! |
|
|
Posted by OCTD 2039 on Tue Jul 5 01:50:45 2016, in response to Re: Proof supplied but ignored, posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Jul 4 23:07:37 2016. Are we still on? Well reef it up, you idiot! |
|
|
| (315558) | |
Re: Proof supplied but ignored |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Tue Jul 5 02:02:02 2016, in response to Re: Proof supplied but ignored, posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Jul 4 23:40:25 2016. hmmm.In the same,manner you've attacked Jay Zee...and/or,anyone,EVERYONE? I had you pegged from day ONE for being an ASSHOLE FIRST CLASS,MASCOTE. NOW,Everyone else,knows it,too! Even your Rescue Ranger pals. 😕☕🚬📀. |
|
|
| (315559) | |
Re: Proof supplied but ignored |
|
|
Posted by TerrApin Station on Tue Jul 5 07:04:17 2016, in response to Re: Proof supplied but ignored, posted by Edwards! on Tue Jul 5 02:02:02 2016. Nope. I don't attack people for no reason. |
|
|
| (315560) | |
Re: Proof supplied but ignored |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Tue Jul 5 07:09:00 2016, in response to Re: Proof supplied but ignored, posted by TerrApin Station on Tue Jul 5 07:04:17 2016. 😆😆😆😆😆Don't make me laugh this hard so early in the morning! 😆😆😆😆😆 |
|
|
| (315562) | |
Re: Proof supplied but ignored |
|
|
Posted by TerrApin Station on Tue Jul 5 08:09:23 2016, in response to Re: Proof supplied but ignored, posted by JayZeeBMT on Tue Jul 5 07:09:00 2016. Proff? |
|
|
| (315563) | |
Re: Proof supplied but ignored |
|
|
Posted by fdtutf on Tue Jul 5 08:55:13 2016, in response to Re: Proof supplied but ignored, posted by Cornell Park on Tue Jul 5 00:45:20 2016. I wouldn't count on it. |
|
|
|
Page 17 of 24 |
||