Oh, c'mon Judy. You know you love me, just admit it! No use denying it.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jst...@...> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote:
> <snip>
> > What I like is how *angry* she gets at the end
> > of each week, as she realizes that she has only
> > a few more posts to make, and tries to pack as
> > much venom into each post as humanly possible.
> >
> > It almost makes them worth skimming through to
> > pick out "keywords" that I can use to push her
> > buttons, like I did yesterday with "self-evident."
> > I have no idea how she used that term, and don't
> > care. I don't care about *anything* she ever says.
> > I just knew it would piss her off and get her to
> > waste another post or two if I riffed on a term
> > she had used, so I did. :-)
>
> Oh, Barry. That's just sad. Nobody believes it;
> you've been making way too many mistakes lately,
> and not only in your posts to me.
>
> When you get agitated and angry because somebody
> disagrees with you (or corrects one of your
> mistakes), you stop being able to think straight.
> We've all seen it, over and over. Your "nefarious
> plot" notion, simple arithmetic, the Bible verses,
> and now this, just in the past few days.
>
> It's only going to get worse if you don't get some
> help.
>
> <snip>
> > Bottom line this week is the same as every week so
> > far this year -- she pissed away all but a handful
> > of her posts "defending herself" against descrip-
> > tions of how she thinks, and how she consistently
> > behaves.
>
> Here's another one. You have it exactly backwards.
>
> And in that handful of posts I wasn't "defending
> myself" in any case, but because in your haste
> to "pile on" and rag on me, you mistakenly attributed
> to me a bunch of things I never said or did.
>
> (Sound familiar? Maybe not; your failing memory is
> part of the problem. You can't even remember what
> *you* said a lot of the time, not to mention what
> others have said.)
>
> > The *only* question is who
> > she'll aim the last two venom-volleys at, and who
> > gets the "Gotta get the 'last word' in" last post.
> >
> > I'm betting this week that it'll be Curtis, for
> > so wisely blowing off her attempt to suck him back
> > into arguing with her in her "Finishing up" post.
>
> Well, I'm sure Curtis appreciates your attempt to
> protect him, but here again you screwed up. I never
> expected Curtis to respond to that post, for obvious
> reasons. That's why I titled it "Finishing up with
> Curtis," don'cha know. *He* got that; why did you
> miss it? You even quote the title.
>
> It won't be Curtis unless he starts something new
> with me before you try another shot. I think that's
> pretty unlikely at this point.
>
> > I'll probably be relegated to being the subject of
> > the next-to-last post.
>
> Actually, as I said, I was hoping you'd be the
> subject of both. You've got one more to go. Try to
> make it a *good* one; try to calm down and take
> some time with it, OK? When you get really enraged,
> you tend to lose control of your posting bowels and
> expel a pile of sloppy turds, like Geeze. You can do
> better. I'll wait to respond until you can come up
> with something with some punch to it (or until you
> make another big mistake).
>
> But you don't want to wait too long, just in case
> somebody else posts something interesting I want to
> comment on.
>
> > "That'll teach him," she'll
> > be thinking, as she exits, possibly mouthing "I win"
> > under her breath as the door hits her in the ass. :-)
>
> No, what I'll be saying to myself between belly laughs
> is, "Loser."
>
