[MD] Speed of Lighting, Roar of thunder...

[david buchanan]

Krimel said to dmb:
I have tried to take what you have said and respond to the substance of your remarks as near as I can make it out. I am never sure whether I am talking down to you or over your head and responses like this one do little to clarify the mystery. ... If you see no substance in any of the styles I have attempted, I am at a loss.

dmb replies:
You've tried to respond to the SUBSTANCE of my remarks as near as you can make them out? So, you're saying that you sincerely and actually think I am proposing 1) Life without concepts 2) having everyone convert to Buddhism 3) atoms are decision makers and 4) the Romantic/Classic split is an invitation to spend your life singing Kumbaya.
That's your best effort to respond to the substance of my remarks? Sorry, but I find that impossible to believe. There is no way you could be that stupid. Nobody could be that stupid. 
Did you see the debate on the Daily Show wherein one guy insisted the anchors on Fox were being stupid about the imam behind the Islamic cultural center in lower Manhattan? The other guy insisted they were not stupid, but evil. The guy making a case for stupidity said they had to be stupid because if they weren't then they are just plain evil. The guy making the case for evil said they had to be evil because if they weren't then they are just plain stupid. It was funny because it's so true. Turns out the money behind the so-called mosque at ground zero comes from a Saudi prince who also owns a substantial chunk of Fox's parent corporation. Rupert Murdoch's business partner is being demonized on FOX news as a financier of terrorism. Former Bush administration officials who sat right next to him on the plane with the imam as they traveled around together doing diplomacy for Bush are now going on FOX news to paint their former pal as a monster. As I see it, the former Bushies know better and they are just being evil liars but the "news" anchors on FOX really are quite stupid. During the daily show bit, for example, they showed tape of a blonde FOX complaining that somebody had called her an "ignoramus", the meaning of which she did not know. So she looked it up and read the definition to the TV audience. Then she mocked the person who called her an ignoramus for being wrong because, she figured, she was not a lawyer. Somehow, reading the definition out loud gave her the idea that an "ignoramus" is a certain kind of lawyer. 

Imagine that. A woman so ignorant that she doesn't even know what "ignoramus" means and even when she looks it up, she still gets it wrong. And this woman is paid a six-figure salary to inform a national audience! Her attempt to refute the charge only proved the charge. 

I'm not saying you're a blonde news anchor but there are just two plausible explanations for your behavior.