Deep Politics Forum

ACK!

Phil Dragoo Wrote:I sometimes think Charles and Seamus do endless variations on the Jack Nicholson "can't we all just get along" scene in Mars Attacks

Yup - genius.

Charles and Seamus both love a scrap.

And scrap they will.

Here are the Marquess of Queensberry rules:

Quote: To be a fair stand-up boxing match in a 24-foot ring, or as near that size as practicable.
No wrestling or hugging (clinching) allowed.
The rounds to be of three minutes duration, and one minute's time between rounds.
If either man falls through weakness or otherwise, he must get up unassisted, 10 seconds to be allowed him to do so, the other man meanwhile to return to his corner, and when the fallen man is on his legs the round is to be resumed and continued until the three minutes have expired. If one man fails to come to the scratch in the 10 seconds allowed, it shall be in the power of the referee to give his award in favour of the other man.
A man hanging on the ropes in a helpless state, with his toes off the ground, shall be considered down.
No seconds or any other person to be allowed in the ring during the rounds.
Should the contest be stopped by any unavoidable interference, the referee to name the time and place as soon as possible for finishing the contest; so that the match must be won and lost, unless the backers of both men agree to draw the stakes.
The gloves to be fair-sized boxing gloves of the best quality and new.
Should a glove burst, or come off, it must be replaced to the referee's satisfaction.
A man on one knee is considered down and if struck is entitled to the stakes.
That no shoes or boots with spikes or springs be allowed. [6]
The contest in all other respects to be governed by revised London Prize Ring Rules.

There is zero chance they will ever comply, or even want to comply, with said Marquess.

So scrap on like an outtake from Fight Club.

Maybe the odd nugget of truth will emerge, like blood streaming from a busted nose or a tooth flying from a battered gum.....

Then there's the story of the boxer who is being pummeled by his opponent, round after round after round. And all the while, his corner men are assuring him that he's doing just fine.

Finally, at the end of the next-to-last round, his trainer says, "He ain't layin' a glove on ya, champ!"

And the boxer wearily responds, "Then keep an eye on the referee, because somebody is kickin' the shit outta me!"

Some of his arguments come unbuttoned easily... or do I mean buttoned up? It's a load of bullshirt anyway.

The spokesman for a generation.

Look at all those nuts.

Too easy.

Tssk.

The "thrust" of it all, Seamus, is irrelevant, IMO. That you (and no one else) supposedly spotted "it" (whatever "it" might be) before anyone else did is equally of no value
as much as it is not even true. However, that Fetzer has "come apart at the seams (not Seamus)" is evident to all, except perhaps Don Jeffries. I can tell that David Healey
tends to defend his friend beyond time to let him go, in my view--as I once did--but for all the right reasons.

I find the "Seamus Outs Fetzer" theme to many of your posts offensive, counterproductive, juvenile, without merit. It's the spirit in which they were writ, rather than the
content, that is most disturbing.

I don't believe in kicking a man who is already down. I don't believe in throwing the first punch unless it is certain that otherwise one will be thrown at me. I don't believe in
crossing the road to pick a fight with an adversary who is walking on the other side of the street. I find the "touchdown type" dance at the end of a UFC match barbarically
immature. I hate cage fighting.

John Mooney Wrote:Some of his arguments come unbuttoned easily... or do I mean buttoned up? It's a load of bullshirt anyway.

The spokesman for a generation.

Look at all those nuts.

Too easy.

Tssk.

I need a little help understanding this post. nail:

Greg Burnham Wrote:The "thrust" of it all, Seamus, is irrelevant, IMO. That you (and no one else) supposedly spotted "it" (whatever "it" might be) before anyone else did is equally of no value
as much as it is not even true. However, that Fetzer has "come apart at the seams (not Seamus)" is evident to all, except perhaps Don Jeffries. I can tell that David Healey
tends to defend his friend beyond time to let him go, in my view--as I once did--but for all the right reasons.

I find the "Seamus Outs Fetzer" theme to many of your posts offensive, counterproductive, juvenile, without merit. It's the spirit in which they were writ, rather than the
content, that is most disturbing.

I don't believe in kicking a man who is already down. I don't believe in throwing the first punch unless it is certain that otherwise one will be thrown at me. I don't believe in
crossing the road to pick a fight with an adversary who is walking on the other side of the street. I find the "touchdown type" dance at the end of a UFC match barbarically
immature. I hate cage fighting.

Quite often we choose anger when disapointment is our best suited response. Just my opinion. :nosmilie:

LR Trotter Wrote:

Greg Burnham Wrote:The "thrust" of it all, Seamus, is irrelevant, IMO. That you (and no one else) supposedly spotted "it" (whatever "it" might be) before anyone else did is equally of no value
as much as it is not even true. However, that Fetzer has "come apart at the seams (not Seamus)" is evident to all, except perhaps Don Jeffries. I can tell that David Healey
tends to defend his friend beyond time to let him go, in my view--as I once did--but for all the right reasons.

I find the "Seamus Outs Fetzer" theme to many of your posts offensive, counterproductive, juvenile, without merit. It's the spirit in which they were writ, rather than the
content, that is most disturbing.

I don't believe in kicking a man who is already down. I don't believe in throwing the first punch unless it is certain that otherwise one will be thrown at me. I don't believe in
crossing the road to pick a fight with an adversary who is walking on the other side of the street. I find the "touchdown type" dance at the end of a UFC match barbarically
immature. I hate cage fighting.

Quite often we choose anger when disapointment is our best suited response. Just my opinion. :nosmilie:

It's not his "anger" that I find disturbing. Quite the contrary. It's the glee.

LR Trotter Wrote:

John Mooney Wrote:Some of his arguments come unbuttoned easily... or do I mean buttoned up? It's a load of bullshirt anyway.

The spokesman for a generation.

Look at all those nuts.

Too easy.

Tssk.

I need a little help understanding this post. nail:

He is off on one elsewhere.

Actually he's off on the same one. Shirtly he can't be serious.

Who the media gonna call on 22nd November... that's right.

Does that help?

Point well taken, Mr Burnham.
:cleanears: