This is The Infamous Ignatz's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following The Infamous Ignatz's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
The Infamous Ignatz
Recent Activity
The Maude Squad is a problem for the Dem's in exactly the opposite way it seems. The Dem's biggest problem is their mainstream is now far, far left. These four cretinish bimbos make the mainstream nutters think they're normal. Vanquishing the Squat and thinking loonies like Warren and Harris have appeal to the mainstream is a bigger problem than keeping the half pint harpies squawking on the sidelines, although neither is optimal. A conundrum or dilemma.
Toggle Commented 3 hours ago on Bracing For 2020 at JustOneMinute
--Teenage girls are just as good with numbers as boys-- --Literally zero data for this.-- OK, but you're a girl and zero is a number so...
--I hope I have not been too forward or intrusive.-- Not at all MR. I'm an open book and can always use some good advice, particularly considering my track record lately. And so to bed, to sleep, perchance to be served with a summons. :)
You just covered Ignatz's categories of women single women over 40, jimmy. 1.Never married; for a very good reason, cuz they're crazy as a betsy bug. 2.Divorced; wounded, wary basket cases. 3.Widows; least damaged but scarce as hen's teeth in the age range I'm interested in.
--If you need us we'll all show up as character witnesses.-- That's not the problem. Because I'm a fixer [as anyone can see by my retarded attempts at intervention around here] and The Mayor of Simpleton, I may need a 2x4 to my head if she comes back in six months and say she'd like to try again.
She's not going to get a restraining order because if I got one against her it would likely lead to some difficult employment circumstances for her because of where she works.
Jesus H... Just stopping by for a lonely hearts club update and wondering whether there are any sane single women over 40. After the gal I was going to marry had broken up with me for no apparent reason last summer, I brilliantly decided I'd give her a few months off and then court her the old fashioned way, via romantic letters and the occasional poem starting last November. Well, she didn't respond but I did invite her to tell me to take a hike if the attention was unwanted so I took her non response as slightly hopeful. Back in February and March after I'd written her six or seven times she came back to church a few times and eventually came over and sat down next to me and sweetly said "hi" and asked how I was. I was of course encouraged and so kept at it. She didn't come back to church for some time but she misses it for months at a time because of her work schedule anyway. So I figure what gal can resist flowers, so I sent her a half dozen yellow roses about three weeks ago along with a note. I waited a couple of weeks and sent her a bouquet of regular old flowers last week along with a note that concluded that I would love to keep sending her flowers but that I'd rather deliver them myself and if we were seeing each other she'd learn I'm the kinda guy who would never stop bringing her flowers. My point was if we were seeing each other I could deliver them myself but I didn't word it too well so she misconstrued it, and did so in a fairly extreme way. I'm sitting in church yesterday when my phone vibrates and I take it out to see I have a text from her. I swipe and see many, many GUS type SENTENCES. I put it back figuring it can't be too good, but can't resist and so read the thing. I won't quote the whole thing but the worst part was where she told me if I were to show up at her house she "would take that as an aggressive act toward her life and personal safety and you will be risking your own life. I WILL PROTECT MYSELF AT ALL COSTS." To top it off she called our pastor that evening and he wanted to talk to me this morning, so I did. Fortunately I go to a men's bible study he leads so he has known the story from before we even met up til now, knows I'm not a lunatic and knows my intentions were honorable. She didn't mention the text she had sent me, so I was a little surprised when he told me she had told him she had nothing against me and was comfortable coming over and saying hi to me. He asked her if I presented any problem to her going to church and she said "no". So when I read him the part about her threatening to shoot me his eyes got quite large and round and he said "Wow." She's calling me a stalker and giving me one last chance to avoid a restraining order and threatening to shoot me while telling him she's ok with me and my presence doesn't stop her from going to church at all. The scary part is Borderline's, if ignored, have a way of worming their way back into your life and wanting to get back together and then going bonkers again. Perhaps not Beast's level bonkers but she is an expert marksman. Three women after Mrs Ig died, each one crazier than the last. Is this how guys turn gay?
--He has a couple cheerleaders who like it when he riles people up so they can leap into the pulpit to lecture us on how much better and more woke they are than we are.-- I'm curious if you label Maryrose the same way? Or does she only stick up for the right people? I don't like it when he riles people up. I have appealed to both sides to knock it off because it makes this an unpleasant place. But I don't give the people who give him constant and over the top shit for saying something they don't like a free pass. You seem to think there is one guilty party and one innocent one, but you're one of the parties. Some of us who are not don't see it that way. Because I'm such a dope I feel obliged to point this out from time to time and you don't seem to like that too much. And so, instead of considering whether I might have an even slightly valid point or that those of us not on either side might warrant just a smidgen of consideration, you attack me personally as well and ascribe false motives and actions to me. FTR I was going to respond to TomR that you hadn't bullied MM, but that she also had nothing to apologize for. But she took care of it herself. Also FTR I have never claimed to be better than anyone here; just the opposite. I know I'm not and have noted it many times. And I am perhaps the least woke person on the planet. I just don't like any people here being attacked personally, even if they're irritating. You only seem to mind it if the people being attacked personally are the ones who don't irritate you. And you only seem to criticize the people who defend people who irritate you. There's an unnecessary problem here that has me close to leaving for good. The reason it persists is because none of the people involved, including you OL, and you TomR, will admit they're part of the problem and give the rest of us enough respect, courtesy or consideration to change their behavior or listen to another point of view. Instead of a thoughtful answer to that point of view, the response from both sides is "nuh, uh, he started it" along with some snark about wokeness and lectures from pulpits or justifying why answering in kind is the right thing to do. I don't know how many I speak for, but to both sides, I'd like to say, thanks for nothin.
--"Winter's Tale" by Mark Helprin. hands down.-- That'll be the day. [said with disdain as the Duke said it in The Searchers] :)
--I know “The Jews” get blamed for a lot of stuff but I think they are likely responsible for getting people to change Ano Domini into Common Era. What does that even mean?-- From wiki; The expression has been traced back to 1615, when it first appeared in a book by Johannes Kepler as the Latin usage annus aerae nostrae vulgaris,[5][6] and to 1635 in English as "Vulgar[b] Era". The term "Common Era" can be found in English as early as 1708,[7] and became more widely used in the mid-19th century by Jewish religious scholars. In the later 20th century, the use of CE and BCE was popularized in academic and scientific publications as a culturally neutral term. It is also used by some authors and publishers who wish to emphasize sensitivity to non-Christians by not explicitly referencing Jesus as "Christ" and Dominus ("Lord") through use of the abbreviation[c] "AD".[9][10]
--If he goes up a sycamore tree he’s coming back down on a rope.-- LOL
BTW, a day or two ago someone linked some malarkey about Lolita being the greatest novel of the 20th century. Oh brother. In a century that produced not only The Code of the Woosters, but also Joy in the Morning? That'll be the day.
Oops. Gotta leave a space; # < twoweeks. :)
Not only did they mistitle some they attribute several to Brett that are definitely his pop's. Brett used cuter models. :)
Mexico, eh? So was it Trump's threatened tariffs that put that ugly, useless Bug out of its misery? One more reason to love the guy.
BTW, if they actually do begin upping the deportations on Sunday won't that equal just about exactly #twoweeks?
--I know it's a defeat...-- It was a judicial defeat, but not only may it help Trump politically, I'm not at all sure the methods Barr indicated won't turn out to be rather better at doing what needs being done anyway.
If we can't get the backstabbing imbecile Roberts to rule in favor of asking a question he acknowledges they have every right to ask, then there is no way in hell the useless bastard would ever vote to disallow illegals being counted toward apportionment. Wonder if the guy shooting French could line Roberts up behind the party of the first part.
I take my Christianity pretty seriously, but God help me, I wish somebody would shoot that useless, dishonest piece of shit David French. At least stop acting like you're one of us you worthless Sadducee. [Little known fact, the Sadducees were more politically involved and made up of a higher class of snootier citizens who tried to enforce a hierarchical form of Judaism on Israel. The Pharisees OTOH democratized it while unfortunately loading their hundreds of burdensome rules on the common man they related to. French strikes me as much more a fastidious elitist lecturing to the great unwashed than a down and dirty Pharisee.]
--What exactly is farfetched about it?-- You didn't seem to understand my point. I think I linked to Acosta's claim that Epstein was an intelligence asset here first. That's somewhat plausible. Speculating that this perverted maggot knowing a few rich Saudis means he might have been part of the "WMD bellyflop" is, what's the word I'm looking for? I know, farfetched.
--or maybe 10 or 14 (just kidding)-- How could anyone NOT enjoy this presidency?
--I would really like to know who is pulling AOC's strings.-- The Rothschilds via George Soros. Rats! There goes my White House invitation. :)
--But IF (I say IF!) we learn that Epstein was protected in 2008 because he was part of the WMD bellyflop in 2002...-- That's the kind of farfetched speculation that gets some people so riled up with TomR. Maybe worse.
--Isn't it the case that pro reparations people have various models (using math) which claim that the unpaid contributions of slaves (and perhaps the underpaid contributions of freed blacks) provided well being to society at large such that everyone living in the US is "responsible" for slavery regardless of their family history?-- Let's construct a model that deducts from that total the cost to society of the freed descendants of those slaves murdering, robbing and pillaging at a rate far in excess of their population ratio for the last 160 years. I suspect who owes who might suffer a significant reversal. I know progs and race hustlers [but I repeat myself] claim those crimes are also a result of cracker oppression but out here in the real world, that hair-brained excuse has about as much traction as reparations themselves.