Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old April 21st 08, 10:27 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Apr 2008
Posts: 24
Default Is Parr wackier than Sloan and Parker?

Sloan's absurd existence can be funny, but
he has become a repetitive bore in recent times.

Parker is an obvious nut case. No need
to describe him.

I used to think Parr was simply tedious and I
never read any of his diatribes to the end.
But now I see that he foams at the mouth
and thinks he is a historian. I suppose he
is tired of facing the fact that he is actually
just a failed journalist.

Would a journalist, i.e. a professional
writer, write "would have sank"
and then complain about the 'aliteracy'
of others?

Can a sane person, in this day and age,
praise the effect of beating a child half to death?

This man is as stupid, pompous and
humorless as Rush Limbaugh. But is
he crazy? As crazy as Sloan and Parker?


  #2   Report Post  
Old April 21st 08, 05:18 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Oct 2007
Posts: 58
Default Is Parr wackier than Sloan and Parker?

Don't forget Marcus....


"Jrgen R." wrote in message ...
Sloan's absurd existence can be funny, but he has become a repetitive bore
in recent times.

Parker is an obvious nut case. No need
to describe him.

I used to think Parr was simply tedious and I
never read any of his diatribes to the end.
But now I see that he foams at the mouth
and thinks he is a historian. I suppose he
is tired of facing the fact that he is actually
just a failed journalist.
Would a journalist, i.e. a professional
writer, write "would have sank"
and then complain about the 'aliteracy'
of others?
Can a sane person, in this day and age,
praise the effect of beating a child half to death? This man is as
stupid, pompous and
humorless as Rush Limbaugh. But is
he crazy? As crazy as Sloan and Parker?





Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com
  #3   Report Post  
Old April 22nd 08, 06:55 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Dec 2006
Posts: 56
Default Is Parr wackier than Sloan and Parker?

On Apr 21, 9:18 am, "Ted E Bear" wrote:
Don't forget Marcus....



"Jrgen R." wrote in ....
Sloan's absurd existence can be funny, but he has become a repetitive bore
in recent times.


Parker is an obvious nut case. No need
to describe him.


I used to think Parr was simply tedious and I
never read any of his diatribes to the end.
But now I see that he foams at the mouth
and thinks he is a historian. I suppose he
is tired of facing the fact that he is actually
just a failed journalist.
Would a journalist, i.e. a professional
writer, write "would have sank"
and then complain about the 'aliteracy'
of others?
Can a sane person, in this day and age,
praise the effect of beating a child half to death? This man is as
stupid, pompous and
humorless as Rush Limbaugh. But is
he crazy? As crazy as Sloan and Parker?


Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com


Is Marcus even a human? His posts read like random
rants from a computer program. MarcusBot v0.1 perhaps?

Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:31 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Chess"

 

Copyright © 2017