Wow, Honey, what a long, long post. I thought someone was complaining earlier that MY posts were too long! Double standard?
Warning: if Ms. Honey really expects me to answer all her facetious questions and comments, this post will indeed be long. STOP READING NOW if you're disinterested, I can certainly understand. I'm disinterested in her kooky questions and unsubstantiated charges myself. They've all been answered hundred of times before.
Honey said: "Multiple-alias Queen said: "Kirk, how would you know this..."
Multiple-alias? How so? Making charges you can't substantiate just like all your other trasher-basher pals? I do not have multiple aliases and I don't believe it's possible here, is it? If so, maybe you can let us all in on your secrets.
Honey queried "Where did Kirk make the statement that you put the QUOTATION MARKS around? Hmmmm? [Ms. Honey seems to like to say "Hmmmmm?" after she asks just such a provocative question] Another double-standard?"
If you're talking about the statement I made about kirk's propensity to think everyone should automatically believe everything he puts out there without substantiation, I made it clear it was indicative of his attitude, not an actual statement. Is that the best you've got?
Honey avowed: "BTW: Everything that Kirk said about people having their Marketimer subscriptions revoked is true. Of course, after the QQQQ fiasco, there were some who cancelled their own subscriptions."
That could be true, but it's still "Sez you". And your "word" is no better or worse than Kirk's. And no more automatically acceptable. What's so difficult to understand about that?
Honey hypothesized "Perhaps that is one reason why Bob Brinker refuses to discuss his stock market views on "weekends" now. Now, when a caller gets a question about the stock market on the air (which is seldom), Brinker slyly announces that he "covers all that in his newsletter" because it "works out well that way." Gaggamaggot!"
Your command of the language is stunning. That so? So what? Don't listen if it doesn't suit your needs.
Honey proposed: "I suppose there are plenty of new listeners who don't remember before 2000 when discussing the stock market was the focal point of his program. That was before the QQQQ-trade that he seems to be trying so hard to cover up. And perhaps Bobby Junior's rather recent interest in newsletters is a factor. I doubt that Bobby Junior will take over the radio program."
I suppose there are plenty of new listeners, apparently so. That a problem? Bobby Junior? maybe so, maybe not, hard to say at this point...and your point would be...??
Honey proclaimed: "Of course, there are a few long-standing besotted fans who believe Bob Brinker truly is a "savant" and that anyone who isn't willing to pay him (on the side--by subscribing to his newsletter), for his hocus-pocus, is just a freeloader. After all, that is what Bob Brinker, posting as "donlane/mistertopes," called his radio listeners right here on SI a few years back--"freeloaders."
"Besotted" and "Savant" are your words and the old saws of the Brinkerbashers that fly all over the net like bats coming out of the cave at dusk. I don't know anyone including myself who is "besotted" or agrees with Brinker 100% of the time or believes he is accurate 100% of the time. And I don't know anyone who's afraid or hesitates to say exactly that when they disagree. "Tin God", "Savant", "koolade drinkers" etc. ad nauseum are your old wornout derogatory terms. They've never stood up to reason before and they don't now. But they're all you've got. |
