OT: Top ten most promiscuous cities

[eavesdropper]

[quote=AN][quote=eavesdropper]Excuse me?? Dallas AND Houston BOTH made the list?? Red-state Texas? Super-Christianite Texas? Pro-marriage Texas? Anti-premarital sex Texas? Mega-family-values-Texas has TWO cities in the top ten? [/quote]
Seriously? This from the lady who constantly rail against the American public for being too polarized and not doing their proper research? I’m sure you did your research and just can’t help but be partisan. FYI both Harris County and Dallas County voted for Obama in 2008. Obama actually beat McCain 57.5% to 41.9% in Dallas.[/quote]

Okay, AN, you reeeallly need to get over your absurd preoccupation with statements I’m making in my posts. You’re starting to remind me of the Frank Burns character in M*A*S*H, and that’s not a good thing.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but I’ve interpreted your post as saying that (1) I’m engaging in polarizing activity by bringing attention to Texas’s presence on the list, (2) that I didn’t do my proper research, and (3) that the research I didn’t do was wrong, and that the fact that Obama beat McCain in the 2008 elections in both Dallas and Harris counties PROVES that these two areas are actually liberal strongholds in Texas, thereby explaining their places on the list.

AN, I didn’t bring politics into my post at all. Everything that I DID mention has been well-established, many times over, in all forms of media, by both outside observers and Texas residents themselves. And these are sociological/cultural phenomena. Over the past few years, I have read hundreds of blog entries, message board posts, letters to editors, and interviews, in which residents of Texas attest to their high levels of morality, their true American family values, their religious fervor, and their special place in God’s radar. When their governor decide to rent a massive stadium in which attendees could get their Jesus on, just in case the message that Texas is the most Christiany place on the planet hadn’t reached everyone living on it, that just served to seal the deal.

But YOU have brought politics into this by your “evidence” re: the 2008 election results in Houston and Dallas. Are we expected to believe that because Obama beat McCain by 15 percentage points in Dallas County and 1.5 in Harris County, that Houston and Dallas are chock full of Democrats, and
— Democrats = liberals
— Liberals = godless sinners
therefore,
–Houston and Dallas are full of sinners, which is why they had a place on the 10 most promiscuous cities list?

Actually, thinking that I was just leaving a tongue-in-cheek response to a humorous post from flu, I did NO research, proper or otherwise, prior to my post on Saturday.

However, I keep abreast of Texas political trends and elections, despite the fact that I am not currently a resident of that fine state. The Harris and Dallas county results of the race between the 2008 Presidential race contenders are true aberrations, AN. The only other year in the past sixty that a Democrat won the Presidency in Harris and Dallas counties was 1964 (why don’t you Google it to determine why that happened?).

The fact remains that Texas, including Harris and Dallas counties, is overwhelmingly (and, in all likelihood, permanently) Republican in its voter demographics. While Democratic candidates for U.S. Senate did slightly better than the Republican winners of the 2008 election, the Republicans maintained a significant lead in U.S. House, and Texas state senate and house seats in both Harris and Dallas counties in 2008. What’s more, these numbers increased in the 2010 midterms.

So, AN, to answer your question: Yes, SERIOUSLY, I find it amusing, and somewhat remarkable that not just one, but TWO Texas cities have found their way onto this list, given the PR job that both the people and the governor of Texas have given themselves over the past several years. Because I said something that wasn’t terribly complimentary to Texas (I pretty much called the Ultra-Christianites hypocrites) doesn’t mean that I am guilty of partisanship. Just like when the New York Times or NPR or CNN reports the criminal acts of a conservative congressman, that doesn’t invariably mean that they have a liberal bias.

In the meantime, stop hassling me with your obsessive nitpicking of my posts, and your absurd misinterpretation of their content. Once again, you’ve left yourself vulnerable to criticism, not because of an opinion or position you adopt, but because of your inability to “hear” what others are saying, and your lack of preparation prior to entering public discourse.

[an]

eavesdropper, you’re funny. FYI, this thread is about cities ranking in the promiscuous scales. I applaud you for bringing up politics.

[quote=eavesdropper]In the meantime, stop hassling me with your obsessive nitpicking of my posts[/quote]
Hypocrisies, makes me laugh and with you being on your high horse, I just can’t resist.

[quote=eavesdropper]…but because of your inability to “hear” what others are saying, and your lack of preparation prior to entering public discourse.[/quote]
You should look in the mirror sometimes.

[an]

eavesdropper, you’re funny. FYI, this thread is about cities ranking in the promiscuous scales. I applaud you for bringing up politics.

[quote=eavesdropper]In the meantime, stop hassling me with your obsessive nitpicking of my posts[/quote]
Hypocrisies, makes me laugh and with you being on your high horse, I just can’t resist.

[quote=eavesdropper]…but because of your inability to “hear” what others are saying, and your lack of preparation prior to entering public discourse.[/quote]
You should look in the mirror sometimes.

[an]

eavesdropper, you’re funny. FYI, this thread is about cities ranking in the promiscuous scales. I applaud you for bringing up politics.

[quote=eavesdropper]In the meantime, stop hassling me with your obsessive nitpicking of my posts[/quote]
Hypocrisies, makes me laugh and with you being on your high horse, I just can’t resist.

[quote=eavesdropper]…but because of your inability to “hear” what others are saying, and your lack of preparation prior to entering public discourse.[/quote]
You should look in the mirror sometimes.

[an]

eavesdropper, you’re funny. FYI, this thread is about cities ranking in the promiscuous scales. I applaud you for bringing up politics.

[quote=eavesdropper]In the meantime, stop hassling me with your obsessive nitpicking of my posts[/quote]
Hypocrisies, makes me laugh and with you being on your high horse, I just can’t resist.

[quote=eavesdropper]…but because of your inability to “hear” what others are saying, and your lack of preparation prior to entering public discourse.[/quote]
You should look in the mirror sometimes.

[an]

eavesdropper, you’re funny. FYI, this thread is about cities ranking in the promiscuous scales. I applaud you for bringing up politics.

[quote=eavesdropper]In the meantime, stop hassling me with your obsessive nitpicking of my posts[/quote]
Hypocrisies, makes me laugh and with you being on your high horse, I just can’t resist.

[quote=eavesdropper]…but because of your inability to “hear” what others are saying, and your lack of preparation prior to entering public discourse.[/quote]
You should look in the mirror sometimes.

[sdduuuude]

So, that’s the list of cities where people are looking for it.

I want the list of cities where they are actually finding it.

[sdduuuude]

So, that’s the list of cities where people are looking for it.

I want the list of cities where they are actually finding it.

[sdduuuude]

So, that’s the list of cities where people are looking for it.

I want the list of cities where they are actually finding it.

[sdduuuude]

So, that’s the list of cities where people are looking for it.

I want the list of cities where they are actually finding it.

[sdduuuude]

So, that’s the list of cities where people are looking for it.

I want the list of cities where they are actually finding it.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=AN]eavesdropper, you’re funny. FYI, this thread is about cities ranking in the promiscuous scales. I applaud you for bringing up politics.
[/quote]

AN, I noticed that you deliberately left out my inclusion of my original post and your response to it. For your convenience, I have inserted it below:

[quote=AN][quote=eavesdropper]Excuse me?? Dallas AND Houston BOTH made the list?? Red-state Texas? Super-Christianite Texas? Pro-marriage Texas? Anti-premarital sex Texas? Mega-family-values-Texas has TWO cities in the top ten?

Hah!! And they can’t even blame it on what they consider their liberal aberration, Austin. Dallas and Houston. That’s rich!

I wonder if Gov. Perry’s going to make some more of his incomparable commercials for Texas tourism that feature this recent achievement.[/quote]
Seriously? This from the lady who constantly rail against the American public for being too polarized and not doing their proper research? I’m sure you did your research and just can’t help but be partisan. FYI both Harris County and Dallas County voted for Obama in 2008. Obama actually beat McCain 57.5% to 41.9% in Dallas.[/quote]

Now that the evidence is before you (and, indeed, anyone with the ability to read this), can you please explain the meaning of, “eavesdropper, you’re funny. FYI, this thread is about cities ranking in the promiscuous scales. I applaud you for bringing up politics.” Please show me *exactly* where it is in the above post that I bring up politics, or invite the discussion of same.

[quote=AN][quote=eavesdropper]In the meantime, stop hassling me with your obsessive nitpicking of my posts[/quote]
Hypocrisies, makes me laugh and with you being on your high horse, I just can’t resist.[/quote]

AN, your responses are not the reactions of someone who is amused. They are characteristic of someone who is angry, insecure, and anxious to find opportunities to demonstrate his superiority. Consider the following:
1. You respond to my original post with a disjointed series of sentences that make no sense.
2. In order to respond to your post, I had to make inferences about what you were trying to say. In my last post, I asked you to correct my inference, if it was incorrect, and explain exactly what you meant. You chose to ignore my request.
3. You had responded to my original post with information of a political nature that I inferred to be evidence of why Houston and Dallas had been included on the “most promiscuous” list (“FYI both Harris County and Dallas County voted for Obama in 2008. Obama actually beat McCain 57.5% to 41.9% in Dallas”) I, in turn, responded with information that demonstrated that the voters of Dallas and Houston clearly share their state’s preference for Republican candidates, the 2008 Presidential race results notwithstanding. You chose to completely ignore this information also.

[quote=AN] [quote=eavesdropper]…but because of your inability to “hear” what others are saying, and your lack of preparation prior to entering public discourse.[/quote]
You should look in the mirror sometimes.[/quote]

Instead of resorting to childish retorts like the one above, please respond in a manner equivalent to your age, background, and education. For my part, I can provide legitimate and relevant sources for everything I use as supporting evidence in my posts. And I make every effort to ensure an open dialogue with any and all correspondents, and will ask questions and research the material behind their opinions, if I am not familiar enough to challenge them on it.

AN, your posts appear to be very thinly-veiled expressions of hostility that date back to our previous “debate” on your support of school vouchers. I challenge any reasonable intelligent person to read our entire exchange on that topic, and conclude that I did not give you every opportunity to voice and support your positions. Your posts distorted facets of our discussions to a degree that they, in no way, resembled objective reality. Your responses (August 4) to my confronting you on the issue of your “evidence” was a textbook exhibition of narcissistic defenses, each subsequent post an exercise in cognitive distortion, while you denied, accused, fabricated, alternated between playing the victim and posing as the obviously superior intellect.

I cannot accept that it possible to carry on a true debate or discussion with you. Based on a wide variety of your posts, I don’t believe that you are capable of accepting the possibility that you could be wrong. What’s more, I believe that you are so firmly convinced of the superiority and infallibility of your opinions, that you find it offensive that anyone would require you to provide valid evidence supporting them. My perceptions may be erroneous, but I choose to be guided by them in order to avoid unnecessarily fractious exchanges.

I come to Piggs to exchange ideas and opinions with a widely diverse group of highly intelligent people, from all walks of life. The most appealing thing about this site is its civil tone, in an era in which name-calling, personal insults, threats of violence, and other irrelevant commentary is almost universally practiced on similar websites. I am grateful for the warm welcome I received as a new Pigg, and for the continuing friendship and encouragement from many of its regulars.

Since August 4, I have made it a point to avoid commenting on your posts, rather than exposing our fellow Piggs to senseless pissing matches and vitriolic exchanges. I would appreciate it if you would do likewise. We can simply agree to disagree.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=AN]eavesdropper, you’re funny. FYI, this thread is about cities ranking in the promiscuous scales. I applaud you for bringing up politics.
[/quote]

AN, I noticed that you deliberately left out my inclusion of my original post and your response to it. For your convenience, I have inserted it below:

[quote=AN][quote=eavesdropper]Excuse me?? Dallas AND Houston BOTH made the list?? Red-state Texas? Super-Christianite Texas? Pro-marriage Texas? Anti-premarital sex Texas? Mega-family-values-Texas has TWO cities in the top ten?

Hah!! And they can’t even blame it on what they consider their liberal aberration, Austin. Dallas and Houston. That’s rich!

I wonder if Gov. Perry’s going to make some more of his incomparable commercials for Texas tourism that feature this recent achievement.[/quote]
Seriously? This from the lady who constantly rail against the American public for being too polarized and not doing their proper research? I’m sure you did your research and just can’t help but be partisan. FYI both Harris County and Dallas County voted for Obama in 2008. Obama actually beat McCain 57.5% to 41.9% in Dallas.[/quote]

Now that the evidence is before you (and, indeed, anyone with the ability to read this), can you please explain the meaning of, “eavesdropper, you’re funny. FYI, this thread is about cities ranking in the promiscuous scales. I applaud you for bringing up politics.” Please show me *exactly* where it is in the above post that I bring up politics, or invite the discussion of same.

[quote=AN][quote=eavesdropper]In the meantime, stop hassling me with your obsessive nitpicking of my posts[/quote]
Hypocrisies, makes me laugh and with you being on your high horse, I just can’t resist.[/quote]

AN, your responses are not the reactions of someone who is amused. They are characteristic of someone who is angry, insecure, and anxious to find opportunities to demonstrate his superiority. Consider the following:
1. You respond to my original post with a disjointed series of sentences that make no sense.
2. In order to respond to your post, I had to make inferences about what you were trying to say. In my last post, I asked you to correct my inference, if it was incorrect, and explain exactly what you meant. You chose to ignore my request.
3. You had responded to my original post with information of a political nature that I inferred to be evidence of why Houston and Dallas had been included on the “most promiscuous” list (“FYI both Harris County and Dallas County voted for Obama in 2008. Obama actually beat McCain 57.5% to 41.9% in Dallas”) I, in turn, responded with information that demonstrated that the voters of Dallas and Houston clearly share their state’s preference for Republican candidates, the 2008 Presidential race results notwithstanding. You chose to completely ignore this information also.

[quote=AN] [quote=eavesdropper]…but because of your inability to “hear” what others are saying, and your lack of preparation prior to entering public discourse.[/quote]
You should look in the mirror sometimes.[/quote]

Instead of resorting to childish retorts like the one above, please respond in a manner equivalent to your age, background, and education. For my part, I can provide legitimate and relevant sources for everything I use as supporting evidence in my posts. And I make every effort to ensure an open dialogue with any and all correspondents, and will ask questions and research the material behind their opinions, if I am not familiar enough to challenge them on it.

AN, your posts appear to be very thinly-veiled expressions of hostility that date back to our previous “debate” on your support of school vouchers. I challenge any reasonable intelligent person to read our entire exchange on that topic, and conclude that I did not give you every opportunity to voice and support your positions. Your posts distorted facets of our discussions to a degree that they, in no way, resembled objective reality. Your responses (August 4) to my confronting you on the issue of your “evidence” was a textbook exhibition of narcissistic defenses, each subsequent post an exercise in cognitive distortion, while you denied, accused, fabricated, alternated between playing the victim and posing as the obviously superior intellect.

I cannot accept that it possible to carry on a true debate or discussion with you. Based on a wide variety of your posts, I don’t believe that you are capable of accepting the possibility that you could be wrong. What’s more, I believe that you are so firmly convinced of the superiority and infallibility of your opinions, that you find it offensive that anyone would require you to provide valid evidence supporting them. My perceptions may be erroneous, but I choose to be guided by them in order to avoid unnecessarily fractious exchanges.

I come to Piggs to exchange ideas and opinions with a widely diverse group of highly intelligent people, from all walks of life. The most appealing thing about this site is its civil tone, in an era in which name-calling, personal insults, threats of violence, and other irrelevant commentary is almost universally practiced on similar websites. I am grateful for the warm welcome I received as a new Pigg, and for the continuing friendship and encouragement from many of its regulars.

Since August 4, I have made it a point to avoid commenting on your posts, rather than exposing our fellow Piggs to senseless pissing matches and vitriolic exchanges. I would appreciate it if you would do likewise. We can simply agree to disagree.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=AN]eavesdropper, you’re funny. FYI, this thread is about cities ranking in the promiscuous scales. I applaud you for bringing up politics.
[/quote]

AN, I noticed that you deliberately left out my inclusion of my original post and your response to it. For your convenience, I have inserted it below:

[quote=AN][quote=eavesdropper]Excuse me?? Dallas AND Houston BOTH made the list?? Red-state Texas? Super-Christianite Texas? Pro-marriage Texas? Anti-premarital sex Texas? Mega-family-values-Texas has TWO cities in the top ten?

Hah!! And they can’t even blame it on what they consider their liberal aberration, Austin. Dallas and Houston. That’s rich!

I wonder if Gov. Perry’s going to make some more of his incomparable commercials for Texas tourism that feature this recent achievement.[/quote]
Seriously? This from the lady who constantly rail against the American public for being too polarized and not doing their proper research? I’m sure you did your research and just can’t help but be partisan. FYI both Harris County and Dallas County voted for Obama in 2008. Obama actually beat McCain 57.5% to 41.9% in Dallas.[/quote]

Now that the evidence is before you (and, indeed, anyone with the ability to read this), can you please explain the meaning of, “eavesdropper, you’re funny. FYI, this thread is about cities ranking in the promiscuous scales. I applaud you for bringing up politics.” Please show me *exactly* where it is in the above post that I bring up politics, or invite the discussion of same.

[quote=AN][quote=eavesdropper]In the meantime, stop hassling me with your obsessive nitpicking of my posts[/quote]
Hypocrisies, makes me laugh and with you being on your high horse, I just can’t resist.[/quote]

AN, your responses are not the reactions of someone who is amused. They are characteristic of someone who is angry, insecure, and anxious to find opportunities to demonstrate his superiority. Consider the following:
1. You respond to my original post with a disjointed series of sentences that make no sense.
2. In order to respond to your post, I had to make inferences about what you were trying to say. In my last post, I asked you to correct my inference, if it was incorrect, and explain exactly what you meant. You chose to ignore my request.
3. You had responded to my original post with information of a political nature that I inferred to be evidence of why Houston and Dallas had been included on the “most promiscuous” list (“FYI both Harris County and Dallas County voted for Obama in 2008. Obama actually beat McCain 57.5% to 41.9% in Dallas”) I, in turn, responded with information that demonstrated that the voters of Dallas and Houston clearly share their state’s preference for Republican candidates, the 2008 Presidential race results notwithstanding. You chose to completely ignore this information also.

[quote=AN] [quote=eavesdropper]…but because of your inability to “hear” what others are saying, and your lack of preparation prior to entering public discourse.[/quote]
You should look in the mirror sometimes.[/quote]

Instead of resorting to childish retorts like the one above, please respond in a manner equivalent to your age, background, and education. For my part, I can provide legitimate and relevant sources for everything I use as supporting evidence in my posts. And I make every effort to ensure an open dialogue with any and all correspondents, and will ask questions and research the material behind their opinions, if I am not familiar enough to challenge them on it.

AN, your posts appear to be very thinly-veiled expressions of hostility that date back to our previous “debate” on your support of school vouchers. I challenge any reasonable intelligent person to read our entire exchange on that topic, and conclude that I did not give you every opportunity to voice and support your positions. Your posts distorted facets of our discussions to a degree that they, in no way, resembled objective reality. Your responses (August 4) to my confronting you on the issue of your “evidence” was a textbook exhibition of narcissistic defenses, each subsequent post an exercise in cognitive distortion, while you denied, accused, fabricated, alternated between playing the victim and posing as the obviously superior intellect.

I cannot accept that it possible to carry on a true debate or discussion with you. Based on a wide variety of your posts, I don’t believe that you are capable of accepting the possibility that you could be wrong. What’s more, I believe that you are so firmly convinced of the superiority and infallibility of your opinions, that you find it offensive that anyone would require you to provide valid evidence supporting them. My perceptions may be erroneous, but I choose to be guided by them in order to avoid unnecessarily fractious exchanges.

I come to Piggs to exchange ideas and opinions with a widely diverse group of highly intelligent people, from all walks of life. The most appealing thing about this site is its civil tone, in an era in which name-calling, personal insults, threats of violence, and other irrelevant commentary is almost universally practiced on similar websites. I am grateful for the warm welcome I received as a new Pigg, and for the continuing friendship and encouragement from many of its regulars.

Since August 4, I have made it a point to avoid commenting on your posts, rather than exposing our fellow Piggs to senseless pissing matches and vitriolic exchanges. I would appreciate it if you would do likewise. We can simply agree to disagree.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=AN]eavesdropper, you’re funny. FYI, this thread is about cities ranking in the promiscuous scales. I applaud you for bringing up politics.
[/quote]

AN, I noticed that you deliberately left out my inclusion of my original post and your response to it. For your convenience, I have inserted it below:

[quote=AN][quote=eavesdropper]Excuse me?? Dallas AND Houston BOTH made the list?? Red-state Texas? Super-Christianite Texas? Pro-marriage Texas? Anti-premarital sex Texas? Mega-family-values-Texas has TWO cities in the top ten?

Hah!! And they can’t even blame it on what they consider their liberal aberration, Austin. Dallas and Houston. That’s rich!

I wonder if Gov. Perry’s going to make some more of his incomparable commercials for Texas tourism that feature this recent achievement.[/quote]
Seriously? This from the lady who constantly rail against the American public for being too polarized and not doing their proper research? I’m sure you did your research and just can’t help but be partisan. FYI both Harris County and Dallas County voted for Obama in 2008. Obama actually beat McCain 57.5% to 41.9% in Dallas.[/quote]

Now that the evidence is before you (and, indeed, anyone with the ability to read this), can you please explain the meaning of, “eavesdropper, you’re funny. FYI, this thread is about cities ranking in the promiscuous scales. I applaud you for bringing up politics.” Please show me *exactly* where it is in the above post that I bring up politics, or invite the discussion of same.

[quote=AN][quote=eavesdropper]In the meantime, stop hassling me with your obsessive nitpicking of my posts[/quote]
Hypocrisies, makes me laugh and with you being on your high horse, I just can’t resist.[/quote]

AN, your responses are not the reactions of someone who is amused. They are characteristic of someone who is angry, insecure, and anxious to find opportunities to demonstrate his superiority. Consider the following:
1. You respond to my original post with a disjointed series of sentences that make no sense.
2. In order to respond to your post, I had to make inferences about what you were trying to say. In my last post, I asked you to correct my inference, if it was incorrect, and explain exactly what you meant. You chose to ignore my request.
3. You had responded to my original post with information of a political nature that I inferred to be evidence of why Houston and Dallas had been included on the “most promiscuous” list (“FYI both Harris County and Dallas County voted for Obama in 2008. Obama actually beat McCain 57.5% to 41.9% in Dallas”) I, in turn, responded with information that demonstrated that the voters of Dallas and Houston clearly share their state’s preference for Republican candidates, the 2008 Presidential race results notwithstanding. You chose to completely ignore this information also.

[quote=AN] [quote=eavesdropper]…but because of your inability to “hear” what others are saying, and your lack of preparation prior to entering public discourse.[/quote]
You should look in the mirror sometimes.[/quote]

Instead of resorting to childish retorts like the one above, please respond in a manner equivalent to your age, background, and education. For my part, I can provide legitimate and relevant sources for everything I use as supporting evidence in my posts. And I make every effort to ensure an open dialogue with any and all correspondents, and will ask questions and research the material behind their opinions, if I am not familiar enough to challenge them on it.

AN, your posts appear to be very thinly-veiled expressions of hostility that date back to our previous “debate” on your support of school vouchers. I challenge any reasonable intelligent person to read our entire exchange on that topic, and conclude that I did not give you every opportunity to voice and support your positions. Your posts distorted facets of our discussions to a degree that they, in no way, resembled objective reality. Your responses (August 4) to my confronting you on the issue of your “evidence” was a textbook exhibition of narcissistic defenses, each subsequent post an exercise in cognitive distortion, while you denied, accused, fabricated, alternated between playing the victim and posing as the obviously superior intellect.

I cannot accept that it possible to carry on a true debate or discussion with you. Based on a wide variety of your posts, I don’t believe that you are capable of accepting the possibility that you could be wrong. What’s more, I believe that you are so firmly convinced of the superiority and infallibility of your opinions, that you find it offensive that anyone would require you to provide valid evidence supporting them. My perceptions may be erroneous, but I choose to be guided by them in order to avoid unnecessarily fractious exchanges.

I come to Piggs to exchange ideas and opinions with a widely diverse group of highly intelligent people, from all walks of life. The most appealing thing about this site is its civil tone, in an era in which name-calling, personal insults, threats of violence, and other irrelevant commentary is almost universally practiced on similar websites. I am grateful for the warm welcome I received as a new Pigg, and for the continuing friendship and encouragement from many of its regulars.

Since August 4, I have made it a point to avoid commenting on your posts, rather than exposing our fellow Piggs to senseless pissing matches and vitriolic exchanges. I would appreciate it if you would do likewise. We can simply agree to disagree.

[Author]

Posts