Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Indian Charlie
while it's human nature to laugh at the misfortune of others, i think it's useful to draw a line somewhere.
the reason, spenser, that the analogy isnt a bad one was that it was meant to show how ridiculous you are, laughing at a rather severe misfortune somebody just went through.
maybe losing 50k isnt a big deal to people on this board, but i wouldnt assume that for the person who did lose it.
oh, maybe this is an analogy you'll understand better. do you laugh at people, who out of some messed up desperation in their life, spend $100's a week on the lottery that they really cannot afford? No? Why not? It's the ultimate sucker bet and is really much worse than any bet you can make in horse racing.
why even the need to laugh at someone that loses, period? you are probably one of those people that when their horse is obviously going to lose, will route against his friends horse from winning.
misery loves company is alive and well.
as to the person who wanted me to complete the old lady joke...
this lady was crossing the street from her old age home. she got all dolled up in her best moth ball smelling dress from the 40's. she had her requisite 2 gallons of old lady perfume on, and she even had her dentures polished for this rare outing.
anyways, she got to the point where she was about halfway across the road, but because her walker wasnt motorized, it took her several hours to cross the street. finally, some half drunk NASCAR fan who was driving the earth mover vehicle had had enough.
so, he put out his marlboro, put some garth brooks (I hope i've not offended anyone by invoking garth's name) tune on, put a piece of straw in his mouth, and decided to punch the gas with a loud yee haw yell!!
the punchline? she was crossing the street to pick up her social security check!!!! talk about a sucker!!!
|
well that was a good one for character judgments: "
you are probably one of those people that when their horse is obviously going to lose, will route against his friends horse from winning."
I'm sure personal judgments are your forté, as illustrated here, but you're way way off. Of course, the fact that you're totally wrong means nothing when you just want to take a jab, so I'll give you that one.
Why is it severe misfortune, if someone was willing to pony up 50K or so on a bet that relied on an animal, that even if successful paid five cents on the dollar? That has nothing to do with me being a bad person for laughing at misfortune, that has to do with people making shitty sucker bets and losing. They get what they deserve. Someone bridge jumping has to win in the vicinity of 19 out of 20 of their ridiculous wagers in order to just break even. Please find me one bet on an animal that is a good bet at 1-20 odds to come through 19 out of 20 times. Really, please do, since I'm sure it would go a long way in proving your point that I'm a worthless human being who is only out to goad others for their misfortune.
Nope, you're pretty much without a case here, other than trying to prove your point that you don't like me. Well done there, bucko.
And your analogy still sucks, fyi. Misfortune that one brings on themself (wagering thousands of dollars on a 1-20 proposition involving an animal) vs. one they don't bring on themself (getting hit by a car) are in two totally different ballparks on two totally different planets and still, several posts later, have nothing to do with one another.
But all the same -- thinking a bridge-jumper gets what they deserve = I'm a bad person.
You got it. You can have that one if you want to.
Now I know what that one poster said about how he mentioned it several weeks ago and got chided for it. A sucker bet is a sucker bet, no matter how much it gets projected onto the person calling it out. Still a bunch of ho-hum nonsense IC.