This Day in History

Daily Cartoon provided by Bravenet

  #21  
Old 05-11-2006
Bacon Guy's Avatar
Bacon Guy Bacon Guy is offline
Super Senior member - Has no life and spends a lot of time here
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: i pwn n00bs
Posts: 309
Default Whoa!

Did I tell you you could have an opinion, Kthulhu?

Quote:
Put 'em back in your pants, tough guy.

Dude, keep your homoerotic fantasies to yourself.

Quote:
You'll be on the police scanners for intimidation in no time

Um, for what? Knocking on someone's door to let them know that they're in violation of Federal Code? Maybe sissies like you call the police when someone you're afraid of says something unsettling to you, but grown ups don't.

What's the radio code for "intimidation" where you live?

I can almost hear the dispatch:

*crackle* Unit 7? This is dispatch. We have a 10-27 call coming from the Peace Ashram down on Mulberry road... copy? *crackle*

*crackle* 7 here...you have a what, now? *crackle*

*crackle* Yeah...uh, Hippy Intimidation. They sound pretty shaken up. Apparently one crapped himself. Over. *crackle*

*crackle* Um, 'Hippy Intimidation', Sarge? *crackle*

*crackle* Yeah...apparently some pissed-off soldier told them he didn't appreciate them flying a defaced American flag, and offered them some suggestions on how to dispose of it properly. Most of them fainted in fear, but I guess one of them cranked up their hemp-powered phone and called it in, so you gotta go check it out, maybe give them a few reassuring pats on the back...you know. Over. *crackle*



Quote:
you might even (long shot, I know) be on the receiving end of a 12 gauge.


Your impotent, violent fantasizing aside, I don't know too many "Bush Lied People Died!" liberal snotweasels who own guns- much less any who shoot at soldiers in broad daylight.

Quote:
All over a flag. Way to go.

So now you're holding me accountable for your little sick fantasy? That's rich.

Quote:
Doesn't bother me.

Well quite obviously, it does bother you, Tiny- so much so that you felt compelled to waste millions of protons to make that known.

Quote:
don't trespass or steal the property of others

Knocking on doors is trespassing?

Maybe in liberaltopia it is, but here on Earth, it's not. Think "Travelling Salesman", or "Jehova's Witnesses".
Sure, they're annoying, but only people like you apparently would feel justified in pointing a shotgun at them. You seem to have a problem with violent thoughts about people you disagree with. That's bad.

Slash many tires before the last election, Tiny?

As for the flag, it's mine too. Just because those assmonkeys paid for it doesn't mean it doesn't belong to everyone. That's why there is a section of USC applying to the handling of flags and their lawful, historically-prescribed disposal.

Quote:
emotional crybaby

Um, whaaa???

Project your feewings much?

Quote:
thuggery

No. Knocking on a door is not "thuggery".

Saying something mean or intimidating is not "thuggery".

Now, slashing someone's tires to prevent them from excercising their franchise is pretty thugg -ish, only the people who do it aren't thugs-- they're pussies.

Thuggery

n : violent or brutal acts as of thugs


Wow... you're stupid.
__________________
"Conservative, n, A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from the Liberal, who wishes to replace them with others."- Ambrose Bierce's "Devil's Dictionary (1911)"



If you can't beat them, join them. Then beat them. Barring that, arrange to have them beaten.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 05-11-2006
Bacon Guy's Avatar
Bacon Guy Bacon Guy is offline
Super Senior member - Has no life and spends a lot of time here
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: i pwn n00bs
Posts: 309
Default Tsk tsk, Tyler...

Quote:
Capitalism could work BETTER. And that is not imply that it is working good, it sucks.

It "sucks"? How else do you suppose people should earn a living- by sharing in my income? Is that fair? Does it help them?

See "Welfare"...

Quote:
There is no excuse to be living in the richest country in the world and have homeless people or people with no health care and then have what we have on the opposite side.

Sure there is...we have what's called "Equality of Opportunity", not "Equality of Result". Why on earth should I not have more than someone who hasn't prepared, or worked as hard? Why should I be compelled to give them what I earn? How does it help them?

Again, see "Welfare"...

Furthermore, there isn't a living soul in this country who has "no healthcare". You perhaps may mean "no insurance", but that's entirely different from "no healthcare". Anyone can walk in to an ER.

See "Illegal Immigrants".

If I chose to spend my money on something else (regardless of how unwise that is), should I still be forced to pay for the healthcare of others- who may also have consciously decided not to spend their own money on it?

Quote:
Rich bastards getting billion dollar bonuses.

Why so much hate? These "bastards" run the companies that drive the world's economy. If shareholders decide that CEOs' pay isn't justified by corporate performance, they can vote that CEO out.

Your visceral hatred for those more successful than yourself aside, do you think that they get that money by depriving someone else of their "fair share"? Wealth isn't extracted, it's created. Oil is worthless sitting underground-- it takes someone devising a means to get it out, and a reason for using it before it acquires any value.

It might help to look at it this way:

Without "Rich Bastards", there would be less investment, less production of wealth, and less upward mobility for the less-than-wealthy.

Here's some other stuff to consider. Bush's tax cuts have resulted in an enormous swelling of government revenues.

How is that possible, you ask? Because people who get to keep what they earn in turn spread that money around throughout the whole economy.

Since you're fond of recommending that we avail ourselves of your enlightened point of view by directing us to crockumentaries like "The Corporation", why don't you do a little searching of your own and look into something called "The Laffer Curve"- tax cuts boost tax revenues.

The IRS tells us that since 2002:

Tax revenue from aggregate gross incomes (AIGs) under 200K are up 9.3%.

Revenues from AIGs over 200K are up 19.4%.

Dividend Tax (what evil rich bastards pay on their investment yields) revenues are up 35.1%.

Capital Gains Tax (also a "rich bastard" tax) revenues are up a staggering 79.9%.

More, the percentage of federal taxes paid by those with AIGs of over 200K have risen to 46.6% from 40.5%.

Simplified for you, that means that the top 3 people in a representative sample pay almost the same amount as the remaining 97% combined!!! This is the largest share of the tax burden to be borne by this group since 1990, and is the highest in 30 years.

Between 2001 and 2004, the percentage of Americans with AIGs over 200K rose from 12.0% to 14.2% (that's called "social mobility", Tyler), and those making more than 50K rose from 40.8% to 44.2%. The slice of the total income "pie" captured by the richest 1%, 5%, and 10% is lower today than during the last years of the Clinton-era tech-bubble economy.

Honestly...you couldn't possibly give much thought to these memes you hold as truisms, or you would see how foolish and devoid of facts they are. You will literally adopt any view, no matter how hateful and ill-conceived as long as it provides a platform for your Bush-bashing.

There's a little expression you're going to hear a lot in the next few years as you continue to wonder why you keep losing elections in spite of your (errant) conviction that you are somehow the true majority:

It's the contempt, stupid.
__________________
"Conservative, n, A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from the Liberal, who wishes to replace them with others."- Ambrose Bierce's "Devil's Dictionary (1911)"



If you can't beat them, join them. Then beat them. Barring that, arrange to have them beaten.

Last edited by Bacon Guy : 05-11-2006 at 11:44 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 05-11-2006
Bacon Guy's Avatar
Bacon Guy Bacon Guy is offline
Super Senior member - Has no life and spends a lot of time here
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: i pwn n00bs
Posts: 309
Default *sigh*

Tyler,

Linking to some moonbat article full of debunked emotional nonsense (such as likening putting panties on someone's head to the Japanese rapists of Nanking) is neither:

A) Putting forth an argument

B) Even remotely related to the truth.

You are either a supreme dolt, or a satire troll!

Not to mention that you completely ignored all the incontrovertible evidence that our economy is anything but the dire mess you think it is.
__________________
"Conservative, n, A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from the Liberal, who wishes to replace them with others."- Ambrose Bierce's "Devil's Dictionary (1911)"



If you can't beat them, join them. Then beat them. Barring that, arrange to have them beaten.

Last edited by Bacon Guy : 05-11-2006 at 11:24 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 05-12-2006
Bacon Guy's Avatar
Bacon Guy Bacon Guy is offline
Super Senior member - Has no life and spends a lot of time here
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: i pwn n00bs
Posts: 309
Default Hahahahahahahahah!!!!

You're citing Noam Chomsky?

You think I've never heard of that despicable apologist for such wonderful humanitarian outreach-groups as the Khmer Rouge???

Greatest thinkers? The guy purports to be a linguist- not an historian. "Exceeding your purview", anyone?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!! !!1!1!1one!!!

Heh...you ARE a satire troll.

Just in case you're not a deep-cover satire troll, I don't think you want me to list Saddam's links to every terrorist named "Abu________" for the last 30 years, and I'm damn sure you don't want me to point out Zarkie's presence in Iraq pre-dating the invasion. Nor would you like me to cite the multinational assessments of Saddam's collaboration with Sunni AND Shi'a terror groups.

Or do you?!?

Just in case you're not actually a satire troll, you are a fucking assclown of the highest degree.
__________________
"Conservative, n, A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from the Liberal, who wishes to replace them with others."- Ambrose Bierce's "Devil's Dictionary (1911)"



If you can't beat them, join them. Then beat them. Barring that, arrange to have them beaten.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 05-12-2006
Kthulhu's Avatar
Kthulhu Kthulhu is offline
Super Senior member - Has no life and spends a lot of time here
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Oregon
Posts: 203
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bacon Guy
Did I tell you you could have an opinion, Kthulhu?

That's the beauty of America. I don't need some hypocrite's permission to do things.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bacon Guy
Dude, keep your homoerotic fantasies to yourself.

Keep your macho ones to yourself, then.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bacon Guy
Um, for what? Knocking on someone's door to let them know that they're in violation of Federal Code? Maybe sissies like you call the police when someone you're afraid of says something unsettling to you, but grown ups don't.

Number one, federal code isn't law. Number two, do you think someone with a flag like that would care? Number three:

I personally wouldn't have stolen it. I most likely would have shown up at their doorstep in uniform with a can of lighter fluid, a book of matches, and a few nasty looks followed by a few "suggestions" that they show a little respect and dispose of it properly.

That sounds like more than a friendly knock on the door to me. Maybe in your macho fantasy world, though, it's just how business is done.

And I'm afraid of unsettling talk? You're the one getting yourself in a knot over a damn message on a flag! Hilarious irony!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bacon Guy
Your impotent, violent fantasizing aside, I don't know too many "Bush Lied People Died!" liberal snotweasels who own guns- much less any who shoot at soldiers in broad daylight.

You never know. Plus, your bolded statement up there pretty much wipes away any claims to me having violent fantasies (and where have I laid claim to any? Quit projecting). I'm not the one advocating a confrontation over this, and yes, if someone doesn't approve of your actions on their property, it can escalate to getting a 12 gauge pointed in your direction.

And being a soldier doesn't put a person above the law. Trespassing and theft are still crimes. Plus, said soldier was shaming the uniform - improper conduct of a representative of the armed forces and all that. Could get him court-martialed unless he gets rid of it, or his CO chucklingly approves.

I hope the former does happen, and that the latter isn't true, because I'd hate to think that the members and officers of our armed forces are nothing more than a bunch of cretins and criminals who wipe their asses with the Constitution and the military's past honor

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bacon Guy
So now you're holding me accountable for your little sick fantasy? That's rich.

See above. You're just projecting, trying to turn this around on me because you don't have anything to stand on besides emotional appeal and a threatened worldview.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bacon Guy
Well quite obviously, it does bother you, Tiny- so much so that you felt compelled to waste millions of protons to make that known.

I'm probably bigger than you are, for the record. But I'm not inclined to, you know, threaten to kick people's asses or forcibly thrust my views on them like, cough cough, some individuals. "Individuals" in the singular sense, that is.

And excuse me for being tolerant, consistent, and paying more than lip service to morality and the concept of free speech.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bacon Guy
Knocking on doors is trespassing?

No, but if someone doesn't want you on their property, it can be. And you were suggesting more than a simple knock on the door and a polite discussion (not that you're really capable of such, but I digress).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bacon Guy
Maybe in liberaltopia it is, but here on Earth, it's not. Think "Travelling Salesman", or "Jehova's Witnesses".

Of course they can knock on the door. But the minute they make threats about me or my property and refuse to leave when asked to do so, is the minute they become trespassers.

And if they sneak back onto my property and steal something of mine, they are trespassing thieves.

Incidentally, you are aware that Jehovah's Witnesses don't salute the flag, right? Probably not the sort to give me shit about any flag I might put up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bacon Guy
Sure, they're annoying, but only people like you apparently would feel justified in pointing a shotgun at them.

Once again, refer to the bolded text above. I was also referring to hypotheticals - in the hypothetical (because you wouldn't do the above) event that you threatened someone like the above, then yes, I could see them getting the shotgun ready, just in case you decided to become crazy and irrational.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bacon Guy
You seem to have a problem with violent thoughts about people you disagree with. That's bad.

Slash many tires before the last election, Tiny?

Me, the one suggesting "Live and let live", has a problem with violent thoughts, while you, the one suggesting "Threaten and steal" do not? That's pretty rich.

Slashing the tires of people you disagree with sounds like something that is more your style.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bacon Guy
As for the flag, it's mine too. Just because those assmonkeys paid for it doesn't mean it doesn't belong to everyone.

It belongs to everyone and no one. If you don't like their flag, get one of your own. That's the crux of the matter. You're justifying theft, plain and simple.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bacon Guy
That's why there is a section of USC applying to the handling of flags and their lawful, historically-prescribed disposal.

Fabulous. Who cares? You can dispose of your own flags, not mine or anyone else's (unless they say you can). If you dispute this, then someone else can, say, have your car towed (no matter what condition it's in) because it's an "eyesore". The cops would probably take that sort of call more seriously than they would one about a flag, too.

Don't like it? Well shit, son, you're saying it's OK to fuck around with other people's property, if you don't like how they are using it, like some kind of hardcore Communist.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bacon Guy
Um, whaaa???

Project your feewings much?

Well, if the flag didn't make you feel angry or bad (and not in the guilt or shame sense), why are you trying to defend these actions as some sort of righteous behavior? Because it makes you feel good to think that someone is doing something about those "big bad liberals" desecrating your flag?

Perhaps it's not an emotional response, and you're just a kneejerk reactionary.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bacon Guy
No. Knocking on a door is not "thuggery".

Saying something mean or intimidating is not "thuggery".

Now, slashing someone's tires to prevent them from excercising their franchise is pretty thugg -ish, only the people who do it aren't thugs-- they're pussies.

Thuggery

n : violent or brutal acts as of thugs


Wow... you're stupid.

Wow, the dictionary. The last refuge of those who can't, or won't, conceptualize and comprehend. It's all nice in that black and white world, where there are no shades of grey and everything is nice and orderly, isn't it?

By your logic, you can't rightfully double a brownie recipe because "The authoritative cookbook says you can only use the listed quantities of ingredients!"

Get a damn clue and quit hiding behind technicalities: thugs intimidate people, either directly or indirectly, into stepping in line with their desires. Thugs are often used for political purposes, and often act because of them. This was individual thuggish behavior - directly squelch an unpopular opinion.

It's best not to set a precedent for it, because it will blow right back at you.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 05-15-2006
UZI4U's Avatar
UZI4U UZI4U is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: San Antonio, Texas.
Posts: 890
Default Part I

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyler Durden
Bush lied about WMDs. Period. Rummy lied about WMDs. Period.

No they didn't, period.

Quote:
Can I quote a source that said they lied?

By all means.

Quote:
Probably not. You would try to discredit it anyway.

Your sources tend to discredit themselves.

Quote:
you should understand that when somebody continually changes the excuse for something they did, they are lying.

The reasons for the invasion of Iraq have not changed:

#1 Halt Saddams WMD programs, so terrorists do not gain access to them.

#2 Stop Saddams support for Islamic terrorist groups.

#3 Free the Iraqi people from Saddams tyranny.

And we've done all those things.

Quote:
I know you need a web site to tell you what you think.

Will you please stop proving my point about you making a great projection case study?

Quote:
I said I believe you/Fox News, that they found some sarin gas. So you can knock off the "What will it take?/Just answer my questions." crap.

You still won't answer such a simple question? Why? What are you afraid of?

Quote:
Just because they found a jug of sarin gas does not mean Bush didn't lie. Don't you get that?

So why won't you answer my simple question? Just what would it take for you to believe Bush didn't lie? Just theorize, what would it take? A Sarin Gas shell? Ten Mustard Gas shells? A thousand VX gas shells? A biological weapons manufacturing plant? A ton of enriched uranium? A dozen ICBMs?

Pick one.

Quote:
Many of the excuses Bush used were Nucyuler (sic) related. Aluminum tubes, Uranium, etc.

So is that what you'd need to make you believe Bush didn't lie?

Quote:
How exactly did Colbert get into the Bush roast anyway? I think they thought he was a republican comic. How out of touch is the Bush admin?

Do I need to post a list of all the Democrats that went on Colberts show, thinking it was a real news interview? Are they out of touch too?

Quote:
Rummy said,"We've found the WMDs". And he was talking about the empty trailers, and he fucking knew they were empty. Liar.

So are you saying there were no WMD trailers in Iraq?

Yes, or no.

Quote:
You really think Bush didn't want to go in there. "Bring 'em on!" ring any bells? The guy is a f-ing war monger, just like Daddy.

Like those other famous war-mongers, LBJ and FDR.

Both Democrats.

Quote:
I can make up my own mind, can you?

Please continue proving my point about you making a great case study in projection.

Quote:
Or do you need O'reily

I don't watch O'Reily, I don't like him. He strikes my as homosexual, and by that I mean gay, not happy.


Quote:
and Limbaugh

I don't listen to Limbaugh, or use a radio at all for that matter.

Quote:
to tell you what you think?

Will you please quit proving my point about you and projection? You get all your opinions from one person, whom you follow like the prophet of some god.

Quote:
Bush and all his cronies are all liars, the kind of liars that result in the deaths,

Once more, please answer my question about what it would take to make you believe Bush didn't lie.

Quote:
What did you think Clinton was going to say straight up? "Oh, yea I shot my load on her dress?"

You do not lie under oath. He could have simply not said anything, so why did he decide to lie under oath?

Quote:
He lied because this country is so uptight about sex.

So it's okay for someone to lie under oath as long as it's to keep someone else from possibly being disgusted?

Quote:
Damn, I think it's still illegal in some states for two consenting adults to butt each other.

And that makes it okay for him to lie under oath?

Quote:
But your a Liberatarian, and you support individual freedoms, right? How exactly does two guys butting each other hurt you?

It doesn't, hence why it shouldn't be illegal.

Quote:
Your girl/boy friend ever stuff a finger or two up your ass?

No, has yours?

Quote:
And trying to discredit MM because he supports gun control is very narrow minded.

Because G-d knows, discrediting someone because they want to take away a Constitutional right is narrow minded.

Quote:
I think alot of you guys in here support Bush and republicans in general is because you love your guns and are afraid democrats will try to take them away.

Like they've been trying to do for over one hundred years?

Quote:
C'mon, you all know just as well as I do that that's impossible.

No, it isn't impossible, all one has to do is look around the world to see all the times it has been done. The Democrats would like nothing more than to do the same here.

Quote:
Again, the cat is out of the bag. I know Liberals that suggest "can't we just melt all the guns down?" Silly.

Yes, it's silly that they actually did that in the UK and Austrialia.

Quote:
So to support the republican agena just so you have a better chance of keeping your fancy-shmancy guns is just rediculous.

Because G-d knows, supporting one side because they aren't trying to take away our Constitutional rights is just ridiculous.

Quote:
Guns and America go together, don't support the wrong side just because they are more pro-gun than the other.

So I shouldn't support the 'wrong' side just because they are more pro-Constitution than the other?

Quote:
Oh, is the stock market almost back to even for the Bush admin?

Because of the Bush administration.

Quote:
Wow, amazing. Too bad the debt went to crap, China owns us now.

Please, explain to me how the President of the United States is suppose to control the trade balance.

Quote:
Well, they own our children, but you don't care about them do you.

My Children are going to be well armed and free men, thanks to my efforts and hard work.

If your side had your way, you would turn them from free men into slaves.

Thanks for showing how much you care about them.

And nice move using the 'it's for the CHIIILDREN' argument, keep it up, and no one here will listen to you.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 05-15-2006
UZI4U's Avatar
UZI4U UZI4U is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: San Antonio, Texas.
Posts: 890
Default Part II

Quote:
Lying under oath. Hmm...you mean cause of the whole bible/god thing?

Lying under oath has nothing to do with the bible and everything to do with a mans word.

Quote:
Maybe that's why we disagree so much. I don't believe in fairies, goblins, santa clause or god.

Yet you believe the words of Michael Moore?!?

Quote:
You know why? Cause there ain't no fricken evidence for them.

Just like there is no evidence that Michael More has ever said something that wasn't a lie? Other than "I'd like ten Big Macs".

Quote:
You're not one of them "The jury is still out on evolution" guys are you?

You obviously haven't been around here very long, kid. If you had, you'd know that I'm a Darwinist, backing Natural Selection all the way.

You are challenging my beliefs, however. The fact you haven't removed yourself from the gene pool is proof that there must be a god.

Quote:
That would explain alot.

Everyone has to fit a certain bigoted stereotype if they disagree with you, don't they?

Quote:
Legality and Morality are two entirely different things.

You don't even understand what that statement means, stop using big words before you sink your argument for me.

Quote:
If you could comprehend that perhaps you might come to an alternate conclusion.

Must you prove my point about you being a great case study in projection?

Quote:
You exude a toxicness that is beyond anything I've seen in this administration.

Thank you, soon I hope to be able to kill kittens with a single stare.

Quote:
Plus as Bush has proven, degrees don't mean shit.

If they're so easy to get and don't mean anything, then your degree is from...?

Quote:
We are never going to agree. If "showing off" in front of your gun buddies by repeating the same old Republican spin makes you happy then so be it.

Pffft, most of the people here disagree with me, if I wanted to impress them I'd be posting more images of my cases upon cases of ammo, not political debate.

Good job implying that 'gun people' just want to 'show off'.

Quote:
Why don't you go try these arguements on a Liberal site?

I do, they usually ban me in five our ten minutes after showing proof of Saddams WMDs.

I don't even have to actually say anything, just post some links to them and they ban me.

But of course, we all know that only Republicans don't tolerate dissent.

Quote:
I just get a kick coming in here and seeing how people will blindly defend Bush at all cost.

Funny, a little something that keeps going over your pointy head: I don't like Bush, I never have, not since I watched him run for governor in Texas. I disagree with him on dozens and dozens of issues.

But of course, to you, anyone who doesn't mindlessly hate everything Bush does is 'blindly defending Bush at all costs'.

Quote:
The Bush admin is doing exactly what Bin Laden wanted.

Riiiiight .

Quote:
Making more terrorists.

Bush is killing terrorists, not making them.

The number of Islamic Terrorists is a tenth of what it was before 9-11, and the number of terrorist training camps is down by half.

There certainly aren't more terrorists now than then.

Quote:
Sad. How's this for logic? Bush makes more terrorists, you support Bush, therefore you support production of terrorists.

How about this: Saddam gives money as rewards for committing suicide bombings, and you support leaving Saddam in power, thus you support suicide bombings.

And the best part: I can prove my statement, you cannot prove yours.

Quote:
And banning me from this forum would be the nail in your coffin. "don't want to hear it, Lalalalalalalalal". Just like stealing property from somebodys yard.

For a start, I cannot ban you, nor would I if I could, you do more for my cause than anyone else here.

But you are going to get yourself banned here, if you keep up some of the things you've been doing, and it will be for bad manners, not your tinfoil hat.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 05-15-2006
UZI4U's Avatar
UZI4U UZI4U is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: San Antonio, Texas.
Posts: 890
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyler Durden
OK, how 'bout this. I'll say Bush happened to be right (I think he lied, you don't, there's no way to prove it either way) about WMDs, if you include a gallon of sarin gas as a WMD...AND if you can admit the logic behind my coin flip example is correct. Which was:

If I say a coin is going to land heads and it does, doesn't mean I knew what I was talking about.

In other words, it doesn't matter to you what we find in Iraq, you'll still say Bush was wrong?

That's the point I was trying to make with my question, thank you for coming out and saying it.

Is there anything that we could find in Iraq that would make you think Bush didn't lie? Anything?

Quote:
If I may ask, since you dislike Bush so much also, who did you vote for in the last two presidential elections?

Bush got my Presidential vote, as the lesser of two evils, and Libertarians got my City, County and State votes.

I'll probably be voting Libertarian or Constitutionalist all around in 2006 and 2008, however.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 05-15-2006
UZI4U's Avatar
UZI4U UZI4U is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: San Antonio, Texas.
Posts: 890
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyler Durden
I'm pretty sure I answered your questions in my last several posts, repeatedly.

No, you didn't, you're playing dumb, when you know full well what I am asking.

What would it take, in your mind, to prove to you Bush wasn't lying about Iraq?

I'm not asking for you to show me whatever reasons you think Bush is lying, I'm asking for you to provide an example of what we would need to find to satisfy you that Bush told the truth.

Please continue dodging the question, you're proving my point each time.

Quote:
Do you think Bush always tells the truth? Yes or No? How about Rummy?

No, but I think they tell the truth as much as any human can.

However, that doesn't change the fact he did not lie about Saddams WMDs.

Now, answer my question, for the tenth time.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 05-15-2006
UZI4U's Avatar
UZI4U UZI4U is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: San Antonio, Texas.
Posts: 890
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyler Durden
Oh, you kept hammering on me to give you a "Yes or No", so I assumed you wanted a Yes or No, so I picked the Yes or No questions I thought you wanted me to answer. I know you have a hard time with grey areas that actually require sophisticated thought. But this last question you ask is not a Yes or No answer.

What I said was 'pick one', and I gave you several choices.

It was on several other questions that I asked you 'Yes or No'.

It might help you to become literate before you attempt debate.

Quote:
Weaponized Uranium would be a good start.

So only nuclear weapons count? Funny, I seem to remember Bush mentioning Chemical and Biological weapons.

But you're saying a nuclear program would be enough to make you admit Bush didn't lie?

Quote:
Are you trying to bait me into debating the definition of WMD? I know what Bush meant and he didn't mean a bottle of sarin gas.

Bush said Saddam had Chemical weapons.

Sarin nerve gas is a chemical weapon.

Or do you disagree? Please do so.

Quote:
But there is probably nothing anybody could do or say (short of a Vulcan mind-meld) to make me think he wasn't lying and taking advantage of our vulnerable state of mind after 911 to attack Iraq for his own agenda.

So as I said, not even a dozen ICBMs with nuclear warheads would be enough to make you mindless Bush haters agree that Bush didn't lie.

Quote:
Can you prove he didn't lie about it? Please try, this will be entertaining.

All in good time.

Quote:
Since it is impossible to prove a negative, perhaps I should ask you what would it take for you to consider that he might have been lying?

I considered it for quite a long time, and then decided he wasn't lying when I found proof of Saddams WMD program.

What would it take for you to consider he might not have been lying?

Quote:
You can't prove Bush wasn't lying and I can't prove MM wasn't lying.

Wrong, I can prove Bush wasn't lying about Saddam having WMDs and WMD research programs.

Quote:
Give me a specific as to what you think MM lied about.

You are attempting to change the subject.

But I'll answer that anyway, with a single example:

In Fahrenheit 9-11, Moore states that Iraq under Saddam had never attacked or killed or even threatened (his words, not mine) any American.

The ball is in your court now: Try to prove that isn't a lie. That gives you a chance in this debate, and also makes it much more fun when I blow your argument out of the water.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:00 AM.


Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright SecurityArms.com 1995 - 2009