Political Threads

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

No. It is just that I have a life and better things to do than write thorough posts to satisfy the requirements of some loser who camps out in the OT section of a family immigration forum. Hence, how many times have I asked people to prove their points, views or posts. Almost zero out of 5,000 posts. Why, because I understand this is the OT section of a family immigration forum.

Haaaaaahahahaahaha!

Yet you waste your time rebutting people and better yet insulting them, because all the cool people who have a life are busy telling people on the internet all about it.

You know, if you were really that great, you might not be needing to tell people online about it.

Sounds to me like "small man, big truck".

I had to laugh at that. Because its the "O/T section of a Family Immigration Forum" there's no burden of proof when illogical or silly arguments are made (you'd love his summary on what constitutes "black culture").

This is a guy of course - who got his a## handed to him when he blatantly lied about having an MA in Economics (yet couldn't make an elementary analysis of economic data). Yet he still insists on people declaring their educational background and employment history when you disagree with him. It just doesn't get any weirder.

The thinking in his posts seems to follow this train of thought

"How dare you disagree with me on <<insert name of any subject you care to name>> I have a background in Economics and Engineering"

Or

"I am rich, therefore I am right"

Edited September 22, 2008 by Paul Daniels

[rocks 494]

Note to you: You're the one comparing posts.

How the hell do you even see one's posts here?

i think you can see it from their profile

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Ummm you keep posting so apparently you don't have anything better to do at the moment. My fiancee is halfway across the world, so be a man like me and admit you have nothing better to do!

You don't know #6 (Paul Daniels). This guys camps in the OT section of Visa Journey. There is a difference coming here every now and then to throw out and idea and discuss or argue a point. Then there is your #6 who camps out looking for people to disagree with.

I have written 5,989 posts.

He has written 21,406 posts.

So I've written more posts than you (because I've been here longer than you). So what?

This is another BY "1+1=3" Special isn't it? Quantity - defines content. Oh my...

[Heracles 417]

Which is fine, but how exactly does it lead to proper debate or discussion if the only requirement to poo poo an idea/argument is to suggest the person holding that point of view is a liberal (communist, tree hugging hippy, dope smoking, lesbian poodle) and subject closed? I might as well counterpoint that with calling people jackbooted, facist, lipstick wearing pigs and pack my bags. In fact, the temptation is very, very strong

I am not denying labels are thrown out, human nature really, but get annoyed when only one side is held accountable, 24/7, while the other is given a green light to use them.

Right or wrong, labels are a part of life and in every single group and culture.

[Peikko 1,575]

What labels do non conservatives consistantly use to shut down an argument? I haven't noticed them, but please feel free to point them out.

[IAMX 3,055]

I had to laugh at that. Because its the "O/T section of a Family Immigration Forum" there's no burden of proof when illogical or silly arguments are made (you'd love his summary on what constitutes "black culture").

This is a guy of course - who got his a## handed to him when he blatantly lied about having an MA in Economics (yet couldn't make an elementary analysis of economic data). Yet he still insists on people declaring their educational background and employment history when you disagree with him. It just doesn't get any weirder.

The thinking in his posts seems to follow this train of thought

"How dare you disagree with me on <<insert name of any subject you care to name>> I have a background in Economics and Engineering"

Or

"I am rich, therefore I am right"

I guess someone has to be the king of the nerds. Who better than a person who's in denial about being one?

Note to you: You're the one comparing posts.

How the hell do you even see one's posts here?

i think you can see it from their profile

Can't see it.

[Heracles 417]

This is a guy of course - who got his a## handed to him when he blatantly lied about having an MA in Economics (yet couldn't make an elementary analysis of economic data). Yet he still insists on people declaring their educational background and employment history when you disagree with him. It just doesn't get any weirder.

The thinking in his posts seems to follow this train of thought

"How dare you disagree with me on <<insert name of any subject you care to name>> I have a background in Economics and Engineering"

No I did not lie and actually corrected that earlier. I said I studied economics as part of my MBA. Like many here who have challenged you personally, I said in the open what I do rather than hide it like you still do; then claim everyone else does not know what they are talking about.

One this that is for sure. You still live up to your rules.

Number 6 (Paul Daniels) & Co ACME school of forum posting

The rules:

1. Always ridicule and attack anyone who you disagree with. The more personal the better. Don't allow them to explain or clarify their own opinion. F##k em!! If it sounds racist then it bloody well is racist!! Drill it in!!
2. Ask them to provide proof for just about everything they post. Even if they state something as simple as what a beautiful day. Demand proof of it. Naturally when people discuss and debate things in person they always follow on with a prove it comment..
3. Then if they do provide the proof you asked for, rebut it and discredit it. Say it's off topic, or stupid or the author is an idiot.
4. If the conversation starts getting a little tricky or you have nothing else to ridicule, just start bringing up #### from the past or from other threads. Look for weaknesses in their sentence structure or punctuation errors. That'll show them!!
5. Also try to get as many of your buddies as possible to help and gang up on the person. Get everyone to ask questions at once. Then call them out for not answering them all.
6. Then basically repeat the process until the other person is tired of hearing your bull ####### for the 500th time..

PS Never ever actually post proof of your own. And of course if you do post proof. Swear by it as if it's the law of gravity.

Edited September 22, 2008 by Aficionado

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Just out of curiosity, isn't the extreme left wing communism? Who exactly advocates anything resembling a communist pov around here? I think we have one self confessed socialist and a bunch of independants and democrats. I am not sure how that constitutes being extremely left wing.

Actually pure communism is Marxism, which has only existed in theory (the idea that everyone is equal in every way goes against the very foundation of human nature). Communists prefer to benefit the group and individual freedoms tend to suffer, but it is also a system of haves & have nots and Karl Marx would roll over in his grave if he saw it. Socialism would be closer to the extreme left wing view, but only in very general terms.

Hard Socialism is a transitionary phased to direct communism.

Social Democracy - describes most socialist policy thinking in the western world. Its a form of socialism - but it isn't "far left".

The "far left" thing comes in because as I said, the whole spectrum of US politics is further to the right than it is in Western Europe for example. Also because the media likes to sensationalize and go off on a hair trigger.

Again - its interesting to me that not only in Barack Obama being classified as a communist (at least on these boards), but that Hillary Clinton was too... (Kerry too - don't forget) I think it has less to do with the positions of individual Democrats, but a fairly disingenuous way of rejecting the Democratic party en-masse.

Which is fine, but how exactly does it lead to proper debate or discussion if the only requirement to poo poo an idea/argument is to suggest the person holding that point of view is a liberal (communist, tree hugging hippy, dope smoking, lesbian poodle) and subject closed? I might as well counterpoint that with calling people jackbooted, facist, lipstick wearing pigs and pack my bags. In fact, the temptation is very, very strong

Well it doesn't of course - I think that's actually the point

Someone referred to Obama as a communist the other day - and when I questioned the label he insisted that "it was his opinion to do so". Fair enough as far as that goes - but if I had to guess, the only reason to use a demonising label like that is so that a person doesn't have to do the hard work of actually thinking about why voting for Obama wouldn't be good for them or their interests...

Quite simply - I think there are a good few people who vote predominantly along party lines and aren't really interested in hearing the ideas of the other side. The issue then becomes one of stereotypical assumptions - "I can't vote Democrat because that's Communism".

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

This is a guy of course - who got his a## handed to him when he blatantly lied about having an MA in Economics (yet couldn't make an elementary analysis of economic data). Yet he still insists on people declaring their educational background and employment history when you disagree with him. It just doesn't get any weirder.

The thinking in his posts seems to follow this train of thought

"How dare you disagree with me on <<insert name of any subject you care to name>> I have a background in Economics and Engineering"

No I did not lie and actually corrected that earlier. I said I studied economics as part of my MBA. Like many here who have challenged you personally, I said in the open what I do rather than hide it like you still do; then claim everyone else does not know what they are talking about.

One this that is for sure. You still live up to your rules.

Number 6 (Paul Daniels) & Co ACME school of forum posting

The rules:

1. Always ridicule and attack anyone who you disagree with. The more personal the better. Don't allow them to explain or clarify their own opinion. F##k em!! If it sounds racist then it bloody well is racist!! Drill it in!!
2. Ask them to provide proof for just about everything they post. Even if they state something as simple as what a beautiful day. Demand proof of it. Naturally when people discuss and debate things in person they always follow on with a prove it comment..
3. Then if they do provide the proof you asked for, rebut it and discredit it. Say it's off topic, or stupid or the author is an idiot.
4. If the conversation starts getting a little tricky or you have nothing else to ridicule, just start bringing up #### from the past or from other threads. Look for weaknesses in their sentence structure or punctuation errors. That'll show them!!
5. Also try to get as many of your buddies as possible to help and gang up on the person. Get everyone to ask questions at once. Then call them out for not answering them all.
6. Then basically repeat the process until the other person is tired of hearing your BS for the 500th time..

PS Never ever actually post proof of your own. And of course if you do post proof. Swear by it as if it's the law of gravity.

My rules? Or the "rules" you've applied to me. Half that stuff you actually do yourself

[Heracles 417]

My rules? Or the "rules" you've applied to me. Half that stuff you actually do yourself

Yeah I learned from the best. From the person who is on a crusade about nothing.

Edited September 22, 2008 by Aficionado

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

My rules? Or the "rules" you've applied to me. Half that stuff you actually do yourself

Yeah I learned from the best.

Of course you did. Because I'm like totally responsible for your behaviour and general demeanor, aren't I...

Crusade? Is that your new mantra to describe my personal deficiencies? You don't have the wit for it.

Edited September 22, 2008 by Paul Daniels

[rocks 494]

Can't see it.

hmm you're right, maybe if we ask Aficionado nicely...

[nowhereman 1]

Which is fine, but how exactly does it lead to proper debate or discussion if the only requirement to poo poo an idea/argument is to suggest the person holding that point of view is a liberal (communist, tree hugging hippy, dope smoking, lesbian poodle) and subject closed? I might as well counterpoint that with calling people jackbooted, facist, lipstick wearing pigs and pack my bags. In fact, the temptation is very, very strong

I am not denying labels are thrown out, human nature really, but get annoyed when only one side is held accountable, 24/7, while the other is given a green light to use them.

Right or wrong, labels are a part of life and in every single group and culture.

I call em like I see them & although both parties are guilty of misusing labels, rhetoric, distortions of the truth, etc. it's my opinion that Republicans have been much more guilty of this over the past 8 years. Of course the Bush administration is (again in my opinion) largely responsible for this, due to the dirty tactics of scumbags like Karl Rove. Although Rove is a complete scumbag he's a smart one, because he knows that if you throw enough manure on the wall some will stick.

I was a Reagan follower back in the late 80's but the antics of the Bush administration have pushed my views to the left... I would "label" myself a moderate independent at this point. Once the bad taste of the Bush administration leaves my mouth I may vote for some Republicans again, but for the next election I feel that they've lost the right to run this country. Others would argue that the conduct of the Democrats have pushed them farther right & to each his own... it's a free country.

[Heracles 417]

Of course you did. Because I'm like totally responsible for your behaviour and general demeanor, aren't I...

You are the one who has proven you live by the rules. Not me.

Oh #### I forget, rule 2. Sorry mate no evidence apart from going through your 21,400 posts. Reading the bull ####### once is enough for me..

Edited September 22, 2008 by Aficionado

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Of course you did. Because I'm like totally responsible for your behaviour and general demeanor, aren't I...

You are the one who has proven you live by the rules. Not me.

Oh #### I forget, rule 2. Sorry mate no evidence apart from going through your 21,400 posts.

You need to get over your post deficiency complex.