It is almost over

[mak2]

As a cheap shot at your conservative posts?

I have a liberal acquaintance who is just like mak2 when it comes to drive by posting, but he does it on my facelessbook page. I laughed my ass off when he posted this today, as a cheap shot at my conservative posts. These liberal yahoos never look in the mirror.

 

[mak2]

Anything that is not stupid far right wing stirs your emotions.

yup, textbook trolling regardless of the point of view. Posting for no more reason than to stir up the emotions on a forum.

 

[mak2]

You guys have run every single person off this forum that is not far right wing. Some cannot venture out to other forums without getting banned for childish stupidity, then thinking (I truly believe honestly thinking) he has such a brilliant right wing mind other forums ban him because of his dominating intelligence. It would be funny to watch but is it just sad. Jev, if you are capable of any introspection at all read up this thread and see who insulted who first. I don't mind being called a cub scout, but you cannot seem to survive anywhere but here, and you think you are brilliant. Ok man, if that is what you need.

mak2 is a Cub Scout at this game. It would be nice if he were to bring forth a provocative topic for debate, stick around and toss real ideas back and forth, and keep from injecting accusatory generalities and websites like dailykos that exist purely to give fodder to the base who are unable to engage in dialog and do valid research.

On Monday I had a discussion on facebook regarding Obama's absence in Paris over the weekend. The crowd were all fairly staunch liberals, and friends of a foodie I made friends with because of her food blog. The dialog went 49 exchanges without anyone demeaning me for my viewpoints, which I substantiated through web links that could not be called left or right, but just fact based. Two of the people in the discussion are licensed psychologists from Berkley California, with one being my foodie friend. I sensed that my friend was borderline getting upset that I was not succumbing to her references, which I challenged as not being truthful or accurate, but were articles written where the contend was blatantly changed to skew the facts. She backed off when the other psychologist began agreeing with my points as I presented multiple references as to the accurate course of events. She never agreed with me (she says Obama is not left enough for her liking, to give you an idea what I was up against), but stopped with the inaccurate references when her psychologist friend began acknowledging the accuracy of my sources.

While I'm sure nobody changed their political views or affiliation over this dialog, it was refreshing and intellectually stimulating to have a discussion where people exchange viewpoints without accusing anyone being a lower life form, a racist, a homophobe or sexual deviant (teabagger). Sadly, this is the exception when it comes to political discussion, but it showed me that not all liberals act like those we find on forums.

 

[tiredretired]

Actually before I was banned I think my favorite RWNJ thread was the one about Obama being the antichrist.

You mean he isn't? Now that my friend is nothing but left wing gibberish.

 

[tiredretired]

You guys have run every single person off this forum that is not far right wing. Some cannot venture out to other forums without getting banned for childish stupidity, then thinking (I truly believe honestly thinking) he has such a brilliant right wing mind other forums ban him because of his dominating intelligence. It would be funny to watch but is it just sad. Jev, if you are capable of any introspection at all read up this thread and see who insulted who first. I don't mind being called a cub scout, but you cannot seem to survive anywhere but here, and you think you are brilliant. Ok man, if that is what you need.

You want an example of intolerance and downright scum. I suggest you try a little experiment. It will be harmless. Just for grins and chuckles, go on Democratic Underground, the discussion part, and try to have an intelligent conversation with anyone there by taking a conservative approach to a topical issue such as lets say the XL pipeline. I've read you beliefs on the XL, so even that should be enough to get the juices flowing.

For once, I am serious. You may be amazed.

 

[squerly]

The moderators deleted my post and edited any reference to it out of any post below it. Are you kidding me? And over the likes of Mak2? That shit just ain't right.

 

[tiredretired]

ONe of the most intelligent replies I have ran into on this fourm. Good work.

Yeah, it was pretty good wasn't it? See, I can talk in cartoonese too. Still want that IPA?

 

[JEV]

You guys have run every single person off this forum that is not far right wing. Some cannot venture out to other forums without getting banned for childish stupidity, then thinking (I truly believe honestly thinking) he has such a brilliant right wing mind other forums ban him because of his dominating intelligence. It would be funny to watch but is it just sad. Jev, if you are capable of any introspection at all read up this thread and see who insulted who first. I don't mind being called a cub scout, but you cannot seem to survive anywhere but here, and you think you are brilliant. Ok man, if that is what you need.

I guess I just have a short fuse for people who repeat the same old "hater, racist, homophobe" crap when a conservative principle is brought forth. I sure I "survive" here because of the lack of this childish drivel. You fit in well over there...it's "you!"

 

[SShepherd]

Anything that is not stupid far right wing stirs your emotions.

no, prickish childish comments is what piss people off- and that, BTW, is why "liberals" don't stick around. They can't have a conversation with turning into insulting little butthurt babies.

I refuse to play your little game. You want to act like an arrogant little napoleon be my guest but until you learn how to have a discussion like a normal person without snide, backhanded passive aggressive comments you're just another liberal doush.

 

[Danang Sailor]

I find it hilariously funny the RW supposedly knows this administration is the most corrupt in the history of history. Literally dozens of outrage and crimes and on and on...yet not a trace of evidence. It is always just our of reach, for some reason. Either the far right lives in a fantasy world or they are so incredibly incompetent and impotent it doesn't matter. Disregard for the constitution? If Obama is doing illegal stuff why is it the Republicans just cant seem to do a damn think about it except form yet another committee. I agree these right wing fantasy things sometimes are even funnier then the Onion,

I never said nor implied "this administration is the most corrupt in history"; some of us do indeed remember history, as
in the Teapot Dome Affair, among others. However, Obama and Holder did indeed collude to quash the prosecution of
the New Black Panthers voter intimidation case; Obama has been taken to task by a majority of the government's IG's for
obstruction of their investigations of corruption and malfeasance, which are impeachable offenses (see Note, below).
Further, his attempts to legislate by fiat are in direct violation of his Oath of Office regarding the Constitution. There is
ample evidence regarding all of these but it has to be devilishly hard to get an indictment (impeachment) when the head
of the Department of Justice is a co-conspirator and would rather be cited for Contempt of Congress than to comply with
subpoenas for documents.

The article you linked is full of literal nonsense. What was the point of noting that Alinsky is dead? His ideas have lived
on, as have the ideas of others, as I noted. Some of the things listed as "hoaxes" have been proven to be facts. The vast
majority of Tea Party people are not blithering idiots who drool and need caretakers (my allusion to the tone of that
hit piece).

So, we have hoaxes that aren't, and impeachable crimes that are being ignored. These are not fantasies; they are facts which
can be ascertained by anyone who cares to look. Now, Mak, I call your attention to the Note, as it directly applies to your
post.




Note: Many people are confused by wording of Article II, Section 4, so this is a good time to address that confusion;
here is what that section says:
"The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and
Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors." (Emphasis added - DS)

We can all understand what treason and bribery are, but what are these "high Crimes and Misdemeanors"? First, they are not
some special sort of crime specific to government officials; they are the same crimes we can all be arrested and tried for
committing. So, why does this section of the Constitution call them "high"? It actually doesn't! The "high" specified does
not define the crimes, but those who commit them! "High" government officials, that is; this usage was common at the
time the Constitution was written. It only becomes confusing if we try to apply contemporary meaning to the word.

Hopefully, this will clarify that every crime for which we ordinary citizens can be arrested and prosecuted - perjury,
misuse of funds, obstruction of justice, etc. - are the same crimes for which the "high" officials mentioned in Article
II, Section 4 may be impeached, tried, and convicted.

 

[MrLiberty]

It could be Holder not doing his job, or it could be he don't arrest people for crazy RW fantasy thingys.

Since we know holder and obama are both corrupt politicians I would think it is obvious to anyone that it is holder not doing his job. The only fantasy is the one liberals live in.

http://www.examiner.com/article/federal-court-top-obama-officials-shut-down-black-panthers-case

U.S. District Court Judge Reggie Walton in Washington, D.C. has confirmed that, contrary to everything we were told, Obama administration officials at the highest levels did in fact directly interfere with and shut down the criminal prosecution of armed Black Panthers who showed up at a voting station and were caught on tape openly intimidating voters.

 

[Big Dog]

The moderators deleted my post and edited any reference to it out of any post below it. Are you kidding me? And over the likes of Mak2? That shit just ain't right.

On this site?? Where?

 

[JEV]

On this site?? Where?

Nice cover.

 

[jpr62902]

On this site?? Where?

Nice cover.

Seriously. No one deleted any of Squerly's posts here.

 

[Big Dog]

Nice cover.

Seriously. No one deleted any of Squerly's posts here.

I venture to guess he was referring to this post ..................

You want an example of intolerance and downright scum. I suggest you try a little experiment. It will be harmless. Just for grins and chuckles, go on Democratic Underground, the discussion part, and try to have an intelligent conversation with anyone there by taking a conservative approach to a topical issue such as lets say the XL pipeline. I've read you beliefs on the XL, so even that should be enough to get the juices flowing.

For once, I am serious. You may be amazed.

 

[Kane]

Actually before I was banned I think my favorite RWNJ thread was the one about Obama being the antichrist.

No, Barack Hussein Obama isn't the anti-Christ. But tell me, mak2, tell me about any one person of influence in Obama's life that wasn't a socialist, communist, anti-colonist, anti-imperialist, anti-Semite, Muslim sympathizer, black liberation theologist, domestic terrorist and just plain ol' anti-American social anarchist?

I've asked you before, but now that you've had a few years to think about it, give me one person. Besides his grandparents, name one person of influence in Obama's life that was good ol' apple pie and Chevrolet American.

You can't.

But you're right on one thing: In two years it will be over and we can finally air out the White House.

 

[squerly]

I sincerely apologize to everyone, I was mistaken. I haven’t been indulging lately in the delight that comes from Mak’s posts as generally they are all the same, just written on a different day. Last night I dropped into this one and as usual, it read exactly like his others. Starts by referencing some BS link that leans so far left that you start to get seasick and then degrades from there.

I should have read the thread from the beginning, but I assumed it was the thread from a few days ago where I make a comment about his (Mak’s) assumed physical features. FWIW, I was asked by a moderator to remove it but I didn’t, and I mistakenly connected this request to this thread and assumed the moderator removed it. I apologize to the moderators, Doc and the rest of you, I fucked up.

I think it’s time for me to take a break. I’m not cut out to listen to this stuff or try to debate a point whose outcome will never change. I’m just to logically minded, paid too many taxes in my life and worked too hard to buy into the Liberal mindset.

Once again, my apologies’ to all.

You too shorty.

 

[tiredretired]

I sincerely apologize to everyone, I was mistaken. I haven’t been indulging lately in the delight that comes from Mak’s posts as generally they are all the same, just written on a different day. Last night I dropped into this one and as usual, it read exactly like his others. Starts by referencing some BS link that leans so far left that you start to get seasick and then degrades from there.

I should have read the thread from the beginning, but I assumed it was the thread from a few days ago where I make a comment about his (Mak’s) assumed physical features. FWIW, I was asked by a moderator to remove it but I didn’t, and I mistakenly connected this request to this thread and assumed the moderator removed it. I apologize to the moderators, Doc and the rest of you, I fucked up.

I think it’s time for me to take a break. I’m not cut out to listen to this stuff or try to debate a point whose outcome will never change. I’m just to logically minded, paid too many taxes in my life and worked too hard to buy into the Liberal mindset.

Once again, my apologies’ to all.

You too shorty.

Don't worry about it. It's not so much the mistake, but how one handles it afterward that makes the man.

I once screwed up on another site and retracted my statements. I was crucified for it, one low life member actually used it as his sig line and eventually I was banned. Low lifers cannot get past their own low self esteem.

We are better then that here. Now keep working and paying your taxes like a good conservative.

 

[Kane]

Don't fret about it, squerly. Explaining the same factual thing to liberals over and over and over again CAN be a bit pointless, and the interminable repetition CAN be a bit confounding.

And since we cannot convince liberals of the obvious by rational thinking, we are left to tedious ROTE as the sole method of pedagogy. Yes, it can be boring and subject to screwup if we're not careful. No harm; No foul.

But surely you wont let someone as misguidedly liberal as mak2 get to you. No dose of reason will ever make the man well, so don't blame yourself.

 

[ki0ho]

No, Barack Hussein Obama isn't the anti-Christ. But tell me, mak2, tell me about any one person of influence in Obama's life that wasn't a socialist, communist, anti-colonist, anti-imperialist, anti-Semite, Muslim sympathizer, black liberation theologist, domestic terrorist and just plain ol' anti-American social anarchist?

I've asked you before, but now that you've had a few years to think about it, give me one person. Besides his grandparents, name one person of influence in Obama's life that was good ol' apple pie and Chevrolet American.

You can't.

But you're right on one thing: In two years it will be over and we can finally air out the White House.

It is going to take..a strong dose of hog dip and a scrubing with clorox!!! then ya can open the doors and air it out......IMHO

 

[mak2]

I have been there a couple of times but I don't think I have ever signed in. It is a pretty big forum with hundreds (or more) of posts per day right? How are you trying to compare that to FF?

You want an example of intolerance and downright scum. I suggest you try a little experiment. It will be harmless. Just for grins and chuckles, go on Democratic Underground, the discussion part, and try to have an intelligent conversation with anyone there by taking a conservative approach to a topical issue such as lets say the XL pipeline. I've read you beliefs on the XL, so even that should be enough to get the juices flowing.

For once, I am serious. You may be amazed.

 

[Kane]

I have been there a couple of times but I don't think I have ever signed in. It is a pretty big forum with hundreds (or more) of posts per day right? How are you trying to compare that to FF?

Typical liberal tactics when confronted with intellectual difficulty. Deflection. Straw men.

Wanna try again, mak2?

 

[mak2]

1. What typical liberal tactics did I use?

2. What exactly was said that was intelligent enough it would present any sort of difficulty to anyone, except maybe you?

3. What did I deflect?

4. What straw man did I construct?


No, I really don't want to try again.

Typical liberal tactics when confronted with intellectual difficulty. Deflection. Straw men.

Wanna try again, mak2?

 

[ki0ho]

1. What typical liberal tactics did I use?

2. What exactly was said that was intelligent enough it would present any sort of difficulty to anyone, except maybe you?

3. What did I deflect?

4. What straw man did I construct?


No, I really don't want to try again.

Then why did you even bother to answer?................except to look for trouble.....

 

[mak2]

He made a bunch of baseless statemnts I suspect he doesn't even know what he means. So I thought I would ask him to explain. Why do you feel the need to protect him? You guys special buddies or something?

Then why did you even bother to answer?................except to look for trouble.....

 

[Kane]

1. What typical liberal tactics did I use?

2. What exactly was said that was intelligent enough it would present any sort of difficulty to anyone, except maybe you?

3. What did I deflect?

4. What straw man did I construct?


No, I really don't want to try again.

Unbelievable, mak2. WTF? Surely you can read. TiredRetired asked you politely to have a conversation with your liberal buddies on some other liberal site about the XL pipeline. And then report back.

You deflected away from the task by some BS gibberish concerning signing in. You created a straw man conversation concerning the size of other sites comparable to FF. You never did speak to the XL pipeline in any respect. Typical liberal debate tactics.

So yes, we'd like you to try again. Take a pro-XL position to another liberal site and tell us how the debate went. Simple enough?

 

[mak2]

He was attempting to say DU is worse than FF in its intolerance of outside thought and they ran people off. I simply pointed out he was wrong due simply to the fact there are thousands of posters there and 12 here. TR's silly homework assignment was flawed and a waste of time anyone capable of thought could see. I might give you a little homework, if you are going to use words like deflect, straw man, typical liberal tactics, etc, try to have some idea what the words mean. Lets go slow with a real easy one...where did I use a strawman?

For your convince here is my post.

I have been there a couple of times but I don't think I have ever signed in. It is a pretty big forum with hundreds (or more) of posts per day right? How are you trying to compare that to FF?

His too. To make it as simple for you as possible.

You want an example of intolerance and downright scum. I suggest you try a little experiment. It will be harmless. Just for grins and chuckles, go on Democratic Underground, the discussion part, and try to have an intelligent conversation with anyone there by taking a conservative approach to a topical issue such as lets say the XL pipeline. I've read you beliefs on the XL, so even that should be enough to get the juices flowing.

For once, I am serious. You may be amazed.

Unbelievable, mak2. Surely you can read. TiredRetired asked you politely to have a conversation with your liberal buddies on some other liberal site about the XL pipeline and report back.

You deflected away from the task by gibberish concerning signing in. You created a straw man concerning the size of other sites comparable to FF. Typical liberal debate tactics.

So yes, we'd like you to try again. Take the pro-XL position to another liberal site and tell us how the debate went.

 

[Kane]

He was attempting to say DU is worse than FF in its intolerance of outside thought and they ran people off. I simply pointed out he was wrong due simply to the fact there are thousands of posters there and 12 here. TR's silly homework assignment was flawed and a waste of time anyone capable of thought could see. I might give you a little homework, if you are going to use words like deflect, straw man, typical liberal tactics, etc, try to have some idea what the words mean. Lets go slow with a real easy one...where did I use a strawman?

... blah, blah, blah

Just more liberal deflection, mak2. Now stop deflecting like a liberal and focus on the task assigned by TiredRetired:

I suggest you try a little experiment. It will be harmless. Just for grins and chuckles, go on Democratic Underground, the discussion part, and try to have an intelligent conversation with anyone there by taking a conservative approach to a topical issue such as lets say the XL pipeline. I've read you beliefs on the XL, so even that should be enough to get the juices flowing.

For once, I am serious. You may be amazed.

And then report back. Simple enough?

 

[mak2]

You really didn't know what those words meant, then when you looked them up you realized.

Just more liberal deflection, mak2. Now stop deflecting like a liberal and focus on the task assigned by TiredRetired:

And then report back. Simple enough?

 

[mla2ofus]

Mak, please don't take this personally, but you remind me of the description I gave recently of al Sharpton: He reminds of the little dog that starts yapping in the front yard, stirs up all the big dogs, and then retreats quietly under the porch.
Mike