Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <You can't even figure out when people are trying to be decent to you.> Yes, I can. I'd take your advise a lot more seriously if you would start following it. Again, if you and Dabob and the rest want to debate the issues honestly, then you need to stop distorting and attacking. Dabob made a misleading statement. I corrected it. Rather than just admitting he was wrong, he had to make it personal. And you just launched into me, without any comment about the actual debate. Again, if I say something that's incorrect, then show me where I got it wrong. But launching unjust attack after unjust attack is not going to make me change my mind, or prevent me from pointing out when you make an error, or state an opinion I don't agree with.
Originally Posted By BeautysBeast Kids..can u say rats deserting a sinking ship?? sure, i knew u could..
Originally Posted By jonvn "I'd take your advise a lot more seriously if you would start following it." Please, just go troll someplace else. You garner no respect with this garbage you constantly post, and make your own viewpoint totally invalid. Go lie to some other people for a while. I'm done.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Well, no, that's not how it happened, and it's there for anyone to see. My statement was not technically correct, but you "corrected" it with a statement that was misleading to the point of being further from the truth than mine in practical terms. Get real here; he replaced all the attorneys except a handful, and those handful lasted a few months. Big hairy difference from what Clinton did - not. But the larger point is this; people here HAVE been trying to be decent to you lately, but it's like you won't take yes for an answer. Try to see things as they are, Doug; it isn't me, or jonvn, who half a dozen or more people of every political stripe have been taking to task for parsing and being evasive and obfuscating, and have been doing so for months. It's you. It isn't us who have our posts regularly lampooned and compared to a Monty Python sketch, it's you. If enough people were all telling me the same thing, I think the very first thing I'd do is deny it; that's human nature. But if they kept saying it, I just might take an honest look at myself and think there just might be something to it. But hey - you've been led to the water, and only you can decide if you want to drink.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <My statement was not technically correct, but you "corrected" it with a statement that was misleading to the point of being further from the truth than mine in practical terms.> No, it wasn't. And the truth is there for anyone to see. <If enough people were all telling me the same thing, I think the very first thing I'd do is deny it; that's human nature. But if they kept saying it, I just might take an honest look at myself and think there just might be something to it.> And, if it was anyone who's opinion I respected, I'd do that. But when the people saying it are the people who are getting other things wrong and distorting what I say, I take their opinion with a grain of salt.
Originally Posted By jonvn "Why bother?" I tried because I thought that maybe there could be some semblance of reason to the person and that by trying to talk to him in a straightforward manner, it would be helpful. It was not. It was only the smallest of hopes anyway. What ended up happening was the guy started distorting what I was saying to him. At this point, delusional is a word. I don't think he's quite all there at this point, and it's really not helpful to him or anyone else to engage him.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 What's sad, too, is that with "And, if it was anyone who's opinion I respected, I'd do that. But when the people saying it are the people who are getting other things wrong and distorting what I say, I take their opinion with a grain of salt."... he's essentially saying he doesn't respect my opinion, or yours, or Kar2oonman's, or SPP's, or ecdc's, or inlandemporer's, or roadtrip's, or imadisneygal's, etc. etc. etc. He'd never believe it, but I actually do respect many of his opinions, even if I don't agree with them. It's the parsing and evasion and obfuscation I don't respect, and that we're all asking him to knock off. And for that we get a knee-jerk, "it's not me, it's you." Oh well.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh I still respect Roadtrip's and imadisneygal's. They are just wrong on politics. <It's the parsing and evasion and obfuscation I don't respect, and that we're all asking him to knock off.> I haven't evaded or obfuscated once on this thread. And what you called parsing I call setting the record straight - you said something that wasn't true, and you can't admit it so you claim it's my fault. It's nothing new - you hold liberals and conservatives to different standards.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 No I don't. If a liberal did what you do, I'd call him on it too, and so would all those others whose opinions you can't seem to respect. As I said, I do respect your opinions per se, even when I disagree with them. Too bad you can't return the favor.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <Too bad you can't return the favor.> I wasn't the one who started making personal attacks. You were.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/08/30/gonzales.probe/index.html" target="_blank">http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITI CS/08/30/gonzales.probe/index.html</a> The inspector general from the Justice Department will be looking into whether Gonzales intentionally misled Congress during his testimony.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>The inspector general from the Justice Department will be looking into whether Gonzales intentionally misled Congress during his testimony.<< Good. Gonzales is another example of the questionable judgement this president shows in choosing his pals and appointments.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <<Too bad you can't return the favor.>> <I wasn't the one who started making personal attacks. You were.> I responded to your erroneous comments and, as usual, you whine that it's a "personal attack." But we're getting nowhere once again. Back - you know - ON TOPIC, I don't know how independent this guy Fine is; let's hope he is, though, and justice is done.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <I responded to your erroneous comments and, as usual, you whine that it's a "personal attack."> No, I'm pointing out that you started us on this road to nowhere. You did it in post 51.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 That's where I pointed out the misleading nature of your comments (and why they were misleading), then said at least I admitted it when I was wrong, since I already had in this very thread. It wouldn't have been a road to nowhere if you hadn't said flat out that I don't admit when I was wrong, I had to point out where I had done so, you couldn't just say "oh, okay," but instead kept attacking... If you lie about me, by saying "no, you don't" (admit when I'm wrong), I'm going to respond to that lie. Sorry. And by the way, I've explained why your statements on the attorneys were misleading. You've only said "no they weren't," without explanation. So rise to the challenge: what's the big hairy difference in practical terms between Clinton replacing all the attorneys upon taking office, and Bush replacing all but a handful and then replacing that handful within a few months? What's the big distinction?
