Originally Posted By Dabob2 I'm actually trying to get him to stop dancing, but you may be right about the futility of that.
Originally Posted By mawnck In case you haven't noticed, you can answer him a million times with every link on the internet, and all you're going to get out of it is fabulous typing skills. It isn't worth it.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <In case you haven't noticed, you can answer him a million times with every link on the internet, and all you're going to get out of it is fabulous typing skills.> Actually, if you present relevant facts and logic that actually counter my opinions, then you'd convince me. But if all you're going to do is repeat liberal talking points, than no, that won't work. I know you'd like to think I'm some unreasonable abberation, but the truth is millions of Americans look at the evidence and draw similar conclusions to me. And you're not going to convince with your "rightness" by distorting, dismissing, and denigrating their opinions.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***Actually, if you present relevant facts and logic that actually counter my opinions, then you'd convince me.*** Now THIS is funny. You have never, in all your years of posting, ever even HINTED at agreeing or even respecting any views that aren't completely in lockstep with your own. Not even once. Not even a hint. How laughable.
Originally Posted By gadzuux That's the whole trick with douglas and other conservatives. They believe what they believe, which is demonstrably wrong. So they twist and contort some facts, try to discredit what they can, and ignore the rest. The result? Bush is a great president, invading iraq was justified by 9/11, terry schaivo could have lived a full productive life, torture is necessary even though we don't actually do it, tax cuts increase taxes, katrina was a failure of the democrats, gays can't marry because they can't procreate, government should not be accountable to the people it represents, and god's waiting on the other side to smack you down after you die. It's a topsy turvy world that doesn't require facts, only faith.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <That's the whole trick with douglas and other conservatives. They believe what they believe, which is demonstrably wrong.> You're projecting.
Originally Posted By DlandDug I am doing something I prefer to avoid here, and discuss personalities. Mawnck, Doug and Dabob have been engaged in this "dance" for years here in WE. I cannot tell you how many threads have run into hundreds of posts (literally) which consist of little more than "says you," and "says you." The issue, ultimately, isn't who is right and who is wrong, but the inability to state an opinion and leave it alone. Each is absolutely intent on getting in the last word. OK, rant off.
Originally Posted By DlandDug >>That's the whole trick with douglas and other conservatives. They believe what they believe, which is demonstrably wrong. So they twist and contort some facts, try to discredit what they can, and ignore the rest.<< I cannot agree that this is just a conservative thing. Rather, it is true of anyone whose views are extreme and intractable. Or, to paraphrase what followed this: That's the whole trick with liberals. They believe what they believe, which is demonstrably wrong. So they twist and contort some facts, try to discredit what they can, and ignore the rest. The result? Bush is the worst President in history, invading Iraq had nothing to do with America's security, Terry Schaivo didn't deserve to live, America engages in heinous torture, increasing taxes balances the budget, Katrina was caused by Republicans, anyone who opposes gay marriage for any reason is a bigot, government should not be accountable to the people it represents, and human existence is just a series of meaningless interactions leading to oblivion. See how that works?
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <Mawnck, Doug and Dabob have been engaged in this "dance" for years here in WE. I cannot tell you how many threads have run into hundreds of posts (literally) which consist of little more than "says you," and "says you."> Mawnck doesn't do that. In fact, he's trying to get me to stop responding when the nonsense starts.
Originally Posted By DlandDug >>Mawnck doesn't do that.<< No, he doesn't. The comment was addressed to Mawnck.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh You know, I don't need to have the last word. If someone wants to disagree with what I said, or present facts and logic that show I'm wrong, I'm fine with it. But it does annoy me when I'm told my opinion is wrong or worse, and another opinion is presented. I'm particularly annoyed when my opinion is denigrated or distorted, or my character is attacked. And I hope you're not equated me with the posters that do this Dug, because they do the same to you. Maybe you think it's a virtue to show restraint in your conversations with them, but I wish you wouldn't. Their posts need to be challenged, and I try to go that with civility and fact, although maybe I fail at times.
Originally Posted By DlandDug My comments were not intended as a value judgement on either person involved. Just an observation based on many years of reading and participating in these boards.
Originally Posted By gadzuux Nice try, but it doesn't work both ways, it just leads to empty sophistry. >> Bush is the worst President in history << Certainly arguable, at least. Who would be worse? >> Terry Schaivo didn't deserve to live << She effectively died a long time ago. And the party of 'lesser government' has no business interfering with the family's decisions. Especially when the motivation is personal faith. >> America engages in heinous torture << Care to dispute? >> increasing taxes balances the budget << Pretty much. At the very least, increasing taxes increases revenue, as sure as night follows day. >> Katrina was caused by Republicans << Katrina represents one of the greatest failures of the bush administration, and exposed the incompetence and cronyism. >> anyone who opposes gay marriage for any reason is a bigot << And what other reason could there be to systematically deny fourth amendment protections of equal treatment under the law to a class of citizens? >> government should not be accountable to the people it represents << Exactly what this administration strives for at all times. >> and human existence is just a series of meaningless interactions leading to oblivion. << Not the purview of our government. You're free to believe anything you like about the meaning of life, just don't presume to legislate your faith.
Originally Posted By DlandDug >>Nice try, but it doesn't work both ways...<< But post #209 demonstrates pretty effectively that it does. The issue is not whether one view is right and the other is wrong. It is this: >>That's the whole trick with douglas and other conservatives. They believe what they believe, which is demonstrably wrong. So they twist and contort some facts, try to discredit what they can, and ignore the rest.<< This point of view, rather than leading to any meaningful discussion, instead leads to such hard and fast "facts" as those presented in each laundry list. And opposing those "facts" (whether they are espoused by conservatives or liberals) becomes an exercise in futility.
Originally Posted By gadzuux But as I said - it doesn't work both ways. You illustrated that nicely. I posted a series of fallacies held dear by conservatives. You attempted to "flip" them to show that it could apply equally to the progressive viewpoint. And as I demonstrated, it doesn't work. In your version, each point was relatively correct - that is, NOT a fallacy. See?
Originally Posted By inlandemporer "If someone wants to disagree with what I said, or present facts and logic that show I'm wrong, I'm fine with it. " You weren't in the bridge to nowhere thread. Dabob presented facts and evidence that Palin supported that bridge earlier, and you couldn't admit to the obvious fact that she did. It's not even the most horrible thing for a politician to do. Most of them like to brag they bring home the bacon for their home state. Of course one state's bacon can be the nation's pork, but that's par for the course. What mattered is she used to favor it but made a big deal about opposing it after it became a symbol of pork, pretending she always opposed it, which she didn't. "I try to go that with civility and fact, although maybe I fail at times." Ya' think?
