FINAL COUNTDOWN FOR USA ELECTION 2008

@Cycloptichorn,

What's wrong with Wally Hirsch if that is even true? Give me some quotes that you think are offensive. What has he done that you think is illegal or irresponsible or unethical. If he is so bad, why would he want to help Sarah achieve success inside the GOP? Why wouldn't he wanted to have her rise to power in the AIP?

Newsweek is the farthest left of all the weekly news magazines, and I doubt they have bothered to provide the full story of any of this nor do they bother to correct any misinformation when it is put out. Lets see how long it takes them to correct the misinformation that Sarah was a member of the AIP now that this has been corrected by the AIP itself.

0 Replies

@Foxfyre,

Foxfyre wrote:

You are going to believe what you want to believe. I see it differently than you.

That much is obvious by now, I would say.

Foxfyre wrote:

You believe Obama is the great messiah who will save the world.

That pretty much disqualifies everything else you have to say. You don't take opposition to your political point of view at face value. You seem to believe that everyone who doesn't agree with your point of view has fallen for some kind of idol worship.

Foxfyre wrote:

I don't see anything but pretty much an empty suit with a lot of dangerous ideas.

Sure, you keep saying that. You have so far not managed to specifically name even one of those "dangerous ideas", though.

But hey, if Obama has so many dangerous ideas, why don't you just tell is which one would be the most dangerous one?

You're probably going to say that you have addressed all of that, at length, before. But let's just assume somebody missed all of that, and that just naming the most dangerous idea Obama holds can't take more than a minute, okay?

Spill the beans. What's so dangerous about Obama?

Foxfyre wrote:

You want to believe Sarah Palin is an evil, hideous person.

Again, you're wrong. I believe that Palin is in over her head. I believe she is not capable competently filling the position of Vice President, let alone President of the United States and Commander in Chief. I believe she is a skilled politician, though. I believe people in Alaska like her. However, I believe she has so far exhibited no interest in all things political outside the scope of Alaskan politics. I believe she was the wrong choice as Vice Presidential candidate.

Foxfyre wrote:

I prefer to see her as a bright, capable, and remarkable woman.

That's certainly true. She seems to be capable of being Governor of Alaska. And there are bright, capable, remarkable women doing excellent work all over the United States.

That doesn't mean that all of them would be qualified to become Vice President or President. And the same is true for Governor Palin.

Foxfyre wrote:

You believe George W. Bush is Satan personified.

Again, you presume too much. I won't bother to even go into that one.

Foxfyre wrote:

You usually believe the worst of America and Americans;

Certainly not true. I understand that it helps you to believe that, because then you can portray your position as the "pro-American", "patriotic" position, and anyone disagreeing with that position is a hateful anti-American lunatic by default.

Sad, in a way.

Foxfyre wrote:

I believe America is a pretty great place and worth defending.

Good for you.

Foxfyre wrote:

You have made it clear that you see me as having no thought or point of view worth considering.

I wouldn't reply to your posts if that was the case. Rather, I'd put you on ignore.

Foxfyre wrote:

I allow you that point of view. I trust you will allow me to continue to see you as not having any interest in any truth that upsets your negative views about anything.

That is just blabbering. What particular "truth" have you pointed out? What "negative views" are you referring to?

Blabbering when caught in defense of a radical, secessionist party.

Pathetic.

1 Reply

@Foxfyre,

Quote:

I disagree with them that secession is the best way for them to achieve their goals. I'm certain that Todd and Sarah Palin and most Alaskans also disagree wtih them on that.

Can you link to the information that provided you with this certainty?

See, b/c I'm quite certain that Ayers has nothing to do with Obama's beliefs in any way. You however have been claiming the opposite for weeks now. What's different about the two situations? The Palins were far more involved with an actual radical organization than Obama was, yet you are 'certain' on one, but not the other. Please explain this in detail.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

@old europe,

That's the way I see most of our exchanges. Pathetic. It's almost impossible to have an exchange of opinion or observations that aren't gotcha or ad hominem or 'you're an idiot'. But you have a lot of company there, so let's just leave it at that.

2 Replies

@Foxfyre,

Foxfyre wrote:

That's the way I see most of our exchanges. Pathetic. Let's just leave it at that.

The way I see most of our exchanges is this:

You start out with some nonsensical claim. People provide evidence that shows that you were wrong. You defend your nonsensical claim. People point out your error. You start blabbering, accusing anyone disagreeing with you of being hateful, anti-American. People argue with that.

You react as if you had been insulted, and drop out of the conversation.

1 Reply

@Foxfyre,

Foxfyre wrote:

That's the way I see most of our exchanges. Pathetic. It's almost impossible to have an exchange of opinion or observations that aren't gotcha or ad hominem or 'you're an idiot'. But you have a lot of company there, so let's just leave it at that.

Have you ever wondered why so many of your exchanges end up this way, Fox? Other Conservatives here don't have this problem, so don't claim it's just Liberal prosecution of your viewpoint.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

But the AIP wants to regain its territorial status and therefore more control over their own affairs. They certainly aren't advocating bombing buildings without remorse as Ayers did and still doesn't regret other than he wasn't as successful as he would have liked to have been doing that. The AIP is not advocating harming anybody or destroying everything America stands for. They believe their government has not kept its promises to them and they therefore want to regain control of their own destiny.

I do not see anything on the AIP website that subscribes to anything subversive. The one primary principle in the U.S. Constitution is the belief that the people should govern themselves. I do see the mindset of a group of people who believe that they were not fully informed when they voted for statehood, and that their government has since broken its contract with the people. I agree with them that in many ways it has.

Well, Foxfyre, you said you'd seen their websited, called "Basic questions".

Obviously you didn't notice that these 'basic questions' only deal with questions and answers about Alaskan INDEPENDENCE...

... not with a 'territorial status' or 'governing themselves'. (There's no dispute worldwide what 'independence' is.)

2 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

On the other hand, since McCain supporters are called by him "his fellow prisoners" ... independence from the U.S.A. can't be a bad alternative Very Happy

0 Replies

What a surprise. Foxfyre is once again wasting pages and pages of A2K real eastate telling everyone what rotten hateful meanies they are to her.

Yeah, pathetic, that pretty much sums it up.

0 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

Well Walter, you must not have read my post that you quoted. Or the Q&A for that matter that reassures the people that reverting to territorial status would not lose them all the perks they enjoy as U.S. Citizens.

0 Replies

@old europe,

Observation noted. As I have noted so very many times before. At least you could come up with some original insulting observations couldn't you? No originality at all? Come on. You can do better. I know you are more creative than Cyclop or Kicky or CI (who I have frequently suspected of being the same person). You may not be able to beat Debra who does at least try to think up a new wrinkle now and then.

But yeah, when you guys don't have anything better than personal insults to make your case with, I usually do bow out. Because I've won and anything further will just be redundant. Smile

3 Replies

@Foxfyre,

Foxfyre wrote:

But yeah, when you guys don't have anything better than personal insults to make your case with, I usually do bow out.

But we have a lot of better stuff. We have your response to a quote from the AIP website:

Foxfyre wrote:

You'll need more than something made up by some hateful person to convince me that the AIP is some subversive radical organization.

When you realized that this

the Alaskan Independence Party wrote:

However, considering the moral, educational, and economic decay of the U.S., Alaskans' who hold themselves to a higher standard might very well decide to at least maintain an arm's length distance from a country in decline.

came, in fact, from the AIP, you went off on a rant.You didn't respond to the content of the post at all. Rather, you started of by saying

Foxfyre wrote:

You are going to believe what you want to believe. I see it differently than you.

You believe Obama is the great messiah who will save the world. I don't see anything but pretty much an empty suit with a lot of dangerous ideas.

and the rest of the post was pretty much along the same lines.

It's funny how you seem to think that you made a sober case, relying on facts and evidence, and it was everybody else who started the insults.

I guess telling someone that "You believe Obama is the great messiah who will save the world" doesn't count as an insult, or evading a question, or refusing to address the topic.

0 Replies

@Foxfyre,

DOUBLE LOL @ Fox

You were routed on all fronts in this argument. It hasn't even been necessary to insult you in any way, for you abandoned every point that was raised against you, and pleaded ignorance when confronted with facts.

Your behavior is semi-trollish, you know that? Not in that you are antagonistic, or crude. But in that your posts have very little relation to what actually is being discussed in the thread. It doesn't matter how good someone's argument is against you, they are always wrong; and when people point out the ridiculousness of that, you retreat into accusations of personal insults, which you are apparently too weak to stand up to.

It's truly mind-boggling that someone could believe the things that you write, Fox. I wonder if you could find a single other person here who has as high an opinion about your rhetorical abilities as you seem to Laughing

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

@Foxfyre,

Foxy love- I think you are risking alienating voters from the Conservative interest. Are you a double-agent?

1 Reply

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

Foxy love- I think you are risking alienating voters from the Conservative interest. Are you a double-agent?

Really? What would you suggest that I do to win them back?

1 Reply

@Foxfyre,

Play upfield well away from our goal area.

1 Reply

@spendius,

Terrific metaphor. But what does it mean?

0 Replies

Pages and pages of squabble over an inconsequential regional political movement, more attractive to the lunatic fringe than otherwise. The AIP is kooky without a doubt, but the linkages between that group and Gov. Palin seem very tenuous indeed. Her husband apparently was a member for a short time over a decade ago, but he isn't running for anything. Even if Gov. Palin had some dealings with the group a long time ago, how is that relevant today?

If those who are trying to make a big deal out of this have some point, then it is also on point to examine other candidates and their embarrasing (to say the least) associations that continued right up until those associations became a drag on a national campaign.

Obama, running for the top slot rather than V.P., maintained an intimate relationship with the racially bigoted Rev. Wright, and his Afro-centric church. Obama celebrated his mentor, held him as a close adviser, and made him a part of his political campaigns. When Rev. Wright's racially bigoted speech and anti-American rhetorical excesses became and embarrassment, Obama finally and reluctantly cut the cord. Clear, close association with that should make folks question just how tolerant Sen. Obama really is.

The AIP has, so far as I can tell, never advocated violence to advance their political agenda. On the other hand, Prof. Ames is to this day an unrepentant Weather Underground bomber. Officially, Obama and Ames are only neighbors who happen to have served on two community oriented boards. It seems that the relationship is deeper than that, and that knowing dangerous it is to be associated with a real terrorist, Obama has kept their association very, very quiet. Ames was one of Obama's earliest and most fervent supporters when there was a chance that Obama could fill an empty seat. Maybe it was just because they live in the same neighborhood that a violent radical would hold get togethers to gain support for Obama. Maybe it is all innocent coincidence, but then Obama and Ames do share many philosophical positions, don't they? Obama counts a terrorist bomber among his supporters and that's no more compelling than Gov. Palin's husband once upon a time belonged to a marginal political group with no violent tendencies. Both of those two associations are almost certainly without real merit, but then we are in the middle of a hotly contested election campaign and all's fair in the political arena.

The same "wash" sort of comparison doesn't exist when Obama's relationship and hero worship of a racial bigot is considered.

3 Replies

@Debra Law,

Debra wrote:

Quote:

First you can't be bothered with making correct attributions for a quote, and now you can't be bothered with looking for your own error?

Please Debra, surely you know that I have already scrutinized both of your involved posts and my own that employed them for my argument before asking you to provide the offending text. I felt it odd that in your accusing post that you did not immediately point out my supposed error. Your second relative post requiring me to do the obvious and perform the examination of the three posts was then suspicious when it ignored my request and, perhaps tellingly, lacked any hint of the alleged offensive text. There now seems to be two choices for observers of this tempestuous tea pot environment. Either I am a completely incompetent editor of my own posts or, using Occam’s razor, the alleged offense is non-existent. The ball is in your court.

Given what I have gleaned from posts on this thread, you have at least some advanced and/or formal legal training. Additionally, I will assume that you are informed as to the American legal tradition of a defendant being presumed innocent until a final legal judgment results in a verdict of guilty.
Given your charge:

Quote:

I'm not going to waste much time responding to your post because you're being substantively and intellectually dishonest.

First, you quoted a statement and attributed to me, but I didn't make that statement.

The first sentence I consider subjective and you are entitled to your opinion. But, you seem to spend a lot of time dismissing me. But fortunately for both of us, the second sentence 's charges merely requires the empirical evidence that you say exists. I only ask that you invest a little of your time to substantiate your charge specifically brought forth in that above sentence. Surely, you don't want to be known as the Mike Nifong of A2K.

Respectfully,

JM

2 Replies

@JamesMorrison,

Who's Mike Nifong when he's at home?

0 Replies

FINAL COUNTDOWN FOR USA ELECTION 2008

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know