cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Mon 28 Dec, 2015 09:10 pm
@Brandon9000,
What you wish doesn't mean a hill of beans.
BillRM
 
  0  
Mon 28 Dec, 2015 09:30 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
What you wish doesn't mean a hill of beans.


That of course go for all of us who is not in the top one half percent of the population.

We are not as yet as bad as the late Rome Republic era but we are getting there.
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Mon 28 Dec, 2015 09:34 pm
@BillRM,
I don't worry too much about how our government handles immigration. They have experts......
roger
 
  2  
Mon 28 Dec, 2015 10:48 pm
@cicerone imposter,
They have experts and they are here to help us?
0 Replies
 
woiyo
 
  0  
Tue 29 Dec, 2015 07:13 am
@parados,
4 of the FBI's Most Wanted? Illegal Immigrants.

Civil Offense is every bit a criminal offense that warrants penalties.

I wonder if you really care about borders and if they need to be secure? All you seem to do is make excuses and refuse to discuss the basic argument of border control.
Brandon9000
 
  0  
Tue 29 Dec, 2015 09:04 am
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:
I don't worry too much about how our government handles immigration. They have experts......

So expert that there are now 12 million people in the country illegally. Nice job.
snood
 
  1  
Tue 29 Dec, 2015 09:46 am
@Brandon9000,
Brandon9000 wrote:

cicerone imposter wrote:
I don't worry too much about how our government handles immigration. They have experts......

So expert that there are now 12 million people in the country illegally. Nice job.


You do realize it was a joke?
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Tue 29 Dec, 2015 11:14 am
@snood,
Don't blame Brandon; a lot of stuff goes way over my head too! LOL
Brandon9000
 
  -1  
Tue 29 Dec, 2015 03:24 pm
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

Don't blame Brandon; a lot of stuff goes way over my head too! LOL

At your age, it's quite remarkable that most of your argument consists of ad hominem attacks. It certainly does nothing to disprove any of my opinions.
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Tue 29 Dec, 2015 03:39 pm
@Brandon9000,
Prove it. I'm talking about ad hominem attacks.
Brandon9000
 
  -2  
Tue 29 Dec, 2015 04:03 pm
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:
Prove it. I'm talking about ad hominem attacks.

Your arguments are almost always about the poster and not the topic. It's an invalid form of argument, and, frankly, is very childish.
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Tue 29 Dec, 2015 05:13 pm
@Brandon9000,
You still haven't proven that I use ad hominem attacks.
Brandon9000
 
  -2  
Tue 29 Dec, 2015 06:26 pm
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:
You still haven't proven that I use ad hominem attacks.

An "ad homenin" is an attack on an opponent's character rather than an answer to the contentions made, and that's what you do a lot. It's an invalid form of argument and is childish. However, I will concede that the case in which I applied it was not an ad hominem attack, or any other type of attack.
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Tue 29 Dec, 2015 06:30 pm
@Brandon9000,
Cut and paste from any of my post! Do you understand anything about evidence? You made the charge.
snood
 
  2  
Tue 29 Dec, 2015 06:39 pm
@Brandon9000,
Brandon9000 wrote:

cicerone imposter wrote:
You still haven't proven that I use ad hominem attacks.

An "ad homenin" is an attack on an opponent's character rather than an answer to the contentions made, and that's what you do a lot. It's an invalid form of argument and is childish. However, I will concede that the case in which I applied it was not an ad hominem attack, or any other type of attack.

Seems pretty cut and dried Brandon. You accused him of using a lot of ad hominem.
C.I. said to prove it.
The next move is clearly for you to A -show him the ad hominem posts, or B -withdraw the charge.
Or, I guess the other option is to C -just act like you don't understand what "prove it" means or keep changing the subject and deflecting and not worry what that does to your credibility.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Tue 29 Dec, 2015 06:44 pm
@snood,
Yea, I do that so often, he has a hard time finding them. LOL
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  1  
Tue 29 Dec, 2015 06:59 pm
@snood,
There is no question that CI love personal attacks as he can not go more then a few posts before he turn to that form of "debate".

Proving that he does so is similar to proving the sky is blue.
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Tue 29 Dec, 2015 06:59 pm
@BillRM,
You still haven't provided PROOF.
snood
 
  2  
Tue 29 Dec, 2015 07:10 pm
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

There is no question that CI love personal attacks as he can not go more then a few posts before he turn to that form of "debate".

Proving that he does so is similar to proving the sky is blue.


That is a terrible metaphor. The two things aren't anything alike at all. That the sky is blue is a universally accepted truth.That C.I. uses ad hominems as Brandon put it "most of the time" is a debatable point. C.I. asked Brandon to cut and paste examples. Seems like an easy enough way for Brandon to win this particular skirmish.Especially if it happens as much as you are saying with your 'blue sky' comment.
0 Replies
 
Miller
 
  -1  
Tue 29 Dec, 2015 07:14 pm
@BillRM,
Also, poor old CI can't remember what he's said from one thread to another. Foofie caught him, the other day in one of his elder moments of "I can't remember". After Foofie zapped CI, CI merely disappeared never to re-appear on the thread ( with egg on his face!).
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND - Discussion by Foxfyre
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Fellow Bostonians: How many of us wished we had an assault weapon last night? - Question by maxdancona
What should be first on the agenda of the winner in November? - Discussion by Frank Apisa
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » The Future President, Donald Trump
  3. » Page 102
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.1 seconds on 12/22/2024 at 01:45:19
▲ ▼