And you totally dismissed the disclaimer at the beginning huh Dookie? Do you realize this is from a publication that regularly bashes President Bush and calls him a liar? You would actually love it.
the AP regularly bashes Bush? I may have to subscribe.
What disclaimer? The one that doesn't tell us for certain that this is sarcasm and just a toungue and cheek job?
I'm sure I would love the site. Perhaps you would find it shocking that a liberal rag like the New York Times would have David Brooks as a columnist.
Huh? The Arab News is The New York Times? David Brooks writes under an Arab pseudoname? What the hell are you guys talking about?
And is it your intention to invite all your buddies in to trash this thread too, Dys?
It's amazing what you don't get, Fox...
Alan Colmes is a liberal on a mostly conservative news channel...
This columnist you quote from comes off rather conservative in bashing Clinton in broad terms with not much context regarding Iran's socio-political internal strife, in an online news rag you say bashes Bush (are ya with me so far?)
And so, even the NYTimes has a conservative columnist.
So, when you said "Do you realize this is from a publication that regularly bashes President Bush and calls him a liar," I mearly replied that sometimes a mostly liberal rag can have a conservative commentator, and vice a versa. And so, big deal. Do you realize that?
I'll just leave the subtlies out next time. I know how hard it is for neocons to grasp such abstract concepts...
Quote:And is it your intention to invite all your buddies in to trash this thread too, Dys?
This is a TOTALLY unwarrented accusation lightly stepping on the TOS, Were the truth to be known I have close to zero following among the lib dems. YOu are posting in a political forum and anyone who does so needs to accept that disagreement will occur among those that post here. It appears that you enjoy debate but only if there is noone to challange your opinions. Your apology will be accepted but not anticipated.
Well you were so sure I was lying and said so.....this is not a violation of TOS?
It just struck me as strange that people who had never before shown up on one of my threads suddenly showed up en masse today, and all bent on completely disregarding my requests for the purpose of the thread. And considering who the people were and that you yourself had objected to my requests for the purpose of the thread, and the fact that you have made it no secret the low regard in which you hold me, I just put two and two together.
If you say you are innocent, I cannot prove you are not. .
two and two does not (even in republican bookkeeping) equal 17.
But people have been hung on compelling circumstantial evidence too.. I don't appreciate being called a liar when I am not, and I don't care whether you enjoy debating me or not, but suggest that if you do not, that you don't.
ok you find where I called you a liar that then report me because that would put me on the edge of TOS violation.
Quote:It's much more enjoyable debating with Mcg, at least he's honest.
Now you put that in context and see how it reads.
I did put it in context, Mcg had posted that, in essence, he was anti social security, and I found that refreshingly honest.
You could have said that, but instead you called me dishonest. I don't expect courtesy from you and I usually can usually disregard what I believe are your intentional pot shots at me. I don't know what I've done to incur your animosity and at this point, I really don't care. But I did believe you intentionally trashed the thread. And your very obvious shot at me was pretty much the confirmaton.
But I will concede that things are not always what they seem, and will give you the benefit of the doubt on that. More especially since you do seem to be trying to be less obnoxious than usual now.
Gee thanks, I guess you forgive me then?
Are you serious? Or being sarcastic? I honestly can't tell.
Well, at least that is an incredibly inciteful and honest statement for you, fox.
Now, please, tell all of us where you EVER saw Dys call you a liar, or else admit to being a liar yourself.
Just for once answer a question addressing the point honestly and without your usual oiliness.
Just scroll up Diane, not that I expect anyone to see things as they are seeing as how I am so oily. Sheesh what in the world have I done to you people? I think I'm pretty nice actually, and some people actually seek out my company. I like me. I don't know why you don't, but I accept that you don't. And is Dys not able to speak for himself here?
Foxfyre wrote:Just scroll up Diane, not that I expect anyone to see things as they are seeing as how I am so oily. Sheesh what in the world have I done to you people? I think I'm pretty nice actually, and some people actually seek out my company. I like me. I don't know why you don't, but I accept that you don't. And is Dys not able to speak for himself here?
I think you are nice too.
I did answer it Diane, when Dys asked it. I don't see why I have to repost the answer here when all you have to do is scroll up a few posts to see it. I am beginning to believe, however, that my initial suspicions were correct. Speaking of oiliness. Unbelievable.
Fox, can you imagine if we did a search on "Foxfyre + answer the question."
http://able2know.com/forums/search.php?search_id=395383345&start=0
1460 hits
Now, not all of them are on point - but a surprising number of posts asking you to answer questions instead of diverting and digressing. Even HoT gave it a go.
Eventually, you must start to wonder why people keep asking you to answer questions that have been posed to you. It isn't always them. It might sometimes be you.
