Where is the US economy headed?

@Cycloptichorn,

No, you are trying to weasel out of the consequences of your fairly clear - and obviously ridiculous - statement. It was as follows;

cyclo wrote:

Yeah. I'm dead serious about this - you can't find an issue that prominent Republicans, both elected and in the media, don't constantly lie about.

All it takes to disprove your assertion is a single statement regarding a public issue by a "prominent Republican" , either elected or in the media, that wasn't a lie.

Are you sure you want to go down that road?

Just who is being deliberately deceptive here?

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

georgeob1 wrote:

No, you are trying to weasel out of the consequences of your fairly clear - and obviously ridiculous - statement. It was as follows;

cyclo wrote:
Yeah. I'm dead serious about this - you can't find an issue that prominent Republicans, both elected and in the media, don't constantly lie about.

All it takes to disprove your assertion is a single statement regarding a public issue by a "prominent Republican" , either elected or in the media, that wasn't a lie.

Oh, don't be an ass, George.

Pick an issue and I'll show you a repeated pattern of lies by prominent Republicans. Seriously, go ahead. The fact that occasionally one of them tells the truth about something doesn't disprove the fact that your party constantly lies about issues. I have no idea what logic would say that it would disprove my statement.

Quote:

Are you sure you want to go down that road?

Just who is being deliberately deceptive here?

You are. You are also being evasive because you know that I'm right. Otherwise, you'd simply... name an issue.

Once again, rather than discuss what I was discussing, you're trying to turn the conversation into yet another Ad Hominem attack on me. Do you not realize you have a pattern of doing this? It is ineffective, I assure you.

Go ahead. Pick an issue that you believe Republicans don't lie about all the time. I dare ya!

If you're not interested in discussing what I and others were talking about - and only seek to insult and attack me instead - then I'm not interested and will simply begin to ignore you. Which would be sad.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Oh, don't be an ass, George.

Pick an issue and I'll show you a repeated pattern of lies by prominent Republicans. Seriously, go ahead. The fact that occasionally one of them tells the truth about something doesn't disprove the fact that your party constantly lies about issues. I have no idea what logic would say that it would disprove my statement.

Who is being an ass here? It was you who made the truly outrageous claim that all prominent Republicans consistently lie about every issue - an assertion that itself defies common sense.

Now you are attempting to modify your stupid claim, but are doing so without the integrity of even acknowledging it. This strikes me as self-servingly deceptive. and suggests that you might not be the best source for evaluating the truthfulness of others.

Cycloptichorn wrote:

You are. You are also being evasive because you know that I'm right. Otherwise, you'd simply... name an issue.

That sounds rather like one of your favorite rhetorical errors - a false dilemma perhaps?

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Once again, rather than discuss what I was discussing, you're trying to turn the conversation into yet another Ad Hominem attack on me. Do you not realize you have a pattern of doing this? It is ineffective, I assure you.

I'm not attacking you at all. Someone who observes you screwing up badly and fails to warn you is not necessarily your friend: likewise the one who warns you in time is not really your enemy.

There's lots of truly stupid stuff on these threads that I ignore completely, I'm sure its the same for you and others too.

Face it: you made a rather stupid and wildly exaggerated claim, which involved a sweeping prejudgment of the inner intentions of those who merely hold different views and a different perspective on events from yours - something you can't possibly know in any consistent or systematic way - and now. when called on it. don't have the maturity to acknowledge this obvious fact, and instead paint yourself as the victim of an "attack".

I am pointing out your distortion (should I call it a lie?) only because I think you might be worth the effort. I hope I'm not wrong

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

You're twisting my statements. I said:

Quote:

Their entire electoral strategy is to lie as much as possible, as often as possible, and never once admit that they were lying, no matter how often the truth is pointed out to them.

I never once stated that each and every one of them lies with every single thing they said. You are attempting a rhetorical trick here, but it has failed. Please try addressing my actual statements rather than substituting the ones you want to argue against.

I stand by this 100%. I don't give a **** what their inner motivations are, and I'm not talking about disagreements due to different philosophies or perspectives. I'm talking about out-and-out lies.

And I'm totally willing to back it up with any amount of proof. Do you want ME to start picking topics and pointing out the lies about them? I'd be more than happy to. I think it's pretty clear that you don't, because you have avoided mentioning any specific topic completely. And I predict you will continue to do so, because you know very well that I will be able to provide examples of repeated lies by your leadership.

If you think I'm making an error, George, prove it. Don't just say 'you're committing an error;' provide evidence that I am doing so or specifically challenge me. I simply don't take your word for it.

Last chance before I cut the conversation off: name an issue that you don't think your leadership in the media and in office continually lies about. This meta-analysis is boring and nothing more than a distraction attempt by you.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

But I was responding to this statement that you also made, and which I specifically cited... and quoted.

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Yeah. I'm dead serious about this - you can't find an issue that prominent Republicans, both elected and in the media, don't constantly lie about.Cycloptichorn

Cut and run if you like.

2 Replies

@georgeob1,

georgeob1 wrote:

But I was responding to this statement that you also made, and which I specifically cited.
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Yeah. I'm dead serious about this - you can't find an issue that prominent Republicans, both elected and in the media, don't constantly lie about.

Cycloptichorn

Yes - you can't find an issue that prominent Republicans don't constantly lie about. This statement is not invalidated by your assertion that occasionally one of them does tell the truth; the party as a whole makes a habit of lying, on every issue, and you know it.

I don't know why you think your assertion that some of them occasionally tell the truth disproves my statement. It certainly does not.

You have thrice refused to engage the meat of my comments; I declare the issue to be done, and what more, that you know I'm right. While I cannot stop you from responding with some sort of condescending post about myself, I don't really care, because it will be plainly obvious to any reader of this thread that in the face of a challenge you were unable or unwilling to rise to it.

Cut and run indeed Laughing

Do you really think anyone is fooled? Do others in your life let you get away with crappy arguments, George? I suspect that they do.

Cycloptichorn

2 Replies

@georgeob1,

It's folk wisdom here George that every politician is lying through his teeth all the time. Even to his or herself. The science of it is that it's impossible to get on the first rung of the political ladder without being a consumate liar. I know that from personal experience.

Getting up the ladder requires the characteristic to be refined from a skill point of view and the ones at the top are candidates for Olympic Gold Medals in the consumate lying marathon steeplechase.

And with us lot to manage it is perfectly obvious that honesty is the route to political extermination.

0 Replies

@georgeob1,

Im sure as hell sure, that I wouldent believe anything Rush and his ilk said if they swore on a ton of bibles.

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

George, Like waterman rejects any proof that isent on a conserative site so your wasting your time. He will reject any thing you post even the truth sites that most people go to check the truth of statements and articles.

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

You have thrice refused to engage the meat of my comments; I declare the issue to be done, and what more, that you know I'm right. While I cannot stop you from responding with some sort of condescending post about myself, I don't really care, because it will be plainly obvious to any reader of this thread that in the face of a challenge you were unable or unwilling to rise to it.

Cycloptichorn

There was no "meat" in your arguments it all. Indeed there were no specific arguments of any kind either, and certainly no "proofs" of anything. It was all merely unsupported bombast with unqualified, unbounded assertions that prominent Republicans (that means all of them) consistently (that means without exception) lie (that means knowingly deceive) about everything.

The best you could do was your, again unsupported. challenge for me to pick a topic so you could find a lie. The probability that some politician of any party or persuasion can be found to have made an incorrect and POSSIBLY deceitful statement about an arbitrarily chosen topic is very high. Unfortunately, even if successful, this doesn't come anywhere close to supporting the outrageous assertion you were so loudly and bombastically proclaimed.

It appears that you are either a liar yourself or an unquestioning and inept consumer of all the propaganda that your party issues. Most people do better than that. I am disappointed in you.

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

Quote:

consistently (that means without exception)

This is incorrect, and it really isn't helpful to your argument to claim things like this.

No definition of the word 'consistently' would lead anyone to believe that the word means 'without exception.' For example, I consistently leave work at 5:00. That doesn't mean that I don't, from time to time, stay later Smile

If you disagree, present the definition that confirms what you say. I feel very confident saying this, because I just researched what the word consistent is defined as, in several different online dictionaries. You don't just get to make up meanings to words in order to conveniently build an argument, George.

In the absence of you responding to this - which I bet you won't - any reader of this thread will conclude that you are in fact talking out your ass, when you make assertions about the meanings of words that don't match the dictionary definitions of those words. Keep that in mind before you pull your usual trick of ignoring arguments that are harmful to your position as if they didn't exist.

Quote:

It appears that you are either a liar yourself or an unquestioning and inept consumer of all the propaganda that your party issues. Most people do better than that. I am disappointed in you.

Considering your whole argument is based on an error that a middle-schooler should have known better than to have made, somehow, I'm not too torn up over this Laughing

I'm going to re-iterate my original comment that started this line of discussion: why is it that right-wingers are simply incapable of looking things up before they post here?

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Yes - you can't find an issue that prominent Republicans don't constantly lie about. Cycloptichorn

That statement in and of itself indicates you are so blindly partisan and follow your own party's demagoguery in such an extreme fashion that you literally are blinded to reality, cyclops.

2 Replies

@okie,

okie wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
Yes - you can't find an issue that prominent Republicans don't constantly lie about. Cycloptichorn

That statement in and of itself indicates you are so blindly partisan and follow your own party's demagoguery in such an extreme fashion that you literally are blinded to reality, cyclops.

I proffer the same challenge to you as I did George: pick a topic and let's see. I mean, you seem pretty sure of yourself; so, go ahead. Which topic does your party not lie about regularly?

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Have you decided to compete with parados now, cyclops, to become the top niggler on this forum? Sure, you can pick any subject and find some insignificant detail that some Republican did not state exactly. However, how many lies has Obama told since he started campaigning and continuing into his presidency? Let us just look at an issue that is supposedly one of his biggest accomplishments, his health care plan, wherein he promised an open and transparent process, but even Pelosi said we had to pass the legislation to find out what was in it. That was an understatement for sure, and it is evident that Obama lied big time, in regard to one of the principle parts of his presidency, being open and transparent. The same principle applies to his entire presidency, regarding being open and transparent. He did not even properly vet his appointees. How many were caught with evading taxes, etc., and to this day the tax cheat Timothy Geithner oversees the Treasury Department.

1 Reply

@okie,

okie wrote:

Have you decided to compete with parados now, cyclops, to become the top niggler on this forum?

My eyes popped out a little here until I read that more closely, okie Laughing

I'm willing to talk about Obama if you like - but let's do that in the Obama '08 thread. Instead of changing the subject, why don't you tell us which topic Republicans don't regularly lie about? I'm not talking about an odd comment here or there, either. I'm talking about leadership in your media and political party that utters statements which are totally false, over and over again.

I can't help but notice that you aren't willing to discuss this, either.

Cycloptichorn

2 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Democrats and Republicans have differing viewpoints on all of the issues, cyclops. I would make the observation that disagreement or a different opinion is not in and of itself a lie.

This is an interesting subject, because I have noticed that Democrats love to throw around the lie accusation, when it is simply a matter of opinion, depending upon what evidence you cite and how that evidence is viewed, whether it is credible or not. One of the best examples of this was the issue of going into Iraq. To this day, the Dems and their liberal friends in the press insist upon the idea that Bush lied about WMD to take us into war, when in fact it is merely the liberal or Democrat opinion because they did not like Bush. Even Hillary Clinton admitted that she consulted all the experts and concluded also that Hussein had WMD.

Now, please do not go off on your tangents again with that subject, as it has been covered so many times that I think the horse has been dead too long, and does not need to be beaten any more. You will believe what you want to believe, no matter what the facts of history tell us.

3 Replies

@okie,

Your quote :You will believe what you want to believe, no matter what the facts of history tell us.

I do think that this may be true! Do you also include yourself into this statement and if so why or why not?

What is it that causes this type of thinking among people?

1 Reply

@okie,

okie wrote:

Now, please do not go off on your tangents again with that subject, as it has been covered so many times that I think the horse has been dead too long, and does not need to be beaten any more. You will believe what you want to believe.

Are you suggesting to Cyclo, Okie, that maybe it is time to stop sniping at each other and move on to other things? That would be refreshing to the rest of us.
The Fed Reserve announced today that Ben Bernanke will hold an open press conference after the Fed meeting in late April (27th?). That has never happened before. I have mixed emotions about that.
I don't have a great deal of respect for the mass media journalists assigned to the "economy beat."
I like the idea of the Fed Chairman getting off script but I am concerned that the position will get more politicized.

2 Replies

@realjohnboy,

The problem is, the Fed seems to be rather out of control these days. There is a strong perception that they don't give a **** about anything other than Goldman's bottom line. And many of the actions they took during the 2008 crisis were downright indefensible, a gigantic transfer of wealth to the very rich, who gambled with all of our monies and lost. In light of this, it's really hard to see how calls for greater transparency at the Fed can be denied.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Do you really think that they lost? Your quote: who gambled with all of our monies and lost. I am not sure that they lost anything for themselves other than the respect of some small investors!

1 Reply

Where is the US economy headed?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know