spendius
 
  0  
Fri 8 Oct, 2010 05:04 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
I understand Cyclo. You're a Media shite sink.
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  -1  
Fri 8 Oct, 2010 05:09 pm
@parados,
parados wrote:

I read just fine okie. You don't seem to know what it means to make an apology.

Quote:
I did do the decent thing. When you provided proof, I acknowledged it.
That isn't an apology. That is just an admission you were wrong about a fact. It in no way apologizes for calling me a liar

I did provide an apology in regard to the usage of the term, "destroy." Here it is:
Quote:
Parados, you deserve credit, you did find quotes of mine, wherein I used the term destroy for Obama's actions in those posts. My apologies to you.


Quote:
Quote:

None of my posts are lies
That is also not an apology.
No, that is not an apology there, parados, because you cherrypicked a quote of mine that did not contain the apology. I do not lie in any of my posts, I have no problem repeating that assertion. A lie implies doing something knowingly, and when I said to you to prove I said something, such as calling for Obama's impeachment, I had not remembered that I had gone that far. Do you remember every single word you use on this forum, parados? That is why I have been asking you for proof of your quotes of me. In regard to me calling you a liar, turnabout seems to be fair play here, right, as you have called me a liar I believe numerous times, to which I have responded in kind, because I think you have known that some of the things you have accused me of are simply not true. For example, so far we have uncovered at least one example, that of you accusing me of saying that Obama hates America. You have yet to find any quote to that effect, but have merely translated other statements that I have made in reference to Obama, such as him not loving America as he should, or that he has resentments and hangups, and you have attempted to twist all of that into the allegation that I have said Obama hates America. You ignore the lengthy and detailed explanations that I have provided, wherein I have said that I doubt he hates the country, but the more appropriate term was that he just lacks proper respect for the country, and that he has resentments and thinks the country has been unfair in many respects. You have ignored the fact that a person can resent something or somebody without outright hating them. Surely, parados, you hopefully have enough common sense and decency to understand the points here without continually attempting to demonize my opinions and accusing us conservatives of stuff that is not accurate. I won't call you a liar again now, but let me just say I believe you are being very intellectually dishonest in your debate methods.


Quote:
I want you to admit that this statement of yours is false and apologize to me personally for making it. You falsely impugned my credibility.
Quote:
Parados, I think you need to establish some credibility here. You have been throwing out accusations without evidence and misquotes long enough now that in my opinion your credibility is not much higher than plainoldme's here, and that is really getting pretty low.


And then you can start apologizing for all of these instances okie.
Quote:
You are the liar here, parados.


Quote:
You are the one being dishonest here, Parados, and I think you know it.


Quote:
I am tired of being misrepresented, misquoted, and having my opinions twisted into something that is apparently part of your imagination.


Quote:
Put up or shut up, Parados.


Quote:
You lie as usual.



And then you can admit that by using the word "destroy" it makes logical sense to any reader that your use of "ruin" and "wreck" are synonymous with "destroy". That would mean you need to apologize for your personal attacks on me about how they don't mean the same thing.

Show you have some modicum of decency okie and make an actual apology that you mean. I doubt you will however because your record here is one of claiming to be decent while your words and actions show quite a different story.
[/quote]
As I have already said, I think you are being intellectually dishonest in your debate methods, that is what I believe, and I believe you have not disproven or discredited that with any proofs, parados. So I stand by those assertions and I will not apologize for accusing you of being inaccurate with your accusations thrown at me. And from now on, you will need to provide proofs of all of your points about what I have said. You have found a couple of instances of me using a couple of words, to which I have apologized for, but there are others that you have not provided proof of at all, parados.
blueveinedthrobber
 
  1  
Fri 8 Oct, 2010 06:18 pm
@okie,
so you don't really mean it and you're just talking then? no shame in that.
okie
 
  0  
Fri 8 Oct, 2010 06:58 pm
@blueveinedthrobber,
blueveinedthrobber wrote:

so you don't really mean it and you're just talking then? no shame in that.

I simply pointed out why the Second Amendment was included into the Constitution, bluevein. Did you not cover that in school?

By the way, maybe the folks at Waco could have used more arms to protect themselves when Janet Reno rolled in there with their tanks?
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  0  
Fri 8 Oct, 2010 11:29 pm
@okie,
Quote:
In case you have not heard yet, pom


Who are you to even think of talking down to me?
plainoldme
 
  0  
Fri 8 Oct, 2010 11:30 pm
@mysteryman,
Quote:
BTW, to change the Constitution, to remove the 2nd amendment, would take a majority of the states, and that isnt gonna happen.


Because this country is peopled with unreasonable, under educated paranoids who live in the past and wear rings in their noses.
plainoldme
 
  0  
Fri 8 Oct, 2010 11:34 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Quote:
Mind-boggling. Why would you want this, so we could have several more years of ineffective and failed presidency?


bush was the only public person who was less intelligent than okie.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Sat 9 Oct, 2010 12:22 pm
@plainoldme,
I disagree; okie's ability at communication - even though most of it is gibberish - is yards above GW Bush.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  -2  
Sat 9 Oct, 2010 12:25 pm
@plainoldme,
Constitution of the USA
Quote:

Article V
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  -2  
Sat 9 Oct, 2010 12:28 pm
@plainoldme,
Obama is the only public person who is less intelligent than plainoldme.
talk72000
 
  3  
Sat 9 Oct, 2010 12:29 pm
@ican711nm,
That coming from an ignoramus.
plainoldme
 
  1  
Sat 9 Oct, 2010 01:53 pm
@ican711nm,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ul6SVZsy10
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Sat 9 Oct, 2010 01:54 pm
@ican711nm,
Quote:
Obama is the only public person who is less intelligent than plainoldme.


Can you ever post an original thought? Generally, most people have outgrown changing one word in another's sentence by the sixth grade.
mysteryman
 
  0  
Sat 9 Oct, 2010 03:15 pm
@plainoldme,
So besides the 2nd amendment, are there any other amendments you think should be eliminated?

0 Replies
 
okie
 
  0  
Sat 9 Oct, 2010 05:21 pm
@plainoldme,
plainoldme wrote:

Quote:
In case you have not heard yet, pom

Who are you to even think of talking down to me?

I am being sarcastic, pom. It is not uncommon to see many folks use sarcasm here in an effort to make their point. I admit to having a weakness, if you wish to call it that, to use sarcasm often.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  -1  
Sat 9 Oct, 2010 06:35 pm
@talk72000,
That coming from an ignoramus.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  0  
Sat 9 Oct, 2010 06:37 pm
@plainoldme,
Can you ever post an original thought? Generally, most people have outgrown changing one word in another's sentence by the sixth grade.
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  0  
Sat 9 Oct, 2010 06:40 pm
@plainoldme,
And who runs the education system in this country, pom?
cicerone imposter
 
  0  
Sat 9 Oct, 2010 06:42 pm
@okie,
FYI, from the feds down to the local level. Got that?
okie
 
  1  
Sun 10 Oct, 2010 03:11 pm
@cicerone imposter,
And as the feds have gotten more and more involved, has the quality of education improved, ci? That is a question I would suggest you ponder until you can answer it. In other words, is education better or worse under local or federal authority? That is an important philosophical question that should have an impact upon all of our political convictions and how we should vote.
 

Related Topics

So....Will Biden Be VP? - Question by blueveinedthrobber
My view on Obama - Discussion by McGentrix
Obama/ Love Him or Hate Him, We've Got Him - Discussion by Phoenix32890
Obama fumbles at Faith Forum - Discussion by slkshock7
Expert: Obama is not the antichrist - Discussion by joefromchicago
Obama's State of the Union - Discussion by maxdancona
Obama 2012? - Discussion by snood
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Obama '08?
  3. » Page 1805
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.18 seconds on 07/07/2025 at 03:08:48