Oh my, it's an ad hominem freeforall! 

Since we've established that people don't want to go this route, then...........

Bernice: I really enjoy reading your posts but you really ought to work on your reading comprehension. :o)

The Usurper: boy if you are that rich why don't you support Fencer and pay for a membership??



or are you one of the ones with your hand out......a dope smoker or perhaps a highschool dropout ROFLMBO

The Usurper: absolutely

"Yes, I am part of the 1 percent of Americans that paid an astounding 40 percent of all federal income tax in 2006. According to recently released Internal Revenue Service figures, about 50 percent of my fellow Americans paid no federal income tax at all that year. My fellow 1-percenters and I covered for them. But for some it is still not enough.

President Obama and a Democratic Congress will likely dole out entitlements like free health care, child care and cash payments to anyone who falls under a certain income level, no matter their circumstances. That means people who drink gin all day will get some of my hard-earned money. Folks who dropped out of school, who are too lazy to hold a job, who smoke reefers 24/7 all will get some goodies in the mail from Uncle Barack and Aunt Nancy, funded by me and other rich folks."

And...

"[Y]ou would be taking money away from other people to give them money because they didn't pay tax in the first place.

And that's the redistribution of income that many working Americans don't like the Democrats for."

Do you agree with him?

The Usurper: It sounds like a statement taken completely out of context, just as Obama took a quote of him explaining the Mexican governments policy on immigration and made an out of context ad making is sound like that was him saying it about mexicans. I'm sure that if you were to print (or even better actually listen) to the whole paragraph, you would find that he's proving that republicans have more compassion for the poor than the dems

Artful Dodger: It sounds like a pretty general statement to me...a settled opinion.

Vikings: I can't stand Chris Matthews. But I don't many Chris Matthews fans posting on here regularly, mostly Republicans who, I am assuming (yes, it is an assumption...am I wrong?) watch Fox News.

"I'm sick of...this so-called compassion for the poor. I don't have compassion for the poor."

What do you think?

Bernice: I think I'll give a lesson on ad hominem since I seem to be the resident expert on it.  ;)

Artful Dodger:

The Usurper:  I never listen to his program and I won't be baited into responding to a statement that's out of context.  Context is everything. 

ustica tnp: Does Cris Mathews give you tingles up your leg?

Bernice:  I'll bet we don't hear from those that took me to task for my posts.  Wanna bet? 

The Usurper:  You're wrong.  They are both insulting and ad hominem.  Whenever you argue "to the man" that's an ad hominem.  Saying one's brain is under the influence of Fox is another way of saying one doesn't think for  him or herself.  You didn't address the issues,  addressed the person. 

And perhaps you can explain to everyone here how the first insult is "strictly accurate."  How can you possibly know?  To whom are you addressing this insult (since you seem to be generalizing it to all repubs)?  You can't have your cake and eat it too Greg.  Ad hominem is to the man.  That is what you did in both cases.  Man up.

Artful Dodger: OOPS......didn't read your posts first LOL.....we both picked up on the same things LOLOL

The Usurper: tch tch.....did I see a "nasty" or two from you.....thought you were above that

"I have no compassion for the poor!"

What do you think of this?

Artful Dodger: Your first quote: "in brains under the influence of Fox News," is strictly accurate and not ad hominem insult.

Your second quote, "you boys trained like pet puppies", is ad hominem and you are correct. I'll have to watch myself. :o)

The Usurper:  don't expect most of you to be able assimilate this fact in brains under the influence of Fox News.

Yes, old politics. From both parties. And they've sure got you boys trained like pet puppies.

And here I thought you said you were above throwing insults?  Guess not.  I'll bet you get a pass tho.  So much for:  "........my (your) attempt to keep this debate civil. In my (your)
opinion, it is too important to be approached in any other way."

Approached any other way except in some cases you mean. 

Rushed through and Congress didn't read final draft. Sure, that's what happened. Giveaway? You bet. Do we have representation in Congress? Surely not.

Yet, you guys are still in the Matrix. For example, same way with the Patriot Act, a far more damaging bill to our Constitution and the "freedom" you all seem to think the Repugs support. Draft was hot off the press, no one had time to read it.

And since when did the Repugs not take your money? They rob from the poor and give to the rich. I don't expect most of you to be able assimilate this fact in brains under the influence of Fox News.

Yes, old politics. From both parties. And they've sure got you boys trained like pet puppies.

Bernice:

Czuch: i think the president of the republic .rush limbaaaaa and bill O`reilly give you a brain wash!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
i love chris matthews!!

Bernice: OOPS....I forgot to bring my pom poms........

ustica tnp: HUH?????

ustica tnp: I have seen keith olberman, many times, he is a dolt, an ex jock reporter, and his political opinions are just that, his opinions..... I happen to disagree with him almost 100% of the time.


Explain to me how socialism is a "new" direction for this country? I guess it does count as change, but a change for the worse for sure.

Czuch: i think you and all republic. you sure whach hardball and keith olbermann! to see your mind espend!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Artful Dodger:

Czuch:  I'm not asking questions.  I'm making statements in the form of a question. 

Artful Dodger: Why do you keep asking these questions????

You already know the answers.... when the shoe was on the other foot, we were in here day and night, trying to defend and explain... the silence today from those same whining liberals is almost deafening!!!

Czuch:notice how many didn't pay their taxes and received no penalty?  I think we need to investigate Obama's tax records.

Artful Dodger: Why do dems even want to control the masses in the first place?

I think it is a power issue.... they claim to be for the people and the little guy, but the reality is, everything they do is about giving them, the politicians, more power and more influence and more money, hardly what you would expect, or is it?

Czuch:And in the history of socialism and communism, they've always oppressed the people, kept them in collective poverty, and eventually they have fallen. 

OTOH, there is no system like the free enterprise / capitalist sys where the little guy can become a millionaire and the average joe can achieve financial freedom.  The Dems want socialism because that's the way to control the masses.  Promise them steak, feed them cake.

Artful Dodger: Thats the change.... its funny how they think Socialism or communism is somehow "change"?

Czuch:A great way to start out change we can believe in. 

Hehheheheheheheh......


The stimulus must be working already, Pelosi is off to Europe for 8 days!!! YAHOOIE!!!!

"oh, the democrats are for the little guy..."

I can see them now.... "okay, we gave the unemployed a few more weeks, and the welfare and food stamps people get a bit more too... (yeah thats all stimulus, not) we have done our jobs, lets all pat ourselves on the back, and reward our great efforts with a nice trip to Europe!"

Yup, them dems... all about the little guy....

Tuesday:

and I love what Awesome said. Amen. :)

Amen??? Really???

I can agree that a good moderator should be like a good umpire, and not be noticed or become more of the story than the story itself....

But AD has not actually even moderated one single post... how could he, as a moderator, be any less intrusive????

Typical liberal mindset, really.... ignore facts, logic and any common sense!

...and dont come back to me complaining that I say everything is a liberal blah blah blah... you put an "amen" to what awesome said, yet what he said actually makes no sense at all when you apply facts and logic and common sense to it, same with 90% of liberal arguments

I haavent heard one liberal on here before the election say anything other than "Obama is for change" or some other tiresome blah, nothing ever of any substance, but why not?

Because you dont even know what that change is meant to be..... if anyone would at least come out and say it, say "I vote democrat because I think the best thing for this country is for the government to take as much money from its citizens as they need to do everything for us and to control our lives in every way possible, and Navcy Pelosi and harry reid know more about what is best for me than i do, that is what I think is best for our country"...

Well, I could respect that, and I would at least know that you have put some though into it, and you have some ideals etc....

But when you "Amen" an asinine statement, and vote for some fantasy changes, well, thats liberalism in a nut (case) shell

Artful Dodger:

From the Cafferty File: Is stimulus plan "theft"?


Nobody needs to comment.... everyone knows the dems have been itching to rob us all blind for many years now, there is nobody who is not a socialist or even the communist party loves the dems right now, who can defend this "stimulus", its a joke, the average tax payor is going to have an extra 13 bucks a week????

Bernice:

I wonder what the theories will be about the fires that are burning good Australian residents to death will be.

Thats an easy one for me... its the do good greenies to blame for this one

Bernice: He has his rights to voice them but it gets a bit mundane and same ole same ole when it is the same ole same ole......oh well

When it is the Usurper it's same ole same ole but when it is AD with the same ole same ole your their with your pom poms out and ready to cheer him on

Tuesday: lol. I'll bet.

Tuesday: I wish to God I had your wit.

Artful Dodger: lol

The Usurper:  I'd respond to that but I'm way over my quota for the day. 

Artful Dodger: Thank you, Dan, for your gentlemanly remarks. And I also appreciate the welcome fact that, as strong as your opinions may be and as fiercely as you assert them, you nevertheless do not interfere with the posts of myself & others (as moderator), even when some of those posts have been firmly opposed to yours. For this, I commend you.

The Usurper:  Well I've made my position clear and I have no interest in rehashing this topic as I've discussed it on several other forums.  My view hasn't changed over the years and it's unlikely you will convince me here either.  But feel free to engage others and I will stay out of it and keep my tiresome insulting comments to myself. 

Bernice:  Great, you ask me a question and now I have to answer so now I'm up to 20 posts for today and that means I'm still over 50 percent!  Oh well, now that I'm here, I have an answer.

You see, the Australian government set those fires.  The current theory is that the fires were set deliberately but the "who" isn't known.  Likely it was secret government operatives with orders coming from the highest branch of the military.  The reason?  Unknown at this point.  But like all good conspiracies, we'll just keep digging until we get to the bottom and find the "truth" (or find some reasonable explanation that we can adopt--which ever comes first).  And like all those committed conspiracy theorists, we will explain away any and all official explanations and only accept those explanations that support our conspiratorial views.

Or something like that.  ;) 

Bernice: To answer your questions:

1. Yes, I was a naughty boy a few years ago and a part of the KM scandal. As a matter of fact, I was the first to expose the scandal, and to publicly apologize for my part in it. I certainly am not, and never have been, a saint.

2. I do not believe I am trying to force my opinions on you either now or in the past. I am arguing a case, which is a type of persuasion, certainly. But my appeal is to facts and to evidence, not to a demand that you think like I do simply because I am a voice of authority (which I don't pretend to be).

3. I have said nothing about the Holocaust. Nor have I rendered an opinion on the little green men in my ashtray Dan alluded to. I am debating the truth about 9/11. I have also indicated my opinion on the assassination of President Kennedy, but that has not been my focus or the main topic of debate.

4. I am very much trying to "prove" my position on the 9/11 conspiracy, by appeals to logic, to common sense, to evidence contained in books, by providing links, by answering objections to the best of my ability, etc.

5. This morning I copied & pasted information on polls about the Kennedy assassination & 9/11. To the best of my immediate recollection, those are my only two copy-&-pastes, and I clearly indicated them as such. If I have pasted before, it should be clear. The vast majority of everything you have read in my posts are my own words.

6. I agree that my previous shinanigans with the KM does potentially damage my credibility. I wish that I had not behaved so badly, but I did. Nevertheless, there is nothing I am asserting in my 9/11 argument that cannot be verified through the links I have provided & others, or through your own independent research.

7. In the end, the truth about 9/11 does not stand or fall on my own qualifications as a debater, or on my moral character, which naturally is mixed. It stands on facts alone. And my KM experience, naughty & sometimes wrongfully hurtful to others as it was, does not disqualify me either from researching the facts about 9/11, reporting some of the results about my research here, or urging others to research for themselves what I consider to be the central political event of our generation.