WHO'S THE PARTY OF LINCOLN?

Obviously you need to boost your self confidence by anonymously berating other people that have different viewpoints. Peoples views are their views. I wouldn't take this so seriously. It's not too healthy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by guyone

Obviously you need to boost your self confidence by anonymously berating other people that have different viewpoints. Peoples views are their views. I wouldn't take this so seriously. It's not too healthy.

---

Says the guy who spends a rather large amount of time bashing others whose views differs from his own – on the political section of a transsexual forum of all places.

Rather than hypocritically shifting your stance when it suits your conduct. you really should pick a position.

1. Is it this:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by guyone

People who constantly have to revert to foul language and name calling only do so because they can't debate very well.

---

or is it this:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by guyone

Wow! What an ungrateful bastard you are.

---

2. Is it this:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by guyone

Why do debates have to devolve into personal attacks? Isn't a free exchange of ideas the building blocks of democracies? What does the debate gain from name calling?

---

or is it this:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by guyone

Are you talking about the same cowardice & weakness of character that the entire left wing of our political system suffers from?

---

or maybe this:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by guyone

But a liberal democrat is the same thing as a BOLSHEVIK!

---

Futhremore, you seem to shift stances when it comes to debating, taking contradictory positions when is suits you.

3. When you put forth unsupported assertions – like those that were so handily refuted in our recent debate – you are happy to rely upon fallacious conjecture:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by guyone

they are just viewpoints.

---

By contrast, when other posters have done the same thing you have told them things like:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by guyone

Proof not conjecture my friend.

---

In the end, the most appropriate response to your penchant for making outrageous and factually unsupported assertions are the very words you once said to another poster:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by guyone

The issue I have with your posts is that they are so outlandish and unsupported by documented facts.

---

Do us all a favor and make up your mind just which set of standards you want to apply.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Quinn

LMFAO!!!! That’s it????? That’s all you have?????? You know, TFan, though I’ve often disagreed with your positions on Bush and religion (we have actually agreed on things, too, like Israel, etc.), I used to think you were fairly intelligent. Clearly, I couldn’t have been more wrong in that regard as your grasp of basic written English couldn’t be more underwhelming. That said, let the lesson begin. This will probably hurt a little:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TFan

. . . your response was an attempt to mischaracterize what guyone said as "Bush Administrations poor planning" He said nothing as such.

---

OK, for starters let’s make sure you comprehend the meaning of the word “mischaracterize,” which is as follows:

Verb: mischaracterize

1. To characterize falsely or erroneously; to give a wrong character to.

Now, why don’t you explain to those of us who don’t live in an alternate reality how that portion of my response to Guyone’s post on Iraq, posted below, mischaracterizes his post as stating or even implying anything about the “Bush Administration’s poor planning” – rather than serving as refutation of his own ridiculous assertion that people whining is why we haven’t won in Iraq yet?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Quinn

Yeah, that's the problem. It's not a matter of poor planning or implementation on the part of the Bush Administration. It's people complaining.

---

Face it, you just disagree with the post and don’t have a cogent argument to counter it. As such, you came out with the only intellectually bereft response you could: a ridiculous allegation not supported by even the most forgiving of interpretations, an allegation far more relevant to your own conduct than anyone else’s.

-Quinn

P.S. On a positive note, at least you’ve stopped hypocritically whining about my engaging in “personal attacks.” Now if we can just deal with your other glaringly obvious hypocrisy.

---

I take this post as a sign of your defeat. When you choose to get into pissing contests over word usage, spelling, punctuation and or grammar, it means you can no longer support your beliefs. That post doesn't even come close to making your point, nor does it even attempt to.... probably because you can no longer support the point in the face of my question.

But I like to punish the confused, so I'll ask the question again.

How do you make the leap from "blood for oil and the rest of the communist propaganda" to "Within the Republican party itself, discontentment runs deep due to the view that Bush's Neoconservativism has strayed far from traditional Republican values – particularly with regard to both his fiscal polices, or lack thereof, and foreign policy."?

Wow, TFan, you really are glutton for punishment, which is fine with me, but you really should figure out just what point you are trying to make. Is it this:

1.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TFan

your response was an attempt to mischaracterize what guyone said as "Bush Administrations poor planning" He said nothing as such.

---

For which you provided the following quotations:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TFan

Guyone said-
You're abosolutly right and if everyone stopped whining about this and that (blood for oil and the rest of the communist propaganda) and just get the job done it wouldr be acomplished by now.

You responded-
Yeah, that's the problem. It's not a matter of poor planning or implementation on the part of the Bush Administration. It's people complaining.

---

Or is it this:

2.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TFan

Let's take a third look at guyone's quote-
You're abosolutly right and if everyone stopped whining about this and that (blood for oil and the rest of the communist propaganda) and just get the job done it wouldr be acomplished by now.

So how do you make the leap from "blood for oil and the rest of the communist propaganda" to "Within the Republican party itself, discontentment runs deep due to the view that Bush's Neoconservativism has strayed far from traditional Republican values – particularly with regard to both his fiscal polices, or lack thereof, and foreign policy."?

---

So, which point are trying, yet failing miserably, to make? Are you sticking with the claim that my first statement was an attempt to distort the meaning of guyone’s post, or are you now returning to the failed argument that it was the second paragraph. Wow, no wonder you have such a hard time grasping the clear and concise English that everyone else so easily understands.

Still, since I’m in a charitable mood, and I really am curious to see if it’s humanly possible for you to make an even bigger fool and laughing stock out of yourself than you already have, I’ll humor both points.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Quinn

Guyone responded to Trish’s posts on Iraq with the following:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by guyone

. . . . if everyone stopped whining about this and that (blood for oil and the rest of the communist propaganda) and just get the job done it would be acomplished by now.

---

Being smart enough to recognize this for what it is – the uninformed opinion of a 19-year old who lives at home with his parents – I responded with the following:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Quinn

Yeah, that's the problem. It's not a matter of poor planning or implementation on the part of the Bush Administration. It's people complaining.

Within the Republican party itself, discontentment runs deep due to the view that Bush's Neoconservativism has strayed far from traditional Republican values – particularly with regard to both his fiscal polices, or lack thereof, and foreign policy.

Seriously, why do you think Giuliani and McCain are receiving so much support form the moderate wing of the Republican Party? They're not Neoconservatives.

---

So, what don’t you get? Is it my use of clear, unambiguous, and well written English that confuses you? Would you prefer that I write it in Spanish? Maybe if I included a diagram with stick figures?

Now, tell me where I “distorted the mans words.” He put the blame for Iraq dragging on with the dissenters against the Bush Administration’s policies (otherwise known as the overwhelming majority of the United States). I refuted it by blaming the Bush Administration's poor planning/implementation and then providing supporting statements as to just how serious the effect of Bush’s failed policies has been – even going so far as to divide the Republican Party (if you wish to dispute that, I can provide plenty of articles to support what is obvious to everyone).

Now, you can whine like a little bitch about distorting someone else’s statement to make my own argument (something you are known for) or making personal attacks (something else you are known for), but the fact is you are both a hypocrite and a fool whose opinions are among the least respected on this forum. Once again, be a man and stand by your conduct – even if it is hypocritical.

---

See how easy that was, stupid.. It's like they say, Reading Is Fundamental (RIF). If your reading comprehension was a little better, maybe you wouldn't be the only one who sees this the way you do. Maybe you wouldn't be the sad little clown you have become.

-Quinn

You're not answering the question.

I'll ask again-

How do you make the leap from "if everyone stopped whining about this and that (blood for oil and the rest of the communist propaganda) and just get the job done it would be accomplished by now" to "Within the Republican party itself, discontentment runs deep due to the view that Bush's Neoconservativism has strayed far from traditional Republican values – particularly with regard to both his fiscal polices, or lack thereof, and foreign policy."?

Hey Quinn!

Truce...

You're going to burst a blood vessel.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TFan

You're not answering the question.

I'll ask again-

How do you make the leap from "blood for oil and the rest of the communist propaganda" to "Within the Republican party itself, discontentment runs deep due to the view that Bush's Neoconservativism has strayed far from traditional Republican values – particularly with regard to both his fiscal polices, or lack thereof, and foreign policy."?

---

You see, this is where RIF comes in. You inability to comprehend written English, when everyone else clearly understands and agrees with my point, really is an issue you should work on. The answer, whicih is contained below, is the reason you originally abandoned this argument in favor of your second argument, which also failed thus requiring you to return to this one. Maybe I really should include diagrams with stick figures if you are that bafflewit, which you clearly are:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Quinn

Guyone responded to Trish’s posts on Iraq with the following:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by guyone

. . . . if everyone stopped whining about this and that (blood for oil and the rest of the communist propaganda) and just get the job done it would be acomplished by now.

---

Being smart enough to recognize this for what it is – the uninformed opinion of a 19-year old who lives at home with his parents – I responded with the following:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Quinn

Yeah, that's the problem. It's not a matter of poor planning or implementation on the part of the Bush Administration. It's people complaining.
Within the Republican party itself, discontentment runs deep due to the view that Bush's Neoconservativism has strayed far from traditional Republican values – particularly with regard to both his fiscal polices, or lack thereof, and foreign policy.

Seriously, why do you think Giuliani and McCain are receiving so much support form the moderate wing of the Republican Party? They're not Neoconservatives.

---

So, what don’t you get? Is it my use of clear, unambiguous, and well written English that confuses you? Would you prefer that I write it in Spanish? Maybe if I included a diagram with stick figures?

Now, tell me where I “distorted the mans words.” He put the blame for Iraq dragging on with the dissenters against the Bush Administration’s policies (otherwise known as the overwhelming majority of the United States). I refuted it by blaming the Bush Administration's poor planning/implementation and then providing supporting statements as to just how serious the effect of Bush’s failed policies has been – even going so far as to divide the Republican Party (if you wish to dispute that, I can provide plenty of articles to support what is obvious to everyone).

Now, you can whine like a little bitch about distorting someone else’s statement to make my own argument (something you are known for) or making personal attacks (something else you are known for), but the fact is you are both a hypocrite and a fool whose opinions are among the least respected on this forum. Once again, be a man and stand by your conduct – even if it is hypocritical.

---

-Quinn

P.S. You really are the best, Tfool. I haven't laughed this hard in at least a month. Thank you for that.

TFan.

Agreed. This isn't getting us anywhere. Have a good evening.

-Quinn

You haven't answered the question, but that's ok.

Hey Grandpa

I'm not nineteen and I don't live with my parents. My name is Mike and I'm a chef in New York City.