Fact-Checking the President's Speech on Iraq
-
IamChrisMcCall wrote:
Which part of the article do you take issue with? Or would you rather play "kill the messenger" like you usually do?
Besides the fact that it's a biased attack on the president paid for with my tax dollars...Nothing. They're entitled to their opinions (though I shouldn't have to pay for them). What I take issue with is your confusion between facts and opinions. But I can't blame you as you ripped this directly off of Digg (including the title).
If liberals are not traitors, their only fallback argument at this point is that they're really stupid. -Ann Coulter
Red Stateler wrote:
But I can't blame you as you ripped this directly off of Digg (including the title).
You apparently don't disagree with it, either.
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
No, my original point was that we posit that other cultures are hopelessly immutable,
I didn't say that, did I? There were two key words that I KNEW you would miss in my original point: "for now". In fact I almost thought about bolding those two words. And true to form, you missed them. It's so predictable.
The early bird who catches the worm works for someone who comes in late and owns the worm farm. -- Travis McGee
Well, since you're so good at predicting things and all, and such a brilliant student of international social trends, when do you predict that they will become mutable?
The only conspiracies that concern me are the ones I am completely unaware of. By the time I find out about it, its probably a done deal. Nothing in the entire universe is more useless than morality without authority. A morality free of hyprocrisy is no morality at all.
-
Red Stateler wrote:
But I can't blame you as you ripped this directly off of Digg (including the title).
You apparently don't disagree with it, either.
IamChrisMcCall wrote:
You apparently don't disagree with it, either.
I addressed disagreement above, which you ignored. There is simply too much BS in their analysis to address individually.
If liberals are not traitors, their only fallback argument at this point is that they're really stupid. -Ann Coulter
-
Well, since you're so good at predicting things and all, and such a brilliant student of international social trends, when do you predict that they will become mutable?
The only conspiracies that concern me are the ones I am completely unaware of. By the time I find out about it, its probably a done deal. Nothing in the entire universe is more useless than morality without authority. A morality free of hyprocrisy is no morality at all.
Stan Shannon wrote:
since you're so good at predicting things and all, and such a brilliant student of international social trends
[snicker] You're so easy to provoke.
The early bird who catches the worm works for someone who comes in late and owns the worm farm. -- Travis McGee
-
IamChrisMcCall wrote:
You apparently don't disagree with it, either.
I addressed disagreement above, which you ignored. There is simply too much BS in their analysis to address individually.
If liberals are not traitors, their only fallback argument at this point is that they're really stupid. -Ann Coulter
Right, you just don't have the time :laugh:
-
Right, you just don't have the time :laugh:
IamChrisMcCall wrote:
Right, you just don't have the time
I don't have the motivation. Besides, you seem to just dismiss things as "sarcastic" whenever it's convenient for you.
If liberals are not traitors, their only fallback argument at this point is that they're really stupid. -Ann Coulter
-
IamChrisMcCall wrote:
Right, you just don't have the time
I don't have the motivation. Besides, you seem to just dismiss things as "sarcastic" whenever it's convenient for you.
If liberals are not traitors, their only fallback argument at this point is that they're really stupid. -Ann Coulter
You win, I believe you support universal health care and were not being sarcastic.
-
You win, I believe you support universal health care and were not being sarcastic.
IamChrisMcCall wrote:
You win, I believe you support universal health care and were not being sarcastic.
I am completely apathetic about a group implementing "universal health care" as long as I am not under its umbrella. I therefore support San Francisco's initiative as it's what they want. I would oppose it where I live.
If liberals are not traitors, their only fallback argument at this point is that they're really stupid. -Ann Coulter
-
IamChrisMcCall wrote:
You win, I believe you support universal health care and were not being sarcastic.
I am completely apathetic about a group implementing "universal health care" as long as I am not under its umbrella. I therefore support San Francisco's initiative as it's what they want. I would oppose it where I live.
If liberals are not traitors, their only fallback argument at this point is that they're really stupid. -Ann Coulter
So you support universal health care, as long as it's not for you. I just want to be clear on this.
-
So you support universal health care, as long as it's not for you. I just want to be clear on this.
IamChrisMcCall wrote:
So you support universal health care, as long as it's not for you. I just want to be clear on this.
Let me make it perfectly clear for you, since stating it three times apparently is not quite enough: I completely and 100% support "universal" health care or any other completely socialist or communistic program as long as those programs are contained within a small and local government, as long as those programs do not contradict the inalienable rights defined in the US and state constitutions, as long as they are derived through the democratic process according to that local community and as long as that community is not the one I live in. Clear enough? I suspect not.
If liberals are not traitors, their only fallback argument at this point is that they're really stupid. -Ann Coulter