Let's Get Rid of the Politics Forum

[tw]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

It's completely fair game, and by the way, you do it constantly. I chose that term "big dic" for a reason.

You also provided the reasons for your reasoning. Just like I defined the concept of 'big dic' with supporting facts.

I never challenge anyone without supporting facts - the always required reason why. You know that quite well when I overtly challenged your beliefs in Saddam's WMDs and justification for "Mission Accomplished".

I also stated up front when and why I was challenging classicman's constant cheap shots with cheap shot. And I remind everyone of that event that was necessary due to a destructive tone encourages by so much silence.

If I do 'it' constantly, then post examples of posts not provided with the supporting justificiations? If you are making an accusation, then you have examples.

It is an insult to post without supporting facts. 70% of Americans did just that - which is why so many blindly accepted a Saddam WMD lie. And therefore sent 4000 American servicemen irresponsibly to a useless death. Many even get angry when the 'reasons why' are provided. For some, anything more complex than the Daily News makes some angry. That also is insulting.

Let's not forget a perfect example: "Mission Accomplish" that made you so angry. I posted unpopular facts and numbers constantly. Overtly challenged what we now know were lies and myths. We know today facts back then could not support the 'Saddam WMD' myths. And I keep posting the reaons why back then in 2003. Very unpopular to oppose conclusions based only in emotion.

Demonstrated not only were reasons necessary to justify war - which everyone should remember today. And that the administration was overtly lying - which is no longer in dispute. But the point. Despite what you accuse me of, I provide fundamental supporting facts which is why my posts are so often unpopular - and longer.

I would hope you learned, for example, why facts necessary to justify war - as so bluntly posted in 2003. I would hope you never forget those so many reasons why. Even though that reality made you so angry back then, those underlying reasons why were accurate.

Remember how I cautioned (in maybe 2004) of the resulting economic damage what would occur? Well I was wrong. I only put the number at $400 billion. But again, I made statements that a majority disagreed with. And I said why - ie $400 billion -well above what anyone else was saying. Well I was wrong. The number is closer to $1trillion. I did not just post the unpopular. Included (routinely) were reasons why.

Welcome to an economy that happens when the predicted bills come due. Another example of something you did not like - but that I predicted WITH the underlying reasons why and without being politically correct. Something I due routinely - and therefore are not popular for demanding the irrefutable fact.

Posts not based in logic - based only in emotion - without supporting facts - that overtly challenge another - that is called what? For some, that is why they carry big guns. What kind of people are they called?

[classicman]

Originally Posted by tw

What kind of people are they called?

Americans. With just as much right to their opinion as you. Whether you like it, agree with it or not, doesn't matter.

[tw]

Originally Posted by classicman

Americans. With just as much right to their opinion as you. Whether you like it, agree with it or not, doesn't matter.

The difference is that you do it only for personal attacks. And then take offense when I attacked you cheap shot for cheap shot. Why are you here? You even went to the Technology forum only to attack me. You had nothing useful to post. You did not have any technical knowledge to contribute. Morethanpretty accurately identfied classicman's "Limbaugh" attitude in Choosing network adapter.

The cheapshot at TW before he ever even posted in this thread was very unwarranted and bad taste. I don't appreciate it in the politics threads (any of the cheap shots taken by anyone), but shit like that needs to stay in those threads. I generally stay away from them because I don't like all the personal attacks. I hate that the politics threads are so immature and unpleasant because of it,

[classicman]

Tommy dragged this here - not me.

Originally Posted by tw

What kind of people are they called?

Originally Posted by classicman

Americans. With just as much right to their opinion as you. Whether you like it, agree with it or not, doesn't matter.

I made a joke as explained in that forum. Why are you bringing it here tommy? Since you and she didn't "get it" I apologized. I guess quoting that would make your above point invalid. Typical Limbaugh/Beck/Hannity move. Selective quoting.
You haven't enough social grace to even accept an apology. I guess in your world, and apparently some other posters, its ok to attack someones family or wife whom you have never met nor interacted and call them a "gonorrhea dripping whore" just to "make a point" - Well it isn't ok with me. Additionally, it wasn't me nor my wife you attacked. It was another poster. Oh, and you still haven't apologized for that.
One suggestion, perhaps you should keep track of which people you attack next time. Have a nice day.

[tw]

Originally Posted by classicman

I made a joke as explained in that forum. Why are you bringing it here tommy?

Your political agenda is the topic here. You posted terrorist threats only with the intent of causing hurt. I am surprised you also did not accuse men if being a dirty Jew. Your apology was for a political reasons. You then went right back to your mockery, insults, personal attacks, and ... as Redux noted when you could not support your extremist accusations, you ran away.

You never apologized due to regret. You went right back to being nasty. You apologized because you had to admit your terrorist threats - because your intentional post to physically attack me complete with identify and address - are what Limbaugh encourages and that extremist advocate. Nobody posts with such harmful intent by accident.

Yes - everyone. He intentionally posted terrorist threats because he is doing what extremists have done all through history. It’s not about making America great. It’s all about a political agenda complete with mockery of liberals and disparaging remarks about moderates. Those terroristic threats were posted only due to an agenda based in hate.

This nastiness happens when peers remains silent about that nastiness openly encouraged and advocated by Hannity, Beck, and Limbaugh. So destructive as to even obstruct all government - to make Obama fail. Classicman is simply doing what is advocated by extremists for a political agenda.