Moderator: Metal Sludge
'You know who' will not back down, even when wrong.ijwthstd wrote:I can't believe someone would dispute something so plainly obvious as to whether or not a Republican congressman and Republican candidate for president is a Republican or not.
Yes, I do. You're just too far into denial to realize it. And I'm still waiting for you to make even ONE convincing rebuttal as to why I'm wrong about ANYTHING I've discussed. ALL you do is attack me. So, shit or get off the pot, asshole.Wheresthestagemanager? wrote:No you don't. You're just an interested party expressing opinions, along with methane gas.Moggio wrote: You see, the problem with you is that you act like I have no credibility or something.
Yes, I do have credibility.
The fact that you're an emotional hothead doesn't give your opinion any more weight, it just proves you're an asshole.
demolition23 wrote:But you didn't.Moggio wrote:Yes, I do have credibility. And that's because when I'm in a discussion about something I usually know what I'm talking about and back my shit up after presenting my case.
You stated that Ron Paul had international support and when politely asked the extent of that support, you refused to provide a simple answer to back up a simple claim. You say I should take it on faith because you have credibility, but I wasn't even denying your statement or its credibility- I was simply asking for further detail. That's something anyone might do in a simple discussion about politics. However, when given an opportunity, you did not back your statement up with further detail. What's more, you got really aggressive about it, when you had in fact been given an opportunity to spread your knowledge.
Look morons, I've not only answered your questions, I've also given you two links that are OVER 3 hours long COMBINED that will answer many of your questions. So, knock yourselves out. And stop splitting hairs. Btw, it's convenient that you don't include those links in your above quotes.pieceofme wrote:So you can't answer his questions. That figures.
???ijwthstd wrote:I can't believe someone would dispute something so plainly obvious as to whether or not a Republican congressman and Republican candidate for president is a Republican or not.
Oh, STFU already.Wheresthestagemanager? wrote:'You know who' will not back down, even when wrong.
He sees it as a sign of weakness and something that undermines his "cred".
This hangup IS his major weakness.
As I've mentioned, such lameness is one of the problems with most politicians today.
They won't give in even if it's a losing cause.
Sure I have. I even provided screen caps, and you still argued about it..Moggio wrote: You STILL haven't shown me why I'm wrong regarding ANYTHING I've discussed on this forum.
No, you haven't. ALL you've done is two things: point out that I'm wrong, despite the FACT I'm not and ATTACK me.Wheresthestagemanager? wrote:Sure I have. I even provided screen caps, and you still argued about it..Moggio wrote: You STILL haven't shown me why I'm wrong regarding ANYTHING I've discussed on this forum.
You're the kind of fool who is afraid to admit mistakes, so I guess you're just gonna have to live with the treatment you get here. You deserve every bit of it.
By the way, do you have any comment on the latest poll about you? Will you recognize the true results, or are ya gonna argue about that too?
Moggio wrote: Oh and the "latest" poll against me in the Original Gossip Board is purely a collection of whiny little bitches who are simply pathetic and couldn't win an argument to save their lives...
Ron Paul is clearly a Republican by all meaningful measures. The fact that he's not a mainstream republican is fairly clear, but that's a more nuanced position than Moggio is capable of holding/understanding.ijwthstd wrote:I can't believe someone would dispute something so plainly obvious as to whether or not a Republican congressman and Republican candidate for president is a Republican or not.
Moggio wrote:You see, the problem with you is that you act like I have no credibility or something.
PhoenixFlames wrote:AVATAR made 2.7 billion which (maths) is close to 3 x million millions!!!!!!
Which PROVES my point.Wheresthestagemanager? wrote:Moggio wrote: Oh and the "latest" poll against me in the Original Gossip Board is purely a collection of whiny little bitches who are simply pathetic and couldn't win an argument to save their lives...
Really?demolition23 wrote:Ron Paul is clearly a Republican by all meaningful measures. The fact that he's not a mainstream republican is fairly clear, but that's a more nuanced position than Moggio is capable of holding/understanding.ijwthstd wrote:I can't believe someone would dispute something so plainly obvious as to whether or not a Republican congressman and Republican candidate for president is a Republican or not.
Really.Moggio wrote:Really?demolition23 wrote:Ron Paul is clearly a Republican by all meaningful measures. The fact that he's not a mainstream republican is fairly clear, but that's a more nuanced position than Moggio is capable of holding/understanding.ijwthstd wrote:I can't believe someone would dispute something so plainly obvious as to whether or not a Republican congressman and Republican candidate for president is a Republican or not.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y5M1tGIi ... ults_video
ROTF!Wheresthestagemanager? wrote:Really.Moggio wrote:Really?demolition23 wrote:Ron Paul is clearly a Republican by all meaningful measures. The fact that he's not a mainstream republican is fairly clear, but that's a more nuanced position than Moggio is capable of holding/understanding.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y5M1tGIi ... ults_video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pZ_Z_XG0L2c
Ron Paul is THE most intelligent politician of our time. What you don't seem to understand (like many), are several things.ijwthstd wrote:Libertarian is a political philosophy (and a very minor political party). Republican is a political party with tens of millions of people including many libertarians.
Ron Paul is a goofball and his fringe supporters mostly seen as harmless. His endorsement is worthless. His true contribution to Romney's victory and backdoor endorsement was going easy on him during the primary campaign, perhaps hoping to secure his son a place on the ticket should he have enough delegates to make any difference whatsoever.
The more serious libertarian leaning Republican candidate would have been former governor Gary Johnson of New Mexico which is why he was completely ignored.
This is the second time you've told us that RP dies not accept "brides".Moggio wrote:
RP does NOT accept brides from lobbyists.
RP does NOT demagogue - if you don't like his platform, TOUGH.
That's nice, darling. Once again, it's PURELY PATHETIC that you concentrate on typos. And btw, I did NOT misuse the meaning of demagogue:Wheresthestagemanager? wrote:This is the second time you've told us that RP dies not accept "brides".Moggio wrote:
RP does NOT accept brides from lobbyists.
RP does NOT demagogue - if you don't like his platform, TOUGH.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/demagogue
Usage Note: Among the nouns that the Usage Panel is loath to see used as a verb is demagogue, meaning "to speak about something in the manner of a demagogue." Ninety-four percent reject it in the sentence The President will demagogue Medicare, unwilling to acknowledge that fundamental reforms need to be made. Resistance to the use of traditional nouns as verbs is sometimes strong, especially when the novel usages are associated with business or bureaucratic jargon.
Get back to me when 100% of the usage panel reject it, sunshine.Wheresthestagemanager? wrote:What flies over your head is the fact that "demagogue" is a NOUN.
You used it as a VERB.
Even the definition you posted shows it to be a NOUN.
If Ron Paul was president, he wouldn't "president" all over the place.
Don't you mean, get back to you when they "usage panel" it?Moggio wrote:Get back to me when 100% of the usage panel reject it, sunshine.Wheresthestagemanager? wrote:What flies over your head is the fact that "demagogue" is a NOUN.
You used it as a VERB.
Even the definition you posted shows it to be a NOUN.
If Ron Paul was president, he wouldn't "president" all over the place.
Like I said, get back to me when 100% of the usage panel reject it, sunshine.Wheresthestagemanager? wrote:Don't you mean, get back to you when they "usage panel" it?Moggio wrote:Get back to me when 100% of the usage panel reject it, sunshine.Wheresthestagemanager? wrote:What flies over your head is the fact that "demagogue" is a NOUN.
You used it as a VERB.
Even the definition you posted shows it to be a NOUN.
If Ron Paul was president, he wouldn't "president" all over the place.
10-4, princess.Moggio wrote:
Like I said, get back to me when 100% of the usage panel reject it, sunshine.
Do you really need a real basic history lesson on this?Moggio wrote:A brokered convention could have been EASILY forced (which is how Eisenhower won with only 5 plurality states, way back when)
The fuck?Wheresthestagemanager? wrote:10-4, princess.Moggio wrote:
Like I said, get back to me when 100% of the usage panel reject it, sunshine.
Not exactly. You're missing the point.ijwthstd wrote:Do you really need a real basic history lesson on this?Moggio wrote:A brokered convention could have been EASILY forced (which is how Eisenhower won with only 5 plurality states, way back when)
In 1952 only 12 states held primaries.
You're trying to say Democracy is dead because the public and the party rejected Ron Paul yet primaries had little effect on the outcome until the 1970's. The public was given 2 candidates to choose from by the parties and that was that.
I guess I could type a simple explanation on how candidates were chosen in the 1950's but why bother, it's obvious you're already seriously floundering with that statement.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=10-4Moggio wrote:The fuck?Wheresthestagemanager? wrote:10-4, princess.Moggio wrote:
Like I said, get back to me when 100% of the usage panel reject it, sunshine.
And another common turn of phrase stumps moggio!Wheresthestagemanager? wrote:http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=10-4Moggio wrote:The fuck?Wheresthestagemanager? wrote:
10-4, princess.
"10-4 means "OK," "understood," and "affirmative." Commonly known as CB radio lingo, originating from the need for brevity in radio transmission."
Moggio wrote:You see, the problem with you is that you act like I have no credibility or something.
PhoenixFlames wrote:AVATAR made 2.7 billion which (maths) is close to 3 x million millions!!!!!!
Wheresthestagemanager? wrote:http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=10-4Moggio wrote:The fuck?Wheresthestagemanager? wrote:
10-4, princess.
"10-4 means "OK," "understood," and "affirmative." Commonly known as CB radio lingo, originating from the need for brevity in radio transmission."
Nope. Where in the FUCK did I state that I didn't understand what 10-4 meant?!demolition23 wrote:And another common turn of phrase stumps moggio!
And I should give a fuck about your ultra-ignorant opinion of Zappa because? Btw, it's off topic and on the wrong board.Skate4RnR wrote:Zappa tried to be funny and he was not humorous in the least. He fucking sucked. His legacy exists today because people make more out of nothing.
