SkyDekker 1,465 #51 August 6, 2010 QuoteIf he and you cant take it drop out can't take you getting the last post? can't take you formulating an opinion? What is it exactly we can't take? (and more to the point, what exactly is wrong with the items brought forward in the article?) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #52 August 6, 2010 QuoteQuoteIf he and you cant take it drop out can't take you getting the last post? can't take you formulating an opinion? What is it exactly we can't take? (and more to the point, what exactly is wrong with the items brought forward in the article?) How about this way You can dish it out but you cant take it Look I dont agree with the guy I dont care what he party affiliations are Would be the same for any of us Point it He thinks in this case the party affilitation is important Next time he will not depending of the view cant have it both ways"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #53 August 6, 2010 QuoteHow about this way You can dish it out but you cant take it Look I dont agree with the guy I dont care what he party affiliations are Would be the same for any of us Point it He thinks in this case the party affilitation is important Next time he will not depending of the view cant have it both ways Out of that whole rant, all I asked you for is to expound on the reasons why you don't agree with the guy. What are you disputing and why. That is kind of the purpose of forums like this. Plus, I really thought we had left the: "he did it first" and "he did it too" lines behind in JK. So, for the third time: Why do you not agree with the guy? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #54 August 6, 2010 QuoteQuoteHow about this way You can dish it out but you cant take it Look I dont agree with the guy I dont care what he party affiliations are Would be the same for any of us Point it He thinks in this case the party affilitation is important Next time he will not depending of the view cant have it both ways Out of that whole rant, all I asked you for is to expound on the reasons why you don't agree with the guy. What are you disputing and why. That is kind of the purpose of forums like this. Plus, I really thought we had left the: "he did it first" and "he did it too" lines behind in JK. So, for the third time: Why do you not agree with the guy? Why should I??? Especially from kallend???? All I ever get it the source is bias bull shit I think this source is biased affilitation be damed Good enough for hem so it is good enough from me He has identified an "honest" republican cause why??? He fucking agrees with him? What if he comes back and says he was mis quoted?? Is he less than honest now?? What a bunch of shit. If he wants an honest debate then the premise needs to be laid out that way. Didnt happen this time and rarley it does"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,184 #55 August 6, 2010 QuoteQuotePost 41 one sided and bullshit? That's all you got in response? I would have thought you would have had something a bit more thoughtful in response. They don't have a response. That is extremely obvious from their "shoot the messenger" posts in this thread. Stockman has impeccable credentials as a conservative Republican - they can't impeach him on that score. What he said is pretty much all true - they can't present any cogent argument against it. All they have is BS attacks on me.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #56 August 6, 2010 QuoteWhy should I??? Because that would be the purpose of a forum like this. Anyways, I have now asked three times to have a normal debate regarding issues with you. It's pretty clear you aren't willing to do that. The reasoning appears to be "cause johnny did it first". This will be my final post on this thread. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,184 #57 August 6, 2010 Quote All I ever get it the source is bias bull shit I think this source is biased affilitation be damed Good enough for hem so it is good enough from me If he wants an honest debate then the premise needs to be laid out that way. Didnt happen this time and rarley it does Would you care to write that in English?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #58 August 6, 2010 QuoteQuotePost 41 one sided and bullshit? That's all you got in response? I would have thought you would have had something a bit more thoughtful in response. I'm SO sorry - was there something in the article that WASN'T one-sided that you'd like me to address? Something that DOESN'T make the inference that all the economic woes are the fault of the Republicans?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #59 August 6, 2010 QuoteThey don't have a response. That is extremely obvious from their "shoot the messenger" posts in this thread. Awww... poor John. Don't like it when your own tactics are used against you? QuoteStockman has impeccable credentials as a conservative Republican - they can't impeach him on that score. Van Jones had "impeccable credentials" as a liberal Democrat - coming to a point sometime soon as the applicability to the discussion? I mean, we already know that your only criterion for honesty is if the person/site agrees with you. QuoteWhat he said is pretty much all true - they can't present any cogent argument against it. That recent Reps are using the same ....what was the quote? oh, yes... "vulgar Keynesianism" as is the Dem's stock-in-trade? Nope. QuoteAll they have is BS attacks on me. Here's another tissue. In fact, here's two - you can give one to Stockman since he's "truthful" (read as "agrees with kallend"), now.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,184 #60 August 6, 2010 Still no coherent argument against Stockman and no way to discredit his credentials, so your only option is to continue to attack me instead. Pathetic. ... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #61 August 6, 2010 Quote Still no coherent argument against Stockman Never said I disagreed with him - recent Reps HAVE, in fact, followed the 'vulgar keynsianism' that the Dems love so, so much. Quote and no way to discredit his credentials Again, no need - you've done it yourself 50 times with your 'voodoo economics' comments on the Reagan administration policies. Why should I interrupt when you're sinking your own boat? Quote so your only option is to continue to attack me instead. You're not done crying YET? Here's another tissue. Quote Pathetic. Far be it from me to interrupt your self-assessment.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,133 #62 August 6, 2010 >Plus, I really thought we had left the: "he did it first" and "he did it too" >lines behind in JK. Well, not completely. But at least several people here have progressed to "I know you are but what am I." Rumor has it that some are working on an even more advanced "rubber/glue" comeback. I have to say that lately my favorite meaningless posts are: "you always have to have the last word, don't you?" "You can post all you want, I'm not even going to reply." They always give me a chuckle. They're not only meaningless, but self-disproving. Sort of the Internet version of antimatter. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,184 #63 August 6, 2010 Still no coherent argument against Stockman and no way to discredit his credentials. Ok, we all understand.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #64 August 6, 2010 QuoteStill no coherent argument against Stockman and no way to discredit his credentials. Ok, we all understand. Maybe you should skip back up and re-read. It's ok, we all understand.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 210 #65 August 6, 2010 Quote >Plus, I really thought we had left the: "he did it first" and "he did it too" >lines behind in JK. Well, not completely. But at least several people here have progressed to "I know you are but what am I." Rumor has it that some are working on an even more advanced "rubber/glue" comeback. I have to say that lately my favorite meaningless posts are: "you always have to have the last word, don't you?" "You can post all you want, I'm not even going to reply." They always give me a chuckle. They're not only meaningless, but self-disproving. Sort of the Internet version of antimatter. That thing caused the NYC blackout in '77. Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,184 #66 August 6, 2010 Why don't you just tell us all where you think Stockman is wrong?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 210 #67 August 6, 2010 Quote Why don't you just tell us all where you think Stockman is wrong? Since you either missed it or chose to ignore it I posted earlier that Mr. Stockman was dead against Keynesian economics. Here's a quote from the article you posted a link to... QuoteBut the new catechism, as practiced by Republican policymakers for decades now, has amounted to little more than money printing and deficit finance — vulgar Keynesianism robed in the ideological vestments of the prosperous classes. You OTOH are a supporter as evidenced in this quote I'm a Keynesian. Govt should pay down debt in the good times, and spend in the bad times. - Kallend Why is someone who is against an economic theory you subscribe to all of a sudden the new messiah?Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,184 #68 August 6, 2010 Where did I say I agreed with EVERYTHING he wrote? ... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #69 August 7, 2010 QuoteWhy is someone who is against an economic theory you subscribe to all of a sudden the new messiah? Because he's saying something Kallend approves of, of course - that's all that's needed.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,184 #70 August 7, 2010 QuoteQuoteWhy is someone who is against an economic theory you subscribe to all of a sudden the new messiah? Because he's saying something Kallend approves of, of course - that's all that's needed. Why don't you detail for us where Stockman is wrong, or has defective conservative credentials, instead of repeatedly trying to make it about me?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #71 August 7, 2010 Quote Quote Quote Why is someone who is against an economic theory you subscribe to all of a sudden the new messiah? Because he's saying something Kallend approves of, of course - that's all that's needed. Why don't you detail for us where Stockman is wrong, or has defective conservative credentials, instead of repeatedly trying to make it about me? I can answer that . . . It's because you are far more entertaining when we make it about you. Just because we don't give you the info you want, when you want it, and bow down before king Kallend, doesn't mean the info isn't there, or even that we don't have it ready to post in response . . . it just means that it is time better spent doing the polar opposite of what you want.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
timmyfitz 0 #72 August 7, 2010 Quote Where did I say I agreed with EVERYTHING he wrote? Excellent side step. You have been asking people to not attack the messenger but to focus on the content of the article. When someone does just that to show you the flaw in your argument, you just side step. Excellent! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,184 #73 August 7, 2010 Quote Quote Where did I say I agreed with EVERYTHING he wrote? Excellent side step. You have been asking people to not attack the messenger but to focus on the content of the article. When someone does just that to show you the flaw in your argument, you just side step. Excellent! Why don't you detail for us where Stockman is wrong, or has defective conservative credentials, since HE is the messenger? Fact is that you have NOTHING on the messenger and NOTHING on the message but can't bring yourself to admit it.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,184 #74 August 7, 2010 Quote Quote Quote Quote Why is someone who is against an economic theory you subscribe to all of a sudden the new messiah? Because he's saying something Kallend approves of, of course - that's all that's needed. Why don't you detail for us where Stockman is wrong, or has defective conservative credentials, instead of repeatedly trying to make it about me? I can answer that . . . It's because you are far more entertaining when we make it about you. Just because we don't give you the info you want, when you want it, and bow down before king Kallend, doesn't mean the info isn't there, or even that we don't have it ready to post in response . . . it just means that it is time better spent doing the polar opposite of what you want. Translation - you can't come up with any reason that Stockman is wrong but you can't bring yourself to admit it.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #75 August 7, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteWhy is someone who is against an economic theory you subscribe to all of a sudden the new messiah? Because he's saying something Kallend approves of, of course - that's all that's needed. Why don't you detail for us where Stockman is wrong, or has defective conservative credentials, instead of repeatedly trying to make it about me? I've answered that several times upthread, perfesser - why don't you go re-read that until you understand it instead of asking me again and again and again?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
