Lucky...

YOU are the one that keeps piling on condition after condition after condition, not I. That is called a strawman argument. I'll await your rebuttal of the data I posted in the other thread. See you there. I'll be glad to answer it, post the url for that thread and perhaps rewrite the question to be specific as to what you want to know. Here's a little help so you can understand what a strawman argument is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man A straw man is a fallacy in which an irrelevant topic is presented in order to divert attention from the original issue. The basic idea is to "win" an argument by leading attention away from the argument and to another topic. So even if I'm adding on conditions, that isn't leading you to another topic. You're welcome.

FROM YOUR POST 43: From Mirriam-Webster: typographic One entry found for typographic. Main Entry: ty·po·graph·ic Pronunciation: "tI-p&-'gra-fik Variant(s): or ty·po·graph·i·cal /-fi-k&l/ Function: adjective : of, relating to, or occurring or used in typography or typeset matter - ty·po·graph·i·cal·ly /-fi-k(&-)lE/ adverb Dictionary.com backed me - lok at it. Then explain the slip from the 1 to the 5.

So what, let's trash this thread that was nothing to begin with so the rest of the forum stays clear of this BS.

So did I, you fucked up royale. You posted me saying Pearl Harbor was Dec 7, 1941 - Normandy was June 6, 1944, which was 2 1/2 years later. I guess you find error in that due to you thinking Pearl Harbor was attacked in 1945.

You have to resort to blatant dishonsty. Show it. Gladly.

Actually, you can clear this up, but stating your facts in Wikipedia, and then issuing a press release to The Onion and let them report on it to set the record straight... It wouldn't be the same if all the neo-con reinforcements hadn't arrived.

From Mirriam-Webster: typographic One entry found for typographic. Main Entry: ty·po·graph·ic Pronunciation: "tI-p&-'gra-fik Variant(s): or ty·po·graph·i·cal /-fi-k&l/ Function: adjective : of, relating to, or occurring or used in typography or typeset matter - ty·po·graph·i·cal·ly /-fi-k(&-)lE/ adverb Seems they forgot to put anything in there about the keys being adjacent. Are you resorting to making up definitions to slam people now, Lucky? That's stooping pretty low, even for you. Not that people don't see right through your silly little games. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Typography TYPOGRAPHY: The arrangement of type involves the selection of typefaces, point size, line length, leading (line spacing), adjusting the spaces between groups of letters (tracking) and adjusting the space between pairs of letters (kerning). [1] I don't see that pertaining to accidentally hitting the wrong key as you suggest. This is more like it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Typographical_error TYPOGRAPHICAL ERROR: The term includes errors due to mechanical failure or slips of the hand or finger, but excludes errors of ignorance. So your finger slipped from the 1 to the 5? Not a typo - so sorry. Looks like ya got me there, Lucky. Oh! Wait! Your "wiki" reference takes on an entirely different meaning when read the whole paragraph and not just what you want people to read. It is as follows: "A typographical error (often shortened to typo) is a mistake made in, originally, the manual type-setting (typography) of printed material, or more recently, the typing process. The term includes errors due to mechanical failure or slips of the hand or finger, but excludes errors of ignorance.[1] Before the arrival of printing, the "copyist's mistake" was the equivalent for manuscripts. Most typos involve simple duplication, omission, transposition, or substitution of a small number of characters." "Includes" doen not mean "is limited to". So sorry your argument doesn't hold water. Besides, I'll trust Webster over wiki any day. Try again. Right, and as I posted, typography is: The arrangement of type involves the selection of typefaces, point size, line length, leading (line spacing), adjusting the spaces between groups of letters (tracking) and adjusting the space between pairs of letters (kerning). Look at the emboldened letters in your words: is a mistake made in, originally, the manual type-setting (typography) of printed material. The act of manually typing is not typography, it's the selections of font, etc. You're trying to call a typographical error an act of typography; close but no Lewinsky. Don't like Wiki? Dictionary.com: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/typographical%20error an error in printed or typewritten matter resulting from striking the improper key of a keyboard, from mechanical failure, or the like. So you reached for the 1 and hit the 5. You lose and quit making it worse by: - Lying - Trying to make us believe that typography is the same as a typographical error.

What are you talking about? Furthermore, genius, it is your job to prove my false allegations. Right, meaning it didn't happen. I haven't read the Onion and am not familiar with it, but here's what made me think it was some extremist rag. We have the neo-con party extremists who want the 28th Amendment to be homophobically-based and they also think Obama is a Muslim terrorist and that the HC plan has death squads. So can ya blame me for thinking the Onion was some nutty RW arm?

In that region you posted? That doesn't illustrate the entire Russian military vs the entire US military. That is such a mocrocosm of each military it isn't funny. You have to be abstract or illustarte a microcosm in order to make an errant point. Show me the threat issued. Tell em how the Russians were gonna fight us as they were deep in Afghanistan. Show me how lethao they were in previous battles/wars going back to WWII where their losses were almost twice that of Germany's even after help from the rest of the world. Well, I see you still haven't read it, then. Funny how you keep adding more and more conditions to what you'll accept as proof, Lucky. How about you go refute what I posted - you know, actually bring somethng besides YOUR OPINION to the table for once? What you want in an affidavit from god. All you have to do is to ask for a standard of proof that doesn't exist and you can wave your Texan flag in pseudo-victory. Of course, being a Texan, you'll execute a man on shaky evidence, but if I ask what Russia was doing to pick a fight, what kind of real threat they were to the US, how Russia was gonna pull off fighting in AFG and the US too, well, you want your affidavit or else you think you're wrong. Worse yet, all of te sudden spending becomes an issue, whereas under your heroes FR and GWB there's no issue with the 7T the debt increased under them and that isn't counting the fact that they inherited very stable deficit/debt conditions and left a hurricane.

It's also funny considering he was a year off in his declaration of when Pearl Harbor was as well, in saying that US unemployment dropped in 1941 because of entering WWII. I guarantee I never said, wrote or otherwise stated that D-Day was before the attack on Pearl Harbor. But hey, 3 or 4 neo-cons can start a false rumor and have it stick I'm sure. Post it. When Pearl Harbor was what? Kinda left an important word out, huh? When it was attacked? US unemplyment dropped in 38-39 as I recall due to preparation for WWII. I never tied the unemployment rate to Dec 7, 1941, but I really appreciate watching the neo-troops rally around each other. And I've stated many times that we were moving ships/equip to Europe in 1940, so there was no exact correlation between unemployment and Dec 7, 1941, or as Beligian calls it, 1945.

You have to resort to blatant dishonsty. Show it.

In that region you posted? That doesn't illustrate the entire Russian military vs the entire US military. That is such a mocrocosm of each military it isn't funny. You have to be abstract or illustarte a microcosm in order to make an errant point. Show me the threat issued. Tell em how the Russians were gonna fight us as they were deep in Afghanistan. Show me how lethao they were in previous battles/wars going back to WWII where their losses were almost twice that of Germany's even after help from the rest of the world. What fuckups? You have illustrated none. Now if you're gonna list what you call fuckups, leave opinion out and cite histroical fuckups. While you're at it, tell me about the threats Russia was making to teh US as we were selling them assloads of wheat.

From Mirriam-Webster: typographic One entry found for typographic. Main Entry: ty·po·graph·ic Pronunciation: "tI-p&-'gra-fik Variant(s): or ty·po·graph·i·cal /-fi-k&l/ Function: adjective : of, relating to, or occurring or used in typography or typeset matter - ty·po·graph·i·cal·ly /-fi-k(&-)lE/ adverb Seems they forgot to put anything in there about the keys being adjacent. Are you resorting to making up definitions to slam people now, Lucky? That's stooping pretty low, even for you. Not that people don't see right through your silly little games. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Typography TYPOGRAPHY: The arrangement of type involves the selection of typefaces, point size, line length, leading (line spacing), adjusting the spaces between groups of letters (tracking) and adjusting the space between pairs of letters (kerning). [1] I don't see that pertaining to accidentally hitting the wrong key as you suggest. This is more like it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Typographical_error TYPOGRAPHICAL ERROR: The term includes errors due to mechanical failure or slips of the hand or finger, but excludes errors of ignorance. So your finger slipped from the 1 to the 5? Not a typo - so sorry.

Not only that, but the most important years of the cold war were 46-58 when we built our nuclear arsenal. And to think, we did this while fighting in Korea and the debt actually fell during a couple of years. Then fascist Ronnie proliferated the Cold War and tripled the debt, all when the major hostilities between the US and Russia had greatly subsided. Yet FR gets the credit....criminal. 81 sucked, but so did the early 70's, mid 70's and late 70's. Carter wasn't the problem, he wasn't the solution, but he wasn't problem of the 70's.

No typo, keys weren't adjacent. Which comparison, the fact that the Soviets weren't threat? Remember, Pearl Harbor, 1945 per Belgian.

Welcome to "change." Why are you implying this has anything to do with Obama? That's just silly. Because its the same policies that got california into the situation they are now that the federal government, under obama, is currently implimenting. Its pretty clear. Why omit R. Reagan and George W. Bush, the great architects of Voodoo Economics? Because O-bow-ma is doing it bigger and better than they did - taking money from the rich and giving it out to the poor. Go ahead and list all of the tax increases Obama has done. Also, list all the rich orgs Obama has given money to. - The banks - The auto makers List all the poor people Obama has given monmey to. Right, your assertions are just silly-wrong.

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-state-tax31-2009oct31,0,2028140.story Forced Loan? Is this the "politically correct" term for theft? Hey, it's probably at least signed by your Governator, if not dreamed up by him. Dude, if you only knew the half of the creative thinking coming out of Sacramento... You're right, tax cuts, my friends. Raising taxes is bad, look at Hoover, cutting taxes worked for him.

Perhaps the title will give you a clue... IS THIS FUCKING LEGIT? Ah, I see, because I wasn't familiar with the Onion, Bush really was a great president and Reagan wasn't a fascist pig . Niiiiice logic. Each element stands alone, unless you are of the party that states, 'With us or against us." I couldn't find you attacking when one of the guys 'with you and not against you' thought Japan was atatcked in 1945. I guess you're selective. Remember, attack the person, not the issue. Verifed in your sig I am an open minded centrist. If you disagree with me, then you are just wrong and goat fuck stupid. Go Republicans Japan was attacked in 1945. Several times. Rather Belgian said Pearl Harbor was attacked in 1945, Belgian didn't say Japan wasn't attacked in 45.

Agree. I've seen 1 or 2 articles referenced here, they seemed to RW promos. They have a very coy way of looking realistic and not too far over the edge. Fuuny shit. Yep, very little reading from them. Made a wrong assessment they were RW.

The hits, they keep on rollin' Vs the neo-con bible: Hannity?

That depends on the topic. If you want to learn the syntax to write a Hello World computer program in a particular language, then Wikipedia tends to be an excellent source of information. For topics that are more controversial, Wikipedia articles are often biased and hardly objective. To be fair, their bibliographies can link to articles with which one can begin researching a topic. And I agree with that. But they are objective and don't have an agenda. If there's a dispute as to the accuracy, they will state so. I would take honest inaccuracy over bias any day. One's an accident, the other a deliberate act of deception. I like Wikipedia as a starting place too, so I agree.

Perhaps the title will give you a clue... IS THIS FUCKING LEGIT? Ah, I see, because I wasn't familiar with the Onion, Bush really was a great president and Reagan wasn't a fascist pig . Niiiiice logic. Each element stands alone, unless you are of the party that states, 'With us or against us." I couldn't find you attacking when one of the guys 'with you and not against you' thought Japan was atatcked in 1945. I guess you're selective. Remember, attack the person, not the issue. Verifed in your sig I am an open minded centrist. If you disagree with me, then you are just wrong and goat fuck stupid. Go Republicans

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-state-tax31-2009oct31,0,2028140.story Forced Loan? Is this the "politically correct" term for theft? Hey, it's probably at least signed by your Governator, if not dreamed up by him.

Who hasn't served and worked? You're beginning to sound like a freeloader. And you sound like a typical, garden variety neo-con. So I guess all of W.E., Canada, Australia and the free world are a bunch of free loaders, right? How come they have to wait? Some of the Canadians come down here and pay rather than die. "Served and worked", and now the world owes you a living? No neocon here, I just paid my way like you will. Oh, that's easy....it's the death squads Speaking of such: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rainmaker_(John_Grisham) Some Canadians; right - the rich ones. They don't have private HC up there, so if you have money you come down here. You have more specialists in the US. No one owes me a thing, I was one of the vets in the military rather than being coddeled by mommy and daddy - I have paid my dues. I want to keep paying my dues and taxes and want society to take care of all, nit just pander to teh rich. Of course you will say they don't, but the gov does. Sorry that may change a few shades, but is it's a relief, the US will still pander to the rich, even after 8 years of Obama.

You just don't post anything but hatred. It has since before the inception of the US; we were established as a debtor nation. We have ALWAYS carried a debt. Jackson got us down to almost 0, but the debt accumulated fact. Yes, we have a money pissing machine, you just don't mind when it pisses for your military. Nah, just a revolving account. The interest will choke us. BTW, nothing more entertaining than to hear a Republican talk about how spending is gonna kill us. Ah, so ya can't win an argument on its merit so you ad hominem: I disagree with his politics therefore he's a bad A&P. Brilliant deduction.