Obama to Address Nation's Children in School

[Grave_n_idle]

That's perfectly fine. Try to recognize that it was a bad joke and move on instead of going off on a completely different tangent.

Your whole argument has been a bad joke, it's impossible to differentiate the (alleged) humour you claim for that comment and everything else you've posted.

It's not off at a tangent, at all - the whole point is that the rightwing has done it's damnedest to censor Obama before he even spoke - worse, they've done so in an entirely partisan and hypocritical fashion.

[Grave_n_idle]

Am I going to be outspoken about Reagan giving a speech to kids? No, that only hurts my own side. It doesn't mean I'm not concerned about it though.

Am I going to be outspoken about Obama giving a speech to kids? Yes, I want to hurt his side as much as possible. Obviously I am concerned about this.

Dude, this isn't Red Rover...

It is if you care more about political parties than about the greater good of the nation.

[Reagan States]

No, though I do assert that your concern about my concern is purely partisan.

Am I going to be outspoken about Reagan giving a speech to kids? No, that only hurts my own side. It doesn't mean I'm not concerned about it though.

Am I going to be outspoken about Obama giving a speech to kids? Yes, I want to hurt his side as much as possible. Obviously I am concerned about this.

You don't admit that your concern is partisan..... but you do assert that your complaints are going to be shaped by not wanting to hurt 'your side', and by wanting to hurt 'his side'?





Is English a second language for you? Seriously?

Because I'm happy to expand on the definition of the word 'partisan' for you if I'm bombarding you with esoteric foreign terms.

Nope, keep twisting though. My outspoken concern and concerns I keep to myself are two entirely different things. I'm concerned that I have to might wet myself right now because I've really got to go, but am I going to announce that to the world? No. Am I still concerned about it? Yes.

There's nothing 'twisty' about it.

My question was about you being partisan -

Here are your words: "No... No, that only hurts my own side... Yes, I want to hurt his side as much as possible".

Your own words convict you. You are partisan. Worse - you are SAYING you're not partisan, in the same post you openly admit partisanship.

If you can't be consistent, at least be honest about it.

When did I EVER say I wasn't partisan? That is where you twist, because I am partisan. That doesn't mean I can't participate in a civil conversation without being blatant about it. I can admit that I feel concern about some things Reagan did, just as I can say I feel concern about some things Obama does.

But I'm not going to make a new thread to bash Reagan like I would for Obama.

Do you mean censuring, or censoring? Because the word you're using has a different meaning than the one GnI just used.

lol, "censoring"

[Kryozerkia]

Do you mean censuring, or censoring? Because the word you're using has a different meaning than the one GnI just used.

lol, "censoring"

Ok, good, your argument makes more sense now.

[Lunatic Goofballs]

Look again.

name-calling: grotesque, batshit, insanity...
rationale: ???

Who did I name?

You don't have to name anyone. You are classifying the whole idea with those names.

What idea did I name call then?

My argument.

Your argument was:

The Left was the chief opposition to things Reagan did. The Right is the chief opposition to things Obama does. It's quite simple.

My response was:

If that's correct, it's quite grotesque. I suspect it isn't though. I think it's an attempt to rationalize recent batshit insanity.

I wasn't calling your argument grotesque. I was calling it incorrect. I called the idea that the 'left' vs 'right' system works that way grotesque. That system wasn't your idea, so I feel I have every right to attack it. And if it IS originally your idea then you have a lot to answer for and the scrotum-seeking attack weasels will have to pay you a visit. Finally, I suggested that your argument was your attempt to rationalize other peoples' batshit insanity.

At no time were any name-calling directed at you, a specific group of people or your argument other than referring to it as not correct. If calling you wrong is name calling then these are going to be very short debates.

[Reagan States]

I wasn't calling your argument grotesque. I was calling it incorrect. I called the idea that the 'left' vs 'right' system works that way grotesque. That system wasn't your idea, so I feel I have every right to attack it. And if it IS originally your idea then you have a lot to answer for and the scrotum-seeking attack weasels will have to pay you a visit. Finally, I suggested that your argument was your attempt to rationalize other peoples' batshit insanity.

At no time were any name-calling directed at you, a specific group of people or your argument other than referring to it as not correct. If calling you wrong is name calling then these are going to be very short debates.

That is rationale. You have to provide that when you claim something is grotesque batshit insanity, because it's impossible to tell where it's directed.

[Lunatic Goofballs]

I wasn't calling your argument grotesque. I was calling it incorrect. I called the idea that the 'left' vs 'right' system works that way grotesque. That system wasn't your idea, so I feel I have every right to attack it. And if it IS originally your idea then you have a lot to answer for and the scrotum-seeking attack weasels will have to pay you a visit. Finally, I suggested that your argument was your attempt to rationalize other peoples' batshit insanity.

At no time were any name-calling directed at you, a specific group of people or your argument other than referring to it as not correct. If calling you wrong is name calling then these are going to be very short debates.

That is rationale. You have to provide that when you claim something is grotesque batshit insanity, because it's impossible to tell where it's directed.

Oh, I disagree. Even the Moderator knew where it was directed.

[Cannot think of a name]

That is rationale. You have to provide that when you claim something is grotesque batshit insanity, because it's impossible to tell where it's directed.

I don't think "impossible" means what you think it means.

[Pevisopolis]

It is if you care more about political parties than about the greater good of the nation.

His mindset, evidently.

For the record, the page number of this monstrosity of a thread happens to be at the Meaning of Life right now. That's the main reason I'm even posting again.

[Kryozerkia]

Let's try and stay on topic. The issue about name-calling seems to have been resolved. There is no need to continue to discuss it here.

[Reagan States]

That is rationale. You have to provide that when you claim something is grotesque batshit insanity, because it's impossible hard to tell where it's directed.

I don't think "impossible" means what you think it means.

Fixed. Did you know exactly what Lunatic was talking about though before s/he clarified with that last post?

If calling you wrong is name calling then these are going to be very short debates.

If every post was like this:

If that's correct, it's quite grotesque. I suspect it isn't though. I think it's an attempt to rationalize recent batshit insanity.

A debate wouldn't last long at all. You are correct.

[Lunatic Goofballs]

Let's try and stay on topic. The issue about name-calling seems to have been resolved. There is no need to continue to discuss it here.

Resolved it is.

It probably would have been fixed before it even happened if there had been more preemptive outrage.

[Grave_n_idle]

Okay, this is getting old. You say something - i call you on it, even quoting your exact words back to you - and you start asking for me to prove you said it.

This is a forum - people can SEE what you've written. I'll not be indulging any more of this nonsensical game.

When did I EVER say I wasn't partisan?

My question: "So you admit your concern is purely partisan?"

Your answer "No".

So - you deny being partisan.


(However, in the SAME post, you are explicitly partisan. And I called you on that hypocrisy.)

Be hypocritical if you must, just don't rpetend you're not, and stop playing the games.

[Reagan States]

Okay, this is getting old. You say something - i call you on it, even quoting your exact words back to you - and you start asking for me to prove you said it.

This is a forum - people can SEE what you've written. I'll not be indulging any more of this nonsensical game.

When did I EVER say I wasn't partisan?

My question: "So you admit your concern is purely partisan?"

Your answer "No".

So - you deny being partisan.


(However, in the SAME post, you are explicitly partisan. And I called you on that hypocrisy.)

Be hypocritical if you must, just don't rpetend you're not, and stop playing the games.

Wow you even quote it for me. Very nice. How many times do I have to say that just because I am concerned, doesn't always mean I'm going to voice that concern?

If your question was "So you admit your voicing of your concern is a result of pure partisanship?"

My answer would have been: "yes"

And that should be the end of that...

[Grave_n_idle]

And that should be the end of that...

It should have ended before it had started. You shouldn't have been a hypcorite if you didn't want to get called on it. You certainly shouldn't have pretended you weren't and demanded proof, if you were going to keep the dishonest pretence up.

[Tunizcha]

Today they required us to view the speech in class. Let me say this, it's completely harmless. He talks about how people who have the odds stacked against them succeed, and how if students put more effort, the government and parents will as well, etc., etc. The usual.

[Buffett and Colbert]

Today they required us to view the speech in class. Let me say this, it's completely harmless. He talks about how people who have the odds stacked against them succeed, and how if students put more effort, the government and parents will as well, etc., etc. The usual.

BUT YOU'RE AN EBIL COMMUNIST NOW, RIGHT?!

[Ashmoria]

Today they required us to view the speech in class. Let me say this, it's completely harmless. He talks about how people who have the odds stacked against them succeed, and how if students put more effort, the government and parents will as well, etc., etc. The usual.

how many of the other students seemed to be paying attention?

[Tunizcha]

Today they required us to view the speech in class. Let me say this, it's completely harmless. He talks about how people who have the odds stacked against them succeed, and how if students put more effort, the government and parents will as well, etc., etc. The usual.

how many of the other students seemed to be paying attention?

About 4. They were the really nerdy kids. But they don't even know anything about politics, so bleh.

[Tunizcha]

Today they required us to view the speech in class. Let me say this, it's completely harmless. He talks about how people who have the odds stacked against them succeed, and how if students put more effort, the government and parents will as well, etc., etc. The usual.

BUT YOU'RE AN EBIL COMMUNIST NOW, RIGHT?!

Oh yeah, totally. I feel completely brainwashed.

[Surote]

It got blocked in my school

[Buffett and Colbert]

Today they required us to view the speech in class. Let me say this, it's completely harmless. He talks about how people who have the odds stacked against them succeed, and how if students put more effort, the government and parents will as well, etc., etc. The usual.

how many of the other students seemed to be paying attention?

About 4. They were the really nerdy kids. But they don't even know anything about politics, so bleh.

Were you one of them?

Or do you care about politics?

[Buffett and Colbert]

It got blocked in my school

For good reason. We don't want your God fearing conservative minds be tainted with Socialistic and anarchic liberalism.

[Gauthier]

Today they required us to view the speech in class. Let me say this, it's completely harmless. He talks about how people who have the odds stacked against them succeed, and how if students put more effort, the government and parents will as well, etc., etc. The usual.

BUT YOU'RE AN EBIL COMMUNIST NOW, RIGHT?!

Oh yeah, totally. I feel completely brainwashed.

If you find yourself with the sudden urge to pray towards Mecca, then we know the brainwashing has been severe.

[Tunizcha]

Today they required us to view the speech in class. Let me say this, it's completely harmless. He talks about how people who have the odds stacked against them succeed, and how if students put more effort, the government and parents will as well, etc., etc. The usual.

how many of the other students seemed to be paying attention?

About 4. They were the really nerdy kids. But they don't even know anything about politics, so bleh.

Were you one of them?

Or do you care about politics?

If you want to call me a nerd just because I have all AP classes, I'm the captain of the Debate team, I'm the captain of the Cross Country team, and I'm the editor of the Yearbook, then go ahead.