Cheney?s Model Republican: More Limbaugh, Less Powell

#41
Re: Cheney?s Model Republican: More Limbaugh, Less Powell

4625, I think what Mark is asking is for me to post the RxForum thread where he confesses his Canadian citizenship into the Asylum forum?
 
#42
Re: Cheney?s Model Republican: More Limbaugh, Less Powell

I've already seen enough of them; but it's difficult to refuse the high comedy which always results from Markie's blown head gasket when sees them. . .
 
#44
Re: Cheney?s Model Republican: More Limbaugh, Less Powell

Who needs Stewart and the Daily Show for laughter when The Canadian Comedian shows up .... Markey is a one man non stop show of laughter !!!
 
#45
Re: Cheney?s Model Republican: More Limbaugh, Less Powell

I believe that pointing out the truth about Mark L. and his self proclaimed status as a Canadian Citizen is indeed attacking the message. We should no more listen to a NON American's speaking or writing about AMERICAN issues then we should listen to, say, a disgraced preacher speaking or writing about sin, heaven, and hell.
 
#46
Re: Cheney?s Model Republican: More Limbaugh, Less Powell

We should no more listen to a NON American's speaking or writing about AMERICAN issues then we should listen to, say, a disgraced preacher speaking or writing about sin, heaven, and hell.
To Mr. Road Dawg:

The Munchkin Man is in a state of shock over your statement above.

The Munchkin Man is in complete and total disagreement with your statement above.

You appear to be saying that a non-American would have nothing of value to speak or write about Ameican issues.

To the Munchkin Man, this is an incredibly narrow-minded viewpoint and one that reeks of extreme prejudice.

There is no proof whatsoever that a non-American's nationality automatically negates, and renders invalid, the validity of anything he or she would have to speak or write about American issues.

An attempt to negate the validity of a non-American's views on any American issue, on the basis of that non-American's nationality, does constitute AN ATTACK UPON THE MESSENGER INSTEAD OF THE MESSAGE!

It is a perfect example of the ad hominem fallacy that Joe Contrarian has so astutely and correctly defined.

Munchkin Man
 
#47
Re: Cheney?s Model Republican: More Limbaugh, Less Powell

We should no more listen to a NON American's speaking or writing about AMERICAN issues then we should listen to, say, a disgraced preacher speaking or writing about sin, heaven, and hell.
To Mr. Road Dawg:

The Munchkin Man has one more thought to express in response to your statement above.

You are essentially saying that the words of a non-American, in regard to any American issue, should be automatically excluded from consideration by American citizens.

You are advocating the practice of exclusion.

That's exclusionary.

Althought the Munchkin Man is aware that you have rejected both the Republican and the Democratic Party, the Munchkin Man always figured that you were more of a liberal than a conservative.

The Munchkin Man further thought that the practice of inclusion, instead of that of exclusion, was a virtue that was championed by proponents of liberal thought.

Here you are advocating the practice of exclusion.

How does your advocacy of the exclusion you support for the words of non-Americans on American issues fit in with your liberal or libertarian worldview?

Please explain this to the Munchkin Man.

:+clueless

Munchkin Man
 
#48
Re: Cheney?s Model Republican: More Limbaugh, Less Powell

I would expect the people of bumfuckistan to have little concern for my opinions regarding the status of their government, economy or laws. In fact, I would expect the people of bumfuckistan to ridicule my attempts to intercede into their discussions of said topics were I to falsely claim to be a proud, native bumfuckistanian. . .
 
#49
Re: Cheney?s Model Republican: More Limbaugh, Less Powell

To wander into the off-topic wilderness where the poster running the "bit" known as Munchkin Man has become lost: we practice exclusion quite often. To name but one example: We exclude those persons from society who have been shown to have an mental or emotional defect or abnormality to the point where they are a demonstrated danger to themselves or others. Such persons are involuntarily committed for medical treatment. I'm not saying that our mountie wannabee or the poster running the "bit" known as Munchkin Man need to be worried, just using the example. . .
 
#50
Re: Cheney?s Model Republican: More Limbaugh, Less Powell

<table id="post2464031" class="tborder" width="100%" align="center" border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td class="thead" style="border-style: solid none solid solid; border-color: rgb(253, 222, 130) -moz-use-text-color rgb(253, 222, 130) rgb(253, 222, 130); border-width: 1px 0px 1px 1px; font-weight: normal;">lmao:LMAO



12-29-2005, 05:10 PM <!-- / status icon and date --> </td> <td class="thead" style="border-style: solid solid solid none; border-color: rgb(253, 222, 130) rgb(253, 222, 130) rgb(253, 222, 130) -moz-use-text-color; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 0px; font-weight: normal;" align="right"> #49 </td> </tr> <tr valign="top"> <td class="alt2" style="border-style: none solid; border-color: -moz-use-text-color rgb(253, 222, 130); border-width: 0px 1px;" width="175"> Joe Contrarian <script type="text/javascript"> vbmenu_register("postmenu_2464031", true); </script>
Banned

Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: UN Headquarters
Posts: 11,535


</td> <td class="alt1" id="td_post_2464031" style="border-right: 1px solid rgb(253, 222, 130);"> <!-- icon and title -->

<hr style="color: rgb(253, 222, 130); background-color: rgb(253, 222, 130);" size="1"> <!-- / icon and title --> <!-- message --> KtVegas, yes I'm Canadian, but just because I'm Canadian doesn't mean I'm automatically going to carry the socialist party line, while I strategically wrap myself in the maple leaf, bashing our friends south of the border, every chance I get. It's those elected officials, we are working overtime to toss out of power!

Besides, if you want to get technical, David Miller (the mayor who's comments touched off this thread) is actually an American -- if you can believe that!
<!-- / message --> </td> </tr> <tr> <td class="alt2" style="border-style: none solid solid; border-color: -moz-use-text-color rgb(253, 222, 130) rgb(253, 222, 130); border-width: 0px 1px 1px;">
</td> <td class="alt1" style="border-style: none solid solid none; border-color: -moz-use-text-color rgb(253, 222, 130) rgb(253, 222, 130) -moz-use-text-color; border-width: 0px 1px 1px 0px;" align="right"> <!-- controls -->
</td></tr></tbody></table>
 
#51
Re: Cheney?s Model Republican: More Limbaugh, Less Powell

To Mr. Road Dawg:

The Munchkin Man has one more thought to express in response to your statement above.

You are essentially saying that the words of a non-American, in regard to any American issue, should be automatically excluded from consideration by American citizens.
In my opinion, yes. Especially when that Non-American is being fraudulent in their claims.

You are advocating the practice of exclusion.

That's exclusionary.
Certainly my right to do so, correct?

Althought the Munchkin Man is aware that you have rejected both the Republican and the Democratic Party, the Munchkin Man always figured that you were more of a liberal than a conservative.
You would be incorrect.

The Munchkin Man further thought that the practice of inclusion, instead of that of exclusion, was a virtue that was championed by proponents of liberal thought.

Here you are advocating the practice of exclusion.

How does your advocacy of the exclusion you support for the words of non-Americans on American issues fit in with your liberal or libertarian worldview?

Please explain this to the Munchkin Man.

:+clueless

Munchkin Man
My exclusion fits in because the indicated poster is being FRAUDULENT in their claims. If he were HONEST about being a Canadian, then I MIGHT give a little more weight to the opinion, as that of an outsider.

I don't speak on Canadian issues, because I'm not Canadian. I don't speak out about issues or elections in other states because I don't live in those states. If I am ASKED, then I might give an opinion with the understanding that it is an OUTSIDER'S view of the issue.

Let me ask you this, poster known as Munchkin Man... did you honestly care about world opinion concerning the invasion of Iraq?
 
#52
Re: Cheney?s Model Republican: More Limbaugh, Less Powell

I believe that pointing out the truth about Mark L. and his self proclaimed status as a Canadian Citizen is indeed attacking the message. We should no more listen to a NON American's speaking or writing about AMERICAN issues then we should listen to, say, a disgraced preacher speaking or writing about sin, heaven, and hell.
Anyone who continues to disrupt debates speculating about "non-American" status for the expressed purpose of avoiding the issues, irritating forum members and hijacking threads, will be spammed right off the forum. That's right, YOUR threads will be turned into commercial for all sorts unrelated products and services.

Period, end of issue.

Road Fraud:

You don't respect me, I won't respect you -- got it?

What's good for the goose...

Unfortunately, Road Fraud is one of those drifting traumatized minority sheeple who can't think for himself and pulled the trigger for Hussein thinking he was getting a "moderate black president."

Anything but Bushitler, right idiot?

Now look what you did!

Thanks to drones like Road Fraud, we now have a MARXIST occupying the White House. 2938u4ji23

Look at our beloved country as it drifts toward a soft tyranny.

Happy, Road Fraud?

And btw, loser, I will continue to receive 10 times as many 'views' as a copy and paste constitutionally illiterate poseur like you will on your best days. Don't you get it? Nobody reads your irrelevant lewrockwell/wannabe Max Cleland tomfoolery so stop trying to steal my thunder.

To my fellow Americans:

WE conservatives will not enage in the familiar petty ad hominem Alinsky tactics because we know that modern liberalism is intellectually bankrupt and morally perverted beyond repair.

We will fight, post and speak the unvarnished, anti-PC truth.

We will articulate our case intelligently and convincingly advocating a freer, more prosperous, more just America -- and WE will win over the hearts and minds of this lost Kool-Aid generation who voted for "Hope and Change(tm)."

One mind at a time -- just like we did with William Buckley, Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan.

Because WE conservatives have an unbending faith that America is made up of millions upon millions of individuals, each with their own personal goals, dreams and aspirations.

The Marxist in Chief wants you to believe we are a nation of growing "minorities" (aka, pockets of malcontents) that exist only to solidify his power base.

WE CONSERVATIVES REJECT HIS STALIST VISION FOR AMERICA!

We are AMERICANS -- period. From sea to shining sea.

Unlike the un-American Marxist Keynan, I am eligible to be POTUS.

Unlike the un-American Marxist Kenyan, I am not LYING to you spending millions of dollars trying to block dozens of lawsuits that will ultimately result in the greatest political scandal in modern history.

Unlike the un-American Marxist Kenyan, I am not misleading you with utopian solutions to our problems with one hand, while I pick your pocket stealing the fruits of YOUR labor via hidden taxes ("Cap and Trade") with the other.

No, my fellow Americans, *I* am not the fraud -- the Kenyan is.

And I am not the convicted drug-addicted criminal no reputable company will hire, "Manny" the Amway slime bucket is.

WE conservatives will not be silenced.

WE conservatives will not be smeared.

WE conservatives will not be bullied for simply having different views.

WE Conservatives will fight the obnoxious community-agitating Alinsky malcontents with every weapon in our arsenal.

Why?

Because ONLY
conservatism is the antidote to Hussein's soft tyranny precisely because its principles are the founding principles.

Principles that must be passed on from one generation to the next, or as Ronald Reagan once said "
we are going to spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children, what it once was like in America when men were free."

My friends, because of unaccountable biggoted malcontents like "Manny" who in a true free and just society would have long been left to rot under a bridge in his own vomit, we are forced to stand up and fight back against this emerging soft tyranny that is poisoning our society and stealing our personal liberties.

A soft tyranny that accepts no personal responsibility or accountability.

A soft tyranny where enlightened kings piss on the Constitution turning your private property into Halloween candy that is to be dished out to the malcontents who are promised heaven on Earth.

That is the truth. And nobody communicates the unvarnished, objective truth than I do.

That is why they hate me...not because I may (or may not be) "Canadian." :thumbsup

Idiots.
 
#53
Re: Cheney?s Model Republican: More Limbaugh, Less Powell

Quick note per the Pasted copy of "JoeC" post from RxForum.

The word BANNED below his name is a product of his own creation. All users can create their own tagline in similar fashion. In fact, "JoeC" is currently free to post without impediment at the RxForum

Thus we expose another fraudulent pose by longtime sports forum chum Mark L
 
#54
Re: Cheney?s Model Republican: More Limbaugh, Less Powell

No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States.

US Constitution Article II Section 1

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.articleii.html#section1

You are no more eligible to be President of the United States than Arnold Schwarzenegger.

 
#55
Re: Cheney?s Model Republican: More Limbaugh, Less Powell

MARK vents in manic fashion: .... we now have a MARXIST occupying the White House.

Manny: We??

Mark: Look at our beloved country

Manny: Our??

Mark: ... I will continue to receive 10 times as many 'views'

Manny: A quick review of Threads started by "JoeC" in past month indicate an average of about 30 views per thread.

Now that's not neccesarily an indictment on Mark's popularity as much as it is a bemusing indicator that he's only brave enough to post his Hot Political Opinions in a venue visited by at most a dozen people in between sports handicapping work.

---
MARK: To my fellow Americans:

Manny: heh

Mark: We will fight, post and speak the unvarnished, anti-PC truth.

Manny: Though the fight will only be carried into a sports handicapping web forum. Because we all know that's where Real Political Change starts.

Mark: - and WE will win over the hearts and minds of this lost Kool-Aid generation who voted for "Hope and Change(tm)."

Manny: But not before we insult them and call them a long list of degrading names.

===
Mark: One mind at a time -- just like we did with William Buckley, Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan.

Manny: Actually those three gentleman worked with audiences in the hundreds, and thousands. But maybe your four years of ranting to sports capping audiences of 10 to 20 people is your internship before you really step out.

==
Mark: Unlike the un-American Marxist Keynan, I am eligible to be POTUS.

Manny: heh #2

Mark: Unlike the un-American Marxist Kenyan, I am not LYING to you

Manny: As long as we ignore your months of proclaiming to be a Canadian while at the RxForum

===
Mark: That is why they hate me...

Manny: No one hates you Markie. We just find you funny and we wonder why you're so ashamed of your family heritage. Those two grandfathers are rolling over in their Canadian graves as you repeatedly disrespect their honor.

No one hates the man who delivers Golden Comedy at the level which you do.

Keep it comin'....Now I gots to go back to enjoying the third period of my profitable Pittsburgh Penguin & Over 5.5 wager.
 
#56
Re: Cheney?s Model Republican: More Limbaugh, Less Powell

To wander into the off-topic wilderness where the poster running the "bit" known as Munchkin Man has become lost:
Lost?

You are the one who has lost this argument with all of the logical fallacies the Munchkin Man has exposed from your end.

we practice exclusion quite often.
The Munchkin Man thanks you for your honesty.

We exclude those persons from society who have been shown to have an mental or emotional defect or abnormality to the point where they are a demonstrated danger to themselves or others. Such persons are involuntarily committed for medical treatment.
For the preservation and safety of human society, the Munchkin Man will agree that the practice of exclusion is justified in the scenario described above.

However.......................

How does this apply to Joe Contrarian and your advocacy of a policy of exclusion against respecting his right to express his opinions and views on American policies?

Are you saying that he has a "mental or emotional defect or abnormality" which justifies this policy of exclusion?

If so, what is your evidence for the above?

What are your professional qualifications for making a diagnosis of the above?

Where is your evidence that he is a "demonstrated danger to himself or others."

Your use of the word "demonstrated" suggests that you have firsthand evidence of "demonstrations" of his danger to himself and others, which have actually been observed and verified as fact.

If what the Munchkin Man is saying in the paragraph above is incorrect, then your entire point has been rendered null and void.

Now then.

Just for the sake of argument, suppose that Joe Contrarian is in possession of the characteristics you have described above, in spite of your lack of evidence.

You have still failed to prove your case that a policy of exclusion against his right to be heard, with his self-expression of his views and opinions on American policies, is justified.

Consider the following hypothetical example:

Suppose that a person who has been institutionalized for a mental illness for several years has spent much of his time conducting private scientific research for a cure for cancer.

Finally, he claims that he has discovered a cure for his cancer.

Should his claim be automatically discounted and excluded, on the sole basis of his diagnosis of mental illness?

The Munchkin Man's answer is NO.

The Munchkin Man believes that he has the right to be heard, and that he should be heard, and that the evidence he has proposed for his cure for cancer should be examined and investigated.

The validity of whatever scientific evidence he has produced for his proposed cure for cancer should be examined on its very own merits and treated as completely independent from his state of mental illness or any other personal characteristics you find objectionable.

In summary:

By continuing to advocate a policy of exclusion from the opinions and views of Joe Contrarian, on the basis of a possible non-American nationality, the supposition that he may be a phony, unproven suggestions that he may have a mental illness, or any other personal qualities you find objectionable, you are continuing to practice the use of argumentum ad hominem.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

You're welcome.

Munchkin Man
 
#58
Re: Cheney?s Model Republican: More Limbaugh, Less Powell

You are essentially saying that the words of a non-American, in regard to any American issue, should be automatically excluded from consideration by American citizens.
In my opinion, yes. Especially when that Non-American is being fraudulent in their claims.
The Munchkin Man respectfully disagrees with your position on this issue.

Your objection to the validity of any views and opinions that Joe Contrarian may wish to express, on the basis of your supposition, whether it is true or false, that he may be presenting a "fraudulent" identity, is based upon ad hominem judgements.

You objection focuses upon the messenger instead of the actual content of the message.

In contrast, the Munchkin Man prefers to focus upon the actual content of the message, independently from the personal characteristics of the messenger.

You are advocating the practice of exclusion.

That's exclusionary.
Certainly my right to do so, correct?
Yes, indeed it is.

As a staunch supporter of free speech and freedom of thought, the Munchkin Man is willing to fight to his death, your right to make prejudicial judgements and fallacious ad hominem arguments anytime you want to.

Although the Munchkin Man is aware that you have rejected both the Republican and the Democratic Party, the Munchkin Man always figured that you were more of a liberal than a conservative.
You would be incorrect.
Thank you for correcting the Munchkin Man.

If you find some spare moments, the Munchkin Man would be interested in reading a more accurate and detailed description of your political orientation.

My exclusion fits in because the indicated poster is being FRAUDULENT in their claims. If he were HONEST about being a Canadian, then I MIGHT give a little more weight to the opinion, as that of an outsider.
Your policy of exclusion is based upon argumentum ad hominem.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

The issue of whether Joe Contrarian is being honest about being a Canadian, or not a Canadian if the case may be, is completely independent from, and irrelevent to, the content of his messages of opinion which pertain to American governmental policies.

Let me ask you this, poster known as Munchkin Man... did you honestly care about world opinion concerning the invasion of Iraq?
The answer to your question is NO.

However...............

The fact that the Munchkin Man did not care about world opinion over the American invasion of Iraq had NOTHING TO DO with the non-American nationalities of those who were objecting to this invasion.

Instead, the Munchkin Man's non-caring attitude about world opinion over the American invasion of Iraq was based upon the Munchkin Man's stauch philosophical agreement with this invasion.

Best Wishes,

Munchkin Man
 
#59
Re: Cheney?s Model Republican: More Limbaugh, Less Powell

The Munchkin Man respectfully disagrees with your position on this issue.
Certainly your right to do so, character known as Munchkin Man.

Your objection to the validity of any views and opinions that Joe Contrarian may wish to express, on the basis of your supposition, whether it is true or false, that he may be presenting a "fraudulent" identity, is based upon ad hominem judgements.

You objection focuses upon the messenger instead of the actual content of the message.

In contrast, the Munchkin Man prefers to focus upon the actual content of the message, independently from the personal characteristics of the messenger.
I wish to disagree. In my opinion, the "messenger" in this case should be the focus. It has been PROVEN, with his own words, that Mark L., is indeed a CANADIAN citizen, therefore is not AFFECTED in any way by what happens here in America. Therefore, his opinion on the matters are irrelevant at best.

Yes, indeed it is.

As a staunch supporter of free speech and freedom of thought, the Munchkin Man is willing to fight to his death, your right to make prejudicial judgements and fallacious ad hominem arguments anytime you want to.
And I have spent the last 19 years in the United States Air Force doing what you CLAIM that you would do.


Thank you for correcting the Munchkin Man.

If you find some spare moments, the Munchkin Man would be interested in reading a more accurate and detailed description of your political orientation.
My personal belief is that every human being has a RIGHT to the maximum amount of freedom possible and that government should exist to protect a citizen's right to life, liberty, and property.

Your policy of exclusion is based upon argumentum ad hominem.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

The issue of whether Joe Contrarian is being honest about being a Canadian, or not a Canadian if the case may be, is completely independent from, and irrelevent to, the content of his messages of opinion which pertain to American governmental policies.
The character known as Munchkin Man is incorrect here. It is the MOST relevant issue concerning the postings of Mark L. His status as a Canadian citizen, and false claims of being an American, invalidate his opinion.

The answer to your question is NO.

However...............

The fact that the Munchkin Man did not care about world opinion over the American invasion of Iraq had NOTHING TO DO with the non-American nationalities of those who were objecting to this invasion.

Instead, the Munchkin Man's non-caring attitude about world opinion over the American invasion of Iraq was based upon the Munchkin Man's stauch philosophical agreement with this invasion.

Best Wishes,

Munchkin Man
Hence we get down to the "nitty-gritty" of your SUPPORT of Mark L. Since you AGREE with his opinions, his status as a Canadian citizen and fraudulent claims as an American do not matter to you. I believe that if Mark L shared the opinions of Doc Mercer, the character known as Munchkin Man would join in the chorus and object to Mark L for being Canadian and POSING as an American.
 
#60
Re: Cheney?s Model Republican: More Limbaugh, Less Powell

I'm not saying that our mountie wannabee or the poster running the "bit" known as Munchkin Man need to be worried, just using the example. . .
Haha. . .No need be so concerned as to jump so high and so fast, poster running the "bit" known as Munchkin Man, I specifically excluded our our ranting Ontarian and yourself from consideration for the exclusion example I used. . .I mean, why get so excited about the topic of involuntary commitment for mental health issues???:yikess:+waving-5
 
#61
Re: Cheney?s Model Republican: More Limbaugh, Less Powell

I wish to disagree. In my opinion, the "messenger" in this case should be the focus. It has been PROVEN, with his own words, that Mark L., is indeed a CANADIAN citizen, therefore is not AFFECTED in any way by what happens here in America. Therefore, his opinion on the matters are irrelevant at best.
Greetings Mr. Road Dawg:

You and the Munchkin Man possess completely polar opposite opinions on this issue.

In the opinion of the Munchkin Man, IT DOES NOT MATTER if Joe Contrarian either is, or is not, a Canadian citizen.

What matters is the content of his messages, regardless of which country bears his citizenship.

The fact that he may not be directly or personally AFFECTED by what happens in America has NOTHING to do with the validity of the content of his views and opinions on American governmental policy.

If you think that it does, then you are clinging to an ad hominem logical fallacy.

Your policy of exclusion is based upon argumentum ad hominem.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

The issue of whether Joe Contrarian is being honest about being a Canadian, or not a Canadian if the case may be, is completely independent from, and irrelevent to, the content of his messages of opinion which pertain to American governmental policies.
The character known as Munchkin Man is incorrect here. It is the MOST relevant issue concerning the postings of Mark L. His status as a Canadian citizen, and false claims of being an American, invalidate his opinion.
The character known as Road Dawg is incorrect here.

His conclusion, as stated above, was derived from an ad hominem logical fallacy.

Hence we get down to the "nitty-gritty" of your SUPPORT of Mark L. Since you AGREE with his opinions, his status as a Canadian citizen and fraudulent claims as an American do not matter to you. I believe that if Mark L shared the opinions of Doc Mercer, the character known as Munchkin Man would join in the chorus and object to Mark L for being Canadian and POSING as an American.
Once again, the character known as Road Dawg is incorrect.

If Joe Contrarian was a member of the Doc Mercer Party, it still would not matter to the Munchkin Man which country claimed his citizenship.

To the Munchkin Man, the issue of his citizenship would remain as completely and totally irrelevant.

That's because it IS completely and totally irrelevant.

Instead, the Munchkin Man would focus upon the content of his messages, regardless of his citizenship and nationality.

In closing, the Munchkin Man would like to thank you for clarifying your political philosophy and for the service you have given to your country for the past 19 years in the United States Air Force.

Best Wishes,

Munchkin Man
 
#62
Re: Cheney?s Model Republican: More Limbaugh, Less Powell

In my opinion, the "messenger" in this case should be the focus.
Road Fraud:

You will pay a very heavy price for your very foolish position breaching EOG policy if you continue to stray from common decent forum decorum with these ad hominem attacks.

If there's one thing I can't stand is when people who CAN'T WIN DEBATE decide to personalize the issues. It is why I have the deepest contempt for the crack dealer known as "Manny."

Whether it's Sarah Palin, Joe the Plumber, Carry Prejean....it's beyond disgusting and COMPLETELY UNACCEPTABLE.

I don't give a fuck what your opinion is -- it's wrong (like all your other opinions).

You want to debate, fine. I will be courteous and respectful.

If not, I will make it my mission to render your lewrockwell nutjob opinions as irrelevant as humanly possible, using whatever tactics at my disposal.

I guess the goal of the left in here is all out forum war.

Where you libs get your twisted value system from I have no idea, but so be it....

YOU ARE THE REASON THE COUNTRY IS GOING INTO THE SHITTER!
 
#63
Re: Cheney?s Model Republican: More Limbaugh, Less Powell

[B said:
MARK L Contrarian[/B];2153195] Road Fraud:

You will pay a very heavy price for your very foolish position breaching EOG policy if you continue to stray from common decent forum decorum with these ad hominem attacks.
NO! NO PLEASE!

Not.....The Heavy Price!

:cocktail
 
Top