• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Afghan Cliff Clash Earns U.S. Military Unit Record 10 Silver Stars

Reverend_Hellh0und said:
Why do you find it necessary to make most of your interactions with me in threads on various topics about the Good Reverend. You should learn some self control. :2wave:
Click to expand...

Yes, because you haven't resorted to personal attacks at all in this thread. :roll:

Like I said, get a new shtick. :2wave:
 
dclxvinoise said:
Yes, because you haven't resorted to personal attacks at all in this thread. :roll:

Like I said, get a new shtick. :2wave:
Click to expand...



So wait, Are YOU now bitching because you hurled a personal attack, then in your perception got what you gave right back in your face?

Is this YOUR argument?


:rofl
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
So wait, Are YOU now bitching because you hurled a personal attack, then in your perception got what you gave right back in your face?

Is this YOUR argument?


:rofl
Click to expand...

Um..no, I'm calling you on your hypocrisy by trying to call me out for personal attacks when you have made them as well. Try to keep up.
 
dclxvinoise said:
Um..no, I'm calling you on your hypocrisy by trying to call me out for personal attacks when you have made them as well. Try to keep up.
Click to expand...




Show me where I have ever initiated a personal attack, or be exposed for the prevaricator you seem to be. :2wave:
 
dclxvinoise said:
No problem. :)
Click to expand...




FAIL.



You always have selective outrage. I simply pointed that out. That is not an attack. You need thicker skin. :lol:


Then maybe you won't personally attack and name call people with:


dclxvinoise said:
Yeah, like you need tips from anyone on how to be a partisan hack. You do quite well on your own.
Click to expand...



See one was pointing out a debate style and something I can demonstrate you do all the time, I laughed at your "selective outrage" comment which was a direct attack based on factual posting style of yours I point out.


We were good there, both responses.,


Then you threw a tantrum and had to call me a partisan hack.


FAIL..... :lol:
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
FAIL.



You always have selective outrage. I simply pointed that out. That is not an attack. You need thicker skin. :lol:
Click to expand...

I need thicker skin? :rofl

Who started whining about personal attacks first?

Then maybe you won't personally attack and name call people with:

See one was pointing out a debate style and something I can demonstrate you do all the time, I laughed at your "selective outrage" comment which was a direct attack based on factual posting style of yours I point out.

We were good there, both responses.,

Then you threw a tantrum and had to call me a partisan hack.

FAIL..... :lol:
Click to expand...

Yeah, you made a personal attack toward me and I responded. Then I told you to change your shtick and you got whiny about me making personal attacks. And no, that's not a tantrum. Perhaps you think that you can somehow magically denote tone from text and tell me what my emotions where and whether or not I was throwing a tantrum, but I can assure you that I wasn't. Nice try, though. Don't dish it out if you can't take it.
 
ok cool man., Cackling like hens is not something I enjoy so whatever bro, you rock! :lol:
 
Blackdog said:
Quoted for truth.

The problem is we get more "fluff" than news. It has little to do with media bias and more to do with money as the person I quoted mentioned.
Click to expand...

It's funny then, to me, anyway, that this "media bias" tends to overemphasize Republican misdeeds/scandals or over-report Democratic "concerns" about Republicans while seemingly casting more positive lights on Democratic problems.

Recent example: The NYT front-page story on Cidy McCain. Anyone recall the NYT or any other contacting, you know, MySpace friends of Michelle Obama's daughters to ask them what they thought of Michelle as a mother?

Maybe we saw something similar to the NYT front-page story about the alleged affair with a lobbyist about Obama and I missed it?

How about pre-eclection coverage of Obama breaking many of his campaign promises and comparing that to the campaign rhetoric of post-partisanship or hope and change?

Nah, didn't think so.

Meanwhile, the GOP VP candidate is treated to story after story ripping her for faking Trig's birth, firing Librarians and banning books, secession, etc., etc.

I just find that kind of funny that this media bias toward sensationalism just tends to cast the worst light on Republicans...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom