Page 14 of 24 FirstFirst ... 41213141516 ... LastLast
Results 131 to 140 of 233

Thread: Secretive Republican Donors Are Planning Ahead

  1. #131
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:50 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,568

    Re: Secretive Republican Donors Are Planning Ahead

    Quote Originally Posted by Ajay View Post
    Please try to be honest and read the prevoius posts? I do not stick up for the left. I do not like the left -- or the right. I think fringe partisans ruin the debate.
    Funny; just a few posts back, when I said he was a "hero of the left," you took it as my saying he was a personal hero of yours. So you're going to have to figure out where you're coming from here.

    In any case, I never said you "stick up for the left." No idea where you're getting these strawmen, but it is, as I must point out yet again, quite ironic when you're accusing me of "dishonesty."
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  2. #132
    Student
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Last Seen
    03-20-13 @ 04:18 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    254

    Re: Secretive Republican Donors Are Planning Ahead

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    Here you go:

    1) http://www.debatepolitics.com/breaki...post1059058739



    It was sarcasm directed at your inexplicable misreading of what I said.



    That's not really a response to what I said. I said that he has been convicted of a crime that the US considers to be a felony, which makes it understandable that someone would refer to him in passing as a convicted felon.

    B) If it makes you feel better, substitute "convicted of insider trading" for "convicted felon" when you come across it.



    DD) And yet you attack the conviction, saying that it was a bull**** political prosecution. I'm waiting for your explanation of why.



    You don't say.
    1) I see what happened. I apologize.

    If the US recognizes Soros to be a convicted felon, then since his appeals he will be subject to the same restrictions and penalties that all convicted felons are. I would appreciate a link to this as a fact because it is an interesting concept.

    B) I do not feel better or worse. I like to deal with facts, and truths, when forming arguments like this one. Fact is, Soros was convicted for insider trading in France. To use a Beck anaology, Saying Soros is a convict because France says he is is like saying Jews were convicts in Nazi germanys. Jews were convicted foe being Jews. They were convicts.

    DD)
    There you go again. I explicitly said "Wrongly convicted? A wrong conviction is not a judgement I can make." That is not an attack on the coviction.

    Maybe I can help you. I did attack the charge "I will say Soros was singled out by the socialits French you are supporting." and considering prosecutorial judgements and all, it is a factual statement. I was usuing a factual statement as part of a larger statement to throw your much admired friend 'sarcasm' back at you.

    and last but not least:


    4) You are assuming now? Why? I will say Soros was singled out by the socialits French you are supporting. Wrongly convicted? A wrong conviction is not a judgement I can make. I'm a liberal, not a conservative, so I would never stray so far for political purposes or gain. Think Scooter Libby. (there's that heroic name of the right again)

    I and you can both read what the arguments in Soros' case(s) were. The court of public opinion is outside a court of law. The politics of personal destruction is all some people have.

  3. #133
    Student
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Last Seen
    03-20-13 @ 04:18 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    254

    Re: Secretive Republican Donors Are Planning Ahead

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    I am not going to get into an argument with you over Media Matters and its credibility. I can post article after article that is a half truth or a distortion. I don't put much faith in any right wing or leftwing source as I prefer actual data from non partisan sites like bea.gov, bls.gov, U.S. Census data, and the U.S. Treasury. Nothing else really matters.

    GW Bush was attacked daily by Media Matters and continues to be attacked to this day by others that want to ignore actual results. I have absolutely no use for George Soros, Media Matters, or any other leftwing source just like I have learned to trust but verify any "rightwing" source. Suggest you do the same thing.
    But the argument is over the credibility of mediamatters, as that is exactly what people were attacking.

    I said upfront I think there are stories on MM that seem too spun for me to use. But what media matters offers that sites like it do not, is a source to track back to.

    I like nonpartisan sites too, but have seen factcheck dot org attacked.

    So Bush was attacked by MM. How much of the attacks were ever exposed as lies or distortions? I'd say very few.

    Your suggestion will pass unchallenged because I believe you have not read all my posts here. I have repeatedly said I like MM but always check what they say. Thing is what they say is easily verifiable because they give links to things. When a wingnut gets something posted on there it is easily identifiable as lunatic fringe.

    You don' like Soros because he funded a group that attacked Bush?

    I dislike about him has to do with his financial dealings -- how he makes some of his money. I am at least consistent in why and what I do not like about people.

    But Soros does not run MM. he funded it.

  4. #134
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: Secretive Republican Donors Are Planning Ahead

    Quote Originally Posted by Ajay View Post
    1) I see what happened. I apologize.

    If the US recognizes Soros to be a convicted felon, then since his appeals he will be subject to the same restrictions and penalties that all convicted felons are. I would appreciate a link to this as a fact because it is an interesting concept.
    ?

    Not sure what you're talking about or why you think that's a response to what I said.

    You said that Soros' conviction in France didn't mean anything here because they have different laws, thus implying that his actions would have been legal here. In order for that to be true, you need to show how French and US securities laws differ and why his actions would warrant a conviction there but not here. If his actions would have warranted a conviction here, then it would be pretty foolish to argue that he's not a criminal simply because the French court was the one that did the deed.

    B) I do not feel better or worse. I like to deal with facts, and truths, when forming arguments like this one. Fact is, Soros was convicted for insider trading in France. To use a Beck anaology, Saying Soros is a convict because France says he is is like saying Jews were convicts in Nazi germanys. Jews were convicted foe being Jews. They were convicts.
    lol

    Yes, 1980's French securities prosecutions are just like 1930's Nazi persecution of jews. We'll get that Godwin yet!



    DD)
    There you go again. I explicitly said "Wrongly convicted? A wrong conviction is not a judgement I can make." That is not an attack on the coviction.

    Maybe I can help you. I did attack the charge "I will say Soros was singled out by the socialits French you are supporting." and considering prosecutorial judgements and all, it is a factual statement.
    I'm asking you for a link to prove that this is a factual statement. You're arguing that the conviction is meaningless because he was "singled out by socialists" and raised an issue as to the fairness of the trial. I'm still waiting for evidence to support this claim.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  5. #135
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,270

    Re: Secretive Republican Donors Are Planning Ahead

    Quote Originally Posted by Ajay View Post
    But the argument is over the credibility of mediamatters, as that is exactly what people were attacking.

    I said upfront I think there are stories on MM that seem too spun for me to use. But what media matters offers that sites like it do not, is a source to track back to.

    I like nonpartisan sites too, but have seen factcheck dot org attacked.

    So Bush was attacked by MM. How much of the attacks were ever exposed as lies or distortions? I'd say very few.

    Your suggestion will pass unchallenged because I believe you have not read all my posts here. I have repeatedly said I like MM but always check what they say. Thing is what they say is easily verifiable because they give links to things. When a wingnut gets something posted on there it is easily identifiable as lunatic fringe.

    You don' like Soros because he funded a group that attacked Bush?

    I dislike about him has to do with his financial dealings -- how he makes some of his money. I am at least consistent in why and what I do not like about people.

    But Soros does not run MM. he funded it.
    I don't have any use for Media Matters as I stated. GW Bush was much maligned by Media Matters with distortions, half truths, and downright lies as the actual facts prove, facts like the documented support for the war in Iraq from Democrats, the Iraq Liberation Act signed by Clinton, the UN Resolution 1441 authorized by the UN, the 9/11 Non Partisan Report, the British Intelligence's Lord Butler Report, and I could go on. MM plays to the ignorance of the Democrat base and others who want to believe their BS. Name for me an issue that MM posted on Bush that you believe is the truth and I will offer a contrary point of view and the source. The point is MM wants the issue and never issues a retraction when wrong.

    Think Soros isn't expecting a return on his investment?

  6. #136
    Student
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Last Seen
    03-20-13 @ 04:18 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    254

    Re: Secretive Republican Donors Are Planning Ahead

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    Stay in the now, champ. I said a hero of the left, not a hero of "yours." Unless you yourself encompass the entirety of the left, must you mischaracterize what I say?

    Where did I bring up MM other than direct response to something YOU said about them? Link to it. Should not be difficult if I "keep" doing it.

    You're having a great deal of difficulty with accuracy here.

    And the fact that Soros is a convicted felon is simply that -- a fact. It isn't an "attack." It's a fact. You may find it an inconvenient fact. You may go to pains to try to dismiss that fact. But it's still a fact.
    Why you can't (to borrow a right wing phrase of late) man up and admit you were accusing me of having Soros as a hero is between you and your what, manhood? Help me out here. What do right wingers mean when they ask people to man up?

    I am never confused with being on the left, except by people on the far right.

    It's about the linking of Soros and MediaMatters. Attack Soros and therefore MediaMatters is suspect.

    Soros was convicted in France of insider trading.

  7. #137
    Sage
    pbrauer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    11-27-15 @ 03:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,394

    Re: Secretive Republican Donors Are Planning Ahead

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    I am not going to get into an argument with you over Media Matters and its credibility. I can post article after article that is a half truth or a distortion. I don't put much faith in any right wing or leftwing source as I prefer actual data from non partisan sites like bea.gov, bls.gov, U.S. Census data, and the U.S. Treasury. Nothing else really matters.

    GW Bush was attacked daily by Media Matters and continues to be attacked to this day by others that want to ignore actual results. I have absolutely no use for George Soros, Media Matters, or any other leftwing source just like I have learned to trust but verify any "rightwing" source. Suggest you do the same thing.
    Who the hell cares what you have a use for. You don't like them - fine. That doesn't make them wrong.


  8. #138
    Student
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Last Seen
    03-20-13 @ 04:18 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    254

    Re: Secretive Republican Donors Are Planning Ahead

    The sad part about right wing attacks and the politics of personal destruction is how easily they can be exposed for how pathetically false and misrepresenting they are.

    1) Vachon said Soros will appeal the case at the Court de Cassation, the equivalent of the Supreme Court.

    2) Soros has two options for appeal.

    3) In France, a suspect is presumed innocent until the final appeal is completed.

    ---

    Since Soros is still presumed innocent in France, it is pathetic and misleading for an American to even suggest he is guilty. No one named how America would ever consider Soros a convict, let alone a convicted felon.

    http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...Ipg&refer=home

  9. #139
    Guru
    Councilman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Riverside, County, CA.
    Last Seen
    11-04-11 @ 10:16 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    4,454
    Blog Entries
    10

    Re: Secretive Republican Donors Are Planning Ahead

    Quote Originally Posted by Ajay View Post
    1) I see what happened. I apologize.

    If the US recognizes Soros to be a convicted felon, then since his appeals he will be subject to the same restrictions and penalties that all convicted felons are. I would appreciate a link to this as a fact because it is an interesting concept.

    B) I do not feel better or worse. I like to deal with facts, and truths, when forming arguments like this one. Fact is, Soros was convicted for insider trading in France. To use a Beck anaology, Saying Soros is a convict because France says he is is like saying Jews were convicts in Nazi germanys. Jews were convicted foe being Jews. They were convicts.

    DD)
    There you go again. I explicitly said "Wrongly convicted? A wrong conviction is not a judgement I can make." That is not an attack on the coviction.

    Maybe I can help you. I did attack the charge "I will say Soros was singled out by the socialits French you are supporting." and considering prosecutorial judgements and all, it is a factual statement. I was usuing a factual statement as part of a larger statement to throw your much admired friend 'sarcasm' back at you.

    and last but not least:


    4) You are assuming now? Why? I will say Soros was singled out by the socialits French you are supporting. Wrongly convicted? A wrong conviction is not a judgement I can make. I'm a liberal, not a conservative, so I would never stray so far for political purposes or gain. Think Scooter Libby. (there's that heroic name of the right again)

    I and you can both read what the arguments in Soros' case(s) were. The court of public opinion is outside a court of law. The politics of personal destruction is all some people have.
    This is not my argument but the fact is George Soros is a convicted Felon which nobody can deny, unless you're and illiterate fool.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/14/bu...4397.html?_r=1

    What's more his appeals were denied. That is the fact.

  10. #140
    Sage
    pbrauer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    11-27-15 @ 03:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,394

    Re: Secretive Republican Donors Are Planning Ahead

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    I don't have any use for Media Matters as I stated. GW Bush was much maligned by Media Matters with distortions, half truths, and downright lies as the actual facts prove, facts like the documented support for the war in Iraq from Democrats, the Iraq Liberation Act signed by Clinton, the UN Resolution 1441 authorized by the UN, the 9/11 Non Partisan Report, the British Intelligence's Lord Butler Report, and I could go on. MM plays to the ignorance of the Democrat base and others who want to believe their BS. Name for me an issue that MM posted on Bush that you believe is the truth and I will offer a contrary point of view and the source. The point is MM wants the issue and never issues a retraction when wrong.

    Think Soros isn't expecting a return on his investment?
    I have better idea, why don't you find a Media Matters story that takes President Bush to task?


Page 14 of 24 FirstFirst ... 41213141516 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •