Page 24 of 25 FirstFirst ... 1422232425 LastLast
Results 231 to 240 of 243

Thread: Wingnuts Unite: Ron Paul Joins Michelle Bachmann in Weirdest Town Hall Ever

  1. #231
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Last Seen
    01-03-16 @ 02:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,761

    Re: Wingnuts Unite: Ron Paul Joins Michelle Bachmann in Weirdest Town Hall Ever

    Quote Originally Posted by the makeout hobo View Post
    Have I personally thrown either one out in this thread?
    I wouldn't have made such a big deal of it otherwise...

    I never watch TV, and seek out a wide range of commentary online. I do research. But many libertarians can't seem to accept that fact that people can do in depth research and come to other conclusions than they do. That's one of my biggest issues with Libertarians.
    The flaw is in pretty well anything mainstream... if you're getting all your information from the big 6 media companies (98% of all radio, print and internet)

    Now, we can discuss the various merits to socialization of various aspects of society... we can also debate on the merits of federalizing various aspects of society... but the constitution states pretty clearly that if the job is not enumerated in the constitution then it's up to the states or the people to deal with in the way they choose. So, if you're putting government to have more power and control over society you begin to accord them more power then the constitution grants, and if it's not directly unconcstitutional then it's against the intent of the constitution.

    Now, I don't care what kind of leaning a person has politically so long as they are acting within the bounds of the constitution then I'm ok with it...


    Aren't you making a blanket statement right here?
    It's an accurate generalization based on the studies... so, it's good to hear that you're an exception... so, having a researched opinion should imply that you are better able to define the flaws that make belief in the constitution to be somehow 'fringe'...

    That was Hatuey, not me. Try to keep us straight. And what criteria do you think should be used to determine whether a belief is kooky?
    Now, if the views show a level of delusional thought, are completely illogical, ir something to that effect, I'll let the person know and try to demonstrate how it is that way...usually through analogy.

    All I've been asking is for libertarians to stop being so insulting and dismissive. What actions you take are independent of actions anyone else takes. Whatever other people do, doesn't stop you from being a better prson.
    It's because the libertarian view IS pretty strictly based off of what is constitutional... but we are already so far gone from the constitution that it seems almost just plainly accepted. It's an idea that is gaining momentum


    Yes, everything they argue about during election and in congress, is just a show
    Well, to an extent... yes. In terms of what congress votes on, more and more are bills written by lobby groups handed off to their friend, the men in the senate that are bought off know whose interests they are voting for, even if they would never admit to it (plausible deniability without proof that they are bought off). Which if they change their minds, then suddenly it turns out that they take bribes and are fired and / or charged.

    Mr Obama received 4-5X the funding that Mccain did from the very banks that most profited from the TARP funds... we're talking 100-150 k to mccain, and 400-7590k from each of four institutions that profited from the TARP funds... Now, this is a clear example of 'I scratch your back you scratch mine' since, those banks are so full of fraud that they would be defunct (if they aren't already regardless)...

    My entire point in this thread was essentially "don't be jerks". Do you consider what Ikari said to do disparaging or not?
    It depends... sometimes you have to take a step back and realize whether you've gone too far... I mean, alot of the time parents say or do things that will hurt a child's feelings, it's not necessarily disparaging, though the target may view it as such.

    I don't mean to compare anyone to a child, more to say that when you're trying to explain something simplistic and it gets rebutted in a nonsensical way, it's appropriate to call the person out on that, but it's also possible to take it too far.

  2. #232
    Rockin' In The Free World
    the makeout hobo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Last Seen
    04-24-14 @ 06:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    7,102

    Re: Wingnuts Unite: Ron Paul Joins Michelle Bachmann in Weirdest Town Hall Ever

    Quote Originally Posted by BmanMcfly View Post
    I wouldn't have made such a big deal of it otherwise...
    Oh yeah? Please show me where in this thread I have referred to libertarians or Ron Paul supporters as nuts? Please show me where I said that.

    I referred to Ron Paul as a nut exactly once, and it was in the context of someone saying "people don't listen to Ron Paul before saying he's nuts". And I responded with "I listened to what he said then decided he was nuts". Nowhere did I disparage the entire group.

    The flaw is in pretty well anything mainstream... if you're getting all your information from the big 6 media companies (98% of all radio, print and internet)
    Yet you assume I blindly listen to those without looking outside of that, which I find pretty insulting. You also somehow assume anything from a major news organization is wrong, which isn't always the case. And what you said here isn't exactly the insulting drivel you were handing out earlier. Would you kindly retract your earlier statement?

    pquote[
    Now, we can discuss the various merits to socialization of various aspects of society... we can also debate on the merits of federalizing various aspects of society... but the constitution states pretty clearly that if the job is not enumerated in the constitution then it's up to the states or the people to deal with in the way they choose. So, if you're putting government to have more power and control over society you begin to accord them more power then the constitution grants, and if it's not directly unconcstitutional then it's against the intent of the constitution.[/quote[
    So would you assist me in changing the constitution then?

    It always seems to me when libertarians bring up the constitution, it's not because they're super concerned about making sure we follow it to the letter of the law, so much as they have their agenda, and they'll use the constitution as an excuse to get what they want. Something tells me if we amended the constitution, you'd do everything in your power to change it back.

    Now, I don't care what kind of leaning a person has politically so long as they are acting within the bounds of the constitution then I'm ok with it...
    And if they don't act exactly as you think they should within those bounds, they hate america and they've been spoonfed information without making their own decisions, and are shills to the main parties

    It's an accurate generalization based on the studies... so, it's good to hear that you're an exception... so, having a researched opinion should imply that you are better able to define the flaws that make belief in the constitution to be somehow 'fringe'...
    A fringe belief, is by definition, one that not many people hold. Hence libertarianism. And what studies are these you mention?


    [quote[Now, if the views show a level of delusional thought, are completely illogical, ir something to that effect, I'll let the person know and try to demonstrate how it is that way...usually through analogy.[/quote]
    Usually through dismissal and insult, you mean. I've met very few polite libertarians on this board. And as to what shows delusional thought, one could argue that libertarian ideals would not work well in the 21st century and it'd be delusional to think otherwise.


    It's because the libertarian view IS pretty strictly based off of what is constitutional... but we are already so far gone from the constitution that it seems almost just plainly accepted. It's an idea that is gaining momentum
    Which has what to do with what I said?

    Well, to an extent... yes. In terms of what congress votes on, more and more are bills written by lobby groups handed off to their friend, the men in the senate that are bought off know whose interests they are voting for, even if they would never admit to it (plausible deniability without proof that they are bought off). Which if they change their minds, then suddenly it turns out that they take bribes and are fired and / or charged.
    Can you think of a good way to discuss or measure this objectively? i don't think it works quite like you think it does.

    Mr Obama received 4-5X the funding that Mccain did from the very banks that most profited from the TARP funds... we're talking 100-150 k to mccain, and 400-7590k from each of four institutions that profited from the TARP funds... Now, this is a clear example of 'I scratch your back you scratch mine' since, those banks are so full of fraud that they would be defunct (if they aren't already regardless)...
    What would the libertarian answer be to deal with that fraud?

    It depends... sometimes you have to take a step back and realize whether you've gone too far... I mean, alot of the time parents say or do things that will hurt a child's feelings, it's not necessarily disparaging, though the target may view it as such.


    I don't mean to compare anyone to a child, more to say that when you're trying to explain something simplistic and it gets rebutted in a nonsensical way, it's appropriate to call the person out on that, but it's also possible to take it too far.[/QUOTE]

    Do you think libertarians take it too far on this board? I also find libertarians acting in the same way you accuse other people of acting.
    The Makeout Hobo is real, and does indeed travel around the country in his van and make out with ladies... If you meet the Makeout Hobo, it is customary to greet him with a shot of whiskey and a high five (if you are a dude) or passionate makeouts (if you are a lady).

  3. #233
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Last Seen
    01-03-16 @ 02:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,761

    Re: Wingnuts Unite: Ron Paul Joins Michelle Bachmann in Weirdest Town Hall Ever

    Quote Originally Posted by the makeout hobo View Post
    Oh yeah? Please show me where in this thread I have referred to libertarians or Ron Paul supporters as nuts? Please show me where I said that.
    If I'm mistaken I'm sorry.. if it wasn't yourself it was someone...

    I referred to Ron Paul as a nut exactly once, and it was in the context of someone saying "people don't listen to Ron Paul before saying he's nuts". And I responded with "I listened to what he said then decided he was nuts". Nowhere did I disparage the entire group.
    Then it wasn't targeted at yourself specifically...

    Yet you assume I blindly listen to those without looking outside of that, which I find pretty insulting.
    Here's the caveat; if it's not applying to yourself is more a matter of exception...

    You also somehow assume anything from a major news organization is wrong, which isn't always the case.
    No, not necessarily... the facts reported are generally accurate, but there is always a spin to favor any relative agenda's that might be supporters of the newscasts.

    And what you said here isn't exactly the insulting drivel you were handing out earlier. Would you kindly retract your earlier statement?
    Which part?? Since I have no qualms about the need to protect the constitution... and that anyone that supports those that are weakening the constitution are unknowingly allied with little better then domestic enemies of this country.

    So would you assist me in changing the constitution then?
    That would depend in which ways... the founding fathers new how easily corruptible large centralized governments become... that's WHY the intent was to have a small government and have the states take care of most of their affairs in the ways that see fit...

    How would you change the constitution??

    It always seems to me when libertarians bring up the constitution, it's not because they're super concerned about making sure we follow it to the letter of the law, so much as they have their agenda, and they'll use the constitution as an excuse to get what they want. Something tells me if we amended the constitution, you'd do everything in your power to change it back.
    That would depend... I mean, every section of the constitution has a very legitimate reasoning behind it and is based off your natural / god given rights that cannot be infringed (unless you allow them to be infringed)...

    So, if you have constitutional ammendments that do not interfere with the right to free speech, keep and bear arms, a right to a fair trial, to be innocent untill proven guilty, to have access to a lawyer, freedom of movement and association, etc... then I might very well support them.

    But then, ONLY if this was done through an open process and acting in the best interests of the people as a whole... and frankly, I wouldn't trust any current politician to act in the publics interest except for as much as it suits their business interests.

    And if they don't act exactly as you think they should within those bounds, they hate america and they've been spoonfed information without making their own decisions, and are shills to the main parties
    I could support Obama if he supported the bill of rights and constitution... something in which he's shown very little interest.

    The fact of the matter is that the vast majority of people get the vast majority of their infomation from 'officialdom'... most of those opinions are bought and paid for, and the television is a proven tool of public mind manipulation... it's good that YOU are exception, but when you come to the same conclusion using the same tactic as the newscasters, it's not pointing to a genuinely independantly formed opinion... which may have been targeting someone else more then yourself in that it was someone else that brought that point out,

    Yes, the 10-15% of party supporters are little more then shills or talking heads for the party line... these are the ones that will go through incredible mental gymnastics to protect their view of the party.

    A fringe belief, is by definition, one that not many people hold. Hence libertarianism. And what studies are these you mention?
    Television viewing at all-time high - Los Angeles Times
    Funny, I was off by an hour... it's 5 hour a day average.

    Most people, if you talk to them one on one, support the constitution on at least most views... but there is a level of sacrifice made when they vote for a certain party... So, really... it might be a 'fringe' belief but it's growing... and faster then I've ever thought possible.

    Usually through dismissal and insult, you mean. I've met very few polite libertarians on this board. And as to what shows delusional thought, one could argue that libertarian ideals would not work well in the 21st century and it'd be delusional to think otherwise.
    That's much too broad a statement... just because we have super-computers that could be linked together to form all the functions required of a large central government, does not mean that it's a "GOOD' thing. (Not saying the technology exists)

    I mean delusional thinking like arguing that the way to get out of debt is to borrow more money, that people not taking a vaccine are doing a disservice to those that have taken the vaccine, and so on...

    I only get insulting when people are being righteously indignant on positions that show a level of ignorance... I try to avoid it, but people are emotional.

    Which has what to do with what I said?
    Over the past few decades our society has been veering further and further away from constitutional beliefs, and more and more people are rediscovering the importance of the constitution mostly from having a direct encounter with the police state that's forming in this country. Some people are sticking to mainstream views, but there is a growing group of people that are seeing the scam of left-right politics and finding libertarian or other third party views as better representations of what they want.

    Can you think of a good way to discuss or measure this objectively? i don't think it works quite like you think it does.
    If anything it's an oversimplification...
    It would be an indepth study to say the least to find out the largest campaign funders within those in the senate... the house is less important in this sense because they are more locally relevant then federally... correct me if I'm wrong, but it's a 2/3 majority to pass a vote, so, if you can get bribes through to 2/3 of the senate then you can get your wishes voted in or vetoed on any issue... Then the question would become are 2/3 of senators corrupt or not??

    I don't think the US has had a president that was NOT bought and paid for in advance by special interests since JFK.

    What would the libertarian answer be to deal with that fraud?
    A criminal investigation possibly... that's a tough call though, one problem that's especially tough to get around are the 'under-the table' agreements that can go on...

    An example; laws were put into place to prevent competing CEO's from sitting in the same boardroom, as this can create price fixing, among other problems... however, there's no law to prevent Coke CEO's to meet with Pepsi CEO's in the boardroom of Brystol-Myers Squibb.

    I'm sure those campaign contributions were made legally if it was announced on tv, so it likely wasn't a fraud in itself, but I'm sure the 'strings attached' would cause issue.


    Do you think libertarians take it too far on this board? I also find libertarians acting in the same way you accuse other people of acting.
    Regardless of political leaning, everyone occasionally takes it too far... not much can be done about that. I do try to maintain a level of civility... but it's the religious zeal with which people will defend their opinions that creates problems...

    One thing I would like to see would be presidential elections with 40-50 candidates so that a wide spectrum of viewpoints are covered... then people could concern themselves more with the issues then the parties issues, which have been tainted by corruption over the past decades,

  4. #234
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Wingnuts Unite: Ron Paul Joins Michelle Bachmann in Weirdest Town Hall Ever

    Quote Originally Posted by the makeout hobo View Post
    Please tell me where in this thread I've made a blanket attack on libertarians other than "they can be rude and insulting", or something to that tune. And I don't think Bman meant everything you tried to attribute to him. Not to mention, you didn't seem to see how any of his comment could be taken as an insult. that's my main problem, is that you don't seem to see any rudeness or insult here. I'm asking you to take care of your side, and I'm trying to keep on that, figuring thats what the discussion is mainly on. We can discuss liberals in another thread or later in this one, but your blinders here are amazing.
    No, it's still pointing to your hypocrisy. First off the statement was "You seem set in your ways and your blanket attacks on libertarians, or at the very least the support of blanket attacks on libertarians.". You've not said anything against people calling us "wingnuts". Insulting our intelligence and competence. Not at all, nothing. But I'm supposed come out against Bman and denounce what he said because there were some jabs in there? WTF is that about. How about hold yourself to the same damned standards you hold me to. How about a little of that. Talk about blinders, I think you should watch throwing that stone out because your glass house is in the way. It's not that there isn't rudeness or whatever, it's that you've taken the statements and twisted them to be nothing but insult. I pointed out what it was really saying. And if you don't like the jabs at your side, maybe your side SHOULDN'T HAVE FIRST insulted us. What about that?

    So you can take your hypocrisy and storm out of this thread. If you want to hold some amount of standard on me about having to critique the writings of people on my side, you better damned well be willing to accept the same. Otherwise, I don't care what you and your hypocrisy have to say on the matter.

    It's the same damned thing all the time. Always ok to insult the libertarian, but bitch like hell if they start swinging back. Pathetic.

    Quote Originally Posted by the makeout hobo View Post
    No, it's just you trying to be a jerk and bring personal attacks into things.
    Those in glass houses shouldn't cast stones.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  5. #235
    Rockin' In The Free World
    the makeout hobo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Last Seen
    04-24-14 @ 06:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    7,102

    Re: Wingnuts Unite: Ron Paul Joins Michelle Bachmann in Weirdest Town Hall Ever

    Quote Originally Posted by BmanMcfly View Post
    If I'm mistaken I'm sorry.. if it wasn't yourself it was someone...
    That's no excuse! You need to check your remarks before you start hurling out attacks! Accusing me of things I never said is pretty low, especially considering how up in arms you got! If you can't take the time to check before you start attacking people, you might as well just stop attacking people!

    Then it wasn't targeted at yourself specifically...
    Bull. It was specifically targeted at me, several times.

    Here's the caveat; if it's not applying to yourself is more a matter of exception...
    Says you. You just find it easier to think people are sheeple who are spoon-fed by the media than maybe just trying to accept that fact that rational, thinking people disagree with you. It's a problem endemic to libertarians, the inability to accept that thinking, rational people disagree with them.

    No, not necessarily... the facts reported are generally accurate, but there is always a spin to favor any relative agenda's that might be supporters of the newscasts.
    But it's still generally the best place to get the facts, as major media outfits are the ones that are actually going to send out reporters.


    Which part?? Since I have no qualms about the need to protect the constitution... and that anyone that supports those that are weakening the constitution are unknowingly allied with little better then domestic enemies of this country.
    I love how I ask you to retract an insult (that I was being spoon-fed by the media), and you put another insult into your post. And libertarians wonder why people are so mean to them.


    That would depend in which ways... the founding fathers new how easily corruptible large centralized governments become... that's WHY the intent was to have a small government and have the states take care of most of their affairs in the ways that see fit...

    How would you change the constitution??
    Let's say I decided to pass some sort of health-care amendment, giving the federal government permission to institute health-care reforms. I suspect not, and that goes on to showcase my point. Many times when libertarians bring up the constitution, it seems that they're just doing it because it helps their aims, not so much because they're so amazingly worried about staying to the letter.


    That would depend... I mean, every section of the constitution has a very legitimate reasoning behind it and is based off your natural / god given rights that cannot be infringed (unless you allow them to be infringed)...

    So, if you have constitutional ammendments that do not interfere with the right to free speech, keep and bear arms, a right to a fair trial, to be innocent untill proven guilty, to have access to a lawyer, freedom of movement and association, etc... then I might very well support them.
    I find it ironic that you bring those up, which are all amendments

    But then, ONLY if this was done through an open process and acting in the best interests of the people as a whole... and frankly, I wouldn't trust any current politician to act in the publics interest except for as much as it suits their business interests.
    and who is to determine the best interest of the people?

    I could support Obama if he supported the bill of rights and constitution... something in which he's shown very little interest.
    The fact of the matter is that the vast majority of people get the vast majority of their infomation from 'officialdom'... most of those opinions are bought and paid for, and the television is a proven tool of public mind manipulation... it's good that YOU are exception, but when you come to the same conclusion using the same tactic as the newscasters, it's not pointing to a genuinely independantly formed opinion... which may have been targeting someone else more then yourself in that it was someone else that brought that point out,
    Wait, are you still trying to suggest I've been brainwashed by the media here?

    Yes, the 10-15% of party supporters are little more then shills or talking heads for the party line... these are the ones that will go through incredible mental gymnastics to protect their view of the party.
    I think you have it backwards. it isn't that people have beliefs because the party has those beliefs, its that the party has beliefs because its members have those beliefs.

    Television viewing at all-time high - Los Angeles Times
    Funny, I was off by an hour... it's 5 hour a day average.

    Most people, if you talk to them one on one, support the constitution on at least most views... but there is a level of sacrifice made when they vote for a certain party... So, really... it might be a 'fringe' belief but it's growing... and faster then I've ever thought possible.
    How much did your guy get in the last election? Can you at least agree that calling it a fringe belief if very few people buy the whole of it?

    And yes, people have some issues they agree with you on, but then you also have to consider the huge bulk of things like isolationism and the gold standard, that you're very much alone on.

    That's much too broad a statement... just because we have super-computers that could be linked together to form all the functions required of a large central government, does not mean that it's a "GOOD' thing. (Not saying the technology exists)

    I mean delusional thinking like arguing that the way to get out of debt is to borrow more money, that people not taking a vaccine are doing a disservice to those that have taken the vaccine, and so on...

    I only get insulting when people are being righteously indignant on positions that show a level of ignorance... I try to avoid it, but people are emotional.
    I call complete bull here. And here's an amazing thought, why don't you not get insulting at all!


    Over the past few decades our society has been veering further and further away from constitutional beliefs, and more and more people are rediscovering the importance of the constitution mostly from having a direct encounter with the police state that's forming in this country. Some people are sticking to mainstream views, but there is a growing group of people that are seeing the scam of left-right politics and finding libertarian or other third party views as better representations of what they want.
    Whats your evidence for this?


    Regardless of political leaning, everyone occasionally takes it too far... not much can be done about that. I do try to maintain a level of civility... but it's the religious zeal with which people will defend their opinions that creates problems...
    And you don't defend yours with the same religious zeal?

    One thing I would like to see would be presidential elections with 40-50 candidates so that a wide spectrum of viewpoints are covered... then people could concern themselves more with the issues then the parties issues, which have been tainted by corruption over the past decades,
    That would be completely unworkable and unmanageable.
    The Makeout Hobo is real, and does indeed travel around the country in his van and make out with ladies... If you meet the Makeout Hobo, it is customary to greet him with a shot of whiskey and a high five (if you are a dude) or passionate makeouts (if you are a lady).

  6. #236
    Rockin' In The Free World
    the makeout hobo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Last Seen
    04-24-14 @ 06:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    7,102

    Re: Wingnuts Unite: Ron Paul Joins Michelle Bachmann in Weirdest Town Hall Ever

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    No, it's still pointing to your hypocrisy. First off the statement was "You seem set in your ways and your blanket attacks on libertarians, or at the very least the support of blanket attacks on libertarians.".
    Technically it wasn't support, it was having nothing to to with them whatsoever. And can you say you don't levy blanket attacks on those you disagree with? Do you speak out against libertarians who insult people? If not, you have no room to attack me.

    You've not said anything against people calling us "wingnuts". Insulting our intelligence and competence. Not at all, nothing. But I'm supposed come out against Bman and denounce what he said because there were some jabs in there? WTF is that about.
    What happened is that I used a post of Bman's as an example of why people didn't like libertarians. You came up and tried to defend it, so I tried to show that what he was saying really was insulting. You interjected yourself into it, so you have no room to cry.

    How about hold yourself to the same damned standards you hold me to. How about a little of that. Talk about blinders, I think you should watch throwing that stone out because your glass house is in the way. It's not that there isn't rudeness or whatever, it's that you've taken the statements and twisted them to be nothing but insult. I pointed out what it was really saying. And if you don't like the jabs at your side, maybe your side SHOULDN'T HAVE FIRST insulted us. What about that?
    I'm not responsible for what my side does. Remember, you brought yourself into this. How's this: I'll try to keep liberal posters in line if you try to keep libertarian posters in line. i doubt you'd do it though, since you can't seem to acknowledge a clear insult when its there, if YOUR side does it.

    So you can take your hypocrisy and storm out of this thread. If you want to hold some amount of standard on me about having to critique the writings of people on my side, you better damned well be willing to accept the same. Otherwise, I don't care what you and your hypocrisy have to say on the matter.

    It's the same damned thing all the time. Always ok to insult the libertarian, but bitch like hell if they start swinging back. Pathetic.
    What do you mean, swinging back? How often do you think libertarians start these exchanges? Pretty damned often.

    I thought libertarians were against playing the victim card. I see I was wrong. Poor you.

    Those in glass houses shouldn't cast stones.
    Will you stop casting stones then?
    The Makeout Hobo is real, and does indeed travel around the country in his van and make out with ladies... If you meet the Makeout Hobo, it is customary to greet him with a shot of whiskey and a high five (if you are a dude) or passionate makeouts (if you are a lady).

  7. #237
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Wingnuts Unite: Ron Paul Joins Michelle Bachmann in Weirdest Town Hall Ever

    Quote Originally Posted by the makeout hobo View Post
    Technically it wasn't support, it was having nothing to to with them whatsoever. And can you say you don't levy blanket attacks on those you disagree with? Do you speak out against libertarians who insult people? If not, you have no room to attack me.
    I don't care for the most part. But hypocrisy is a little pet peeve of mine. So when it's demanded of my side to do something, but the other side gets to act freely, I'll point it out. Don't get your panties in a knot just because I'm pointing out your double standards. Don't like it, don't use double standards.

    Quote Originally Posted by the makeout hobo View Post
    What happened is that I used a post of Bman's as an example of why people didn't like libertarians. You came up and tried to defend it, so I tried to show that what he was saying really was insulting. You interjected yourself into it, so you have no room to cry.
    No. You completely misrepresented most of what he said. While there were a few insults, you interjected a good deal of your own partisan spin and hyperbole to make it seem like all he was doing was insulting you, and then you used that as platform to make a larger attack on the libertarian group as a whole. You have no room to cry about your inaccuracies and hypocrisy being pointed out.

    Quote Originally Posted by the makeout hobo View Post
    I'm not responsible for what my side does. Remember, you brought yourself into this. How's this: I'll try to keep liberal posters in line if you try to keep libertarian posters in line. i doubt you'd do it though, since you can't seem to acknowledge a clear insult when its there, if YOUR side does it.
    More HYPOCRISY. You're not responsible for your side, but you're going to hold me responsible for mine. Nice. Can maybe you try consistency for just a little bit?

    Quote Originally Posted by the makeout hobo View Post
    What do you mean, swinging back? How often do you think libertarians start these exchanges? Pretty damned often.
    Am I responsible for that? I mean, you're not responsible for your ****, right? How often do they start this? I think you'd be surprised if you objectively examined it.

    Quote Originally Posted by the makeout hobo View Post
    I thought libertarians were against playing the victim card. I see I was wrong. Poor you.
    Yay spin and hyperbole. I guess I shouldn't be surprised. You seem to employ these a lot. I played no victim card, I was pointing out your hypocrisy and insults, nothing more. You want to insult insult insult and then try to claim the higher moral ground. Stupidity and nothing more.

    Quote Originally Posted by the makeout hobo View Post
    Will you stop casting stones then?
    Why? Why again is it that you're allowed to do something, but I can't? Huh? Consistency, honesty...try it. You may like it.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  8. #238
    Rockin' In The Free World
    the makeout hobo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Last Seen
    04-24-14 @ 06:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    7,102

    Re: Wingnuts Unite: Ron Paul Joins Michelle Bachmann in Weirdest Town Hall Ever

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    I don't care for the most part. But hypocrisy is a little pet peeve of mine. So when it's demanded of my side to do something, but the other side gets to act freely, I'll point it out. Don't get your panties in a knot just because I'm pointing out your double standards. Don't like it, don't use double standards.



    No. You completely misrepresented most of what he said. While there were a few insults, you interjected a good deal of your own partisan spin and hyperbole to make it seem like all he was doing was insulting you, and then you used that as platform to make a larger attack on the libertarian group as a whole. You have no room to cry about your inaccuracies and hypocrisy being pointed out.



    More HYPOCRISY. You're not responsible for your side, but you're going to hold me responsible for mine. Nice. Can maybe you try consistency for just a little bit?



    Am I responsible for that? I mean, you're not responsible for your ****, right? How often do they start this? I think you'd be surprised if you objectively examined it.



    Yay spin and hyperbole. I guess I shouldn't be surprised. You seem to employ these a lot. I played no victim card, I was pointing out your hypocrisy and insults, nothing more. You want to insult insult insult and then try to claim the higher moral ground. Stupidity and nothing more.



    Why? Why again is it that you're allowed to do something, but I can't? Huh? Consistency, honesty...try it. You may like it.
    I really don't know what i'm even supposed to reply to in this post. It's nothing but you ranting and insulting me. I feel like I can feel the specks of foam coming through the computer. Calm down there, tiger.
    The Makeout Hobo is real, and does indeed travel around the country in his van and make out with ladies... If you meet the Makeout Hobo, it is customary to greet him with a shot of whiskey and a high five (if you are a dude) or passionate makeouts (if you are a lady).

  9. #239
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Wingnuts Unite: Ron Paul Joins Michelle Bachmann in Weirdest Town Hall Ever

    Quote Originally Posted by the makeout hobo View Post
    I really don't know what i'm even supposed to reply to in this post. It's nothing but you ranting and insulting me. I feel like I can feel the specks of foam coming through the computer. Calm down there, tiger.
    Then you read too much into it. I merely asked you to be consistent and honest, instead of engaging in double standard attacks. Holding me responsible for the arguments of my side while refusing responsibility of arguments of your side. And also, to not use hyperbole and spin in assessing people's arguments to make it seem like there was only attack when there was also valid complaint.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  10. #240
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Wingnuts Unite: Ron Paul Joins Michelle Bachmann in Weirdest Town Hall Ever

    But let's say this Hobo. Perhaps we were both being a bit stubborn and both said things which could be corrected. Fair enough, debate is debate after all, sometimes it gets heated. If you took offense to what I said, then I apologize. Though the post I made was not in anger. When people don't seem to understand what I'm saying, I figure I just have to try to repeat it again with emphasis to get the point across.

    I do think that on some fundamental basis there is a double standard charged against those whom self identify as libertarian. And a lot of people do automatically come out of the gates swinging at us. If we swing a lot, it's because we've become quite defensive about it. People make a lot of personal insults at us, they'll call us wingnuts and what have you at every opprotunity (there's a couple on this very board whom are incredibly anti-libertarian and do so). To the post in question. While there were insults in the post in question, I do feel that you skipped over legitimate complaint and point to paint the whole of it as nothing more than insult without warrant.

    But in the end, I've read a lot of what you've written in the past. I can on occasion agree with your points. I'm sorry if I insulted you too gravely. If it wasn't gravely enough, I'll try harder (j/k). But I am in the habit of treating others as they treat me, and recently there has been a small group (I'm not including you in this) of thin skinned folk whom have taken incredible exception to that. I figure if people don't like the way I'm treating them, they should reevaluate how they are treating others. But que sera sera. Let's just have better, calm, and honest debates in the future then, shall we?
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

Page 24 of 25 FirstFirst ... 1422232425 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
  •