• 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!

Reverand Paul gives a sermon on the Book of Fiscal Conservatism

Translation: "I don't understand this stuff enough to make my own judgment on what constitutes 'better'."

You guys argue that austerity makes things worse. That's a lie. Even a child understands that better is better and worse is worse. I'll take your post as an admission that austerity made things better, as proven in the linked article.
 
I didn't claim you deleted the post. Not sure what you're referring to.

Look man, you very deliberately omitted the context in your argument. You thought you could sneak it by without anyone noticing, but you failed in that regard. You claimed spending increased during Eurozone's austerity and you tried to make that argument by examining spending-to-GDP ratios. However, what that doesn't tell you is that GDP declined because that's what happens during a recession...the economy contracts.

Your reaction to being called out is to basically throw a tantrum and either play at being obtuse, or that is who you really are.


omitted = deleted


dude stop the non sense, when a person clicks on the quote in post 362 which you altered with my name attached to it, to takes you back to post 353 which nothing has been omitted/deleted.

Quote Originally Posted by Master PO View Post
blah blah blah falsehood alternate fact falsehood

the bold was never created by me, but you, you are caught in your own lie.
 
Last edited:
Just to clarify ... "omitting context" does not equal "deleting a post".
 
Just to clarify ... "omitting context" does not equal "deleting a post".

Omit Synonyms, Omit Antonyms | Thesaurus.com

Screen Shot 2017-01-28 at 12.32.35 PM.jpg


A synonym is a word or phrase that means exactly or nearly the same as another word or phrase in the same language. Words that are synonyms are said to be synonymous, and the state of being a synonym is called synonymy. The word comes from Ancient Greek sýn (σύν; "with") and ónoma (ὄνομα; "name").

25 Synonyms for “Delete�

11th word
 
Last edited:
Omit Synonyms, Omit Antonyms | Thesaurus.com

View attachment 67213195


A synonym is a word or phrase that means exactly or nearly the same as another word or phrase in the same language. Words that are synonyms are said to be synonymous, and the state of being a synonym is called synonymy. The word comes from Ancient Greek sýn (σύν; "with") and ónoma (ὄνομα; "name").

25 Synonyms for “Delete�

11th word
He said you ommitted CONtext, not text.

Sent from my SM-G360V using Tapatalk
 
He said you ommitted CONtext, not text.

Sent from my SM-G360V using Tapatalk

please read my posting here"


"dude stop the non sense, when a person clicks on the quote in post 362 which you altered with my name attached to it, to takes you back to post 353 which nothing has been omitted/deleted"



he quoted me from post 353 and then deleted ALL of my words and replaced them with his own, when i called him on it, he claimed i omitted/deleted context which would have been from post 353, if you look johnfrmclevelan was the first to quote me in 354, his quote of my posting, exactly matches my posting.

Nothing was omitted / deleted by me
,..never would i post the bold below, becuase it is a stupid and emotional response to another person and i don't dealt in those kinds of responses to people in debating

he made the charge i omitted /deleted and that cleary did not happen, and again when i called him on it, he went further and made remakes about me because it could not handle what he had done.

Quote Originally Posted by Master PO View Post
blah blah blah falsehood alternate fact falsehood

he clearly lied and sought to cover it up.
 
Last edited:
no dude, you lied, and your postings are only digging you in deeper, you need to "move along"

Give it up, Po, you're just making yourself look worse. Everybody can see that you took numbers out of context to try and make your argument, and everybody can see that you got caught. Nobody is coming to your defense, because your position is indefensible. Let it go.
 
no dude, you lied, and your postings are only digging you in deeper, you need to "move along"

So you presented raw data, then tried to form a conclusion based on that raw data without context. The context in this case, being that GDP for the Eurozone was in decline, which is why spending-to-GDP increased. But as we've seen from the charts posted by others on this thread, spending was cut...it just wasn't cut by as much as the GDP declined. You tried to argue that because spending-to-GDP increased, that means spending increased. Which isn't the case at all. Spending was cut, but GDP declined, so that's why the spending-to-GDP percentage increased. That's a pretty weak sauce argument you got there.
 
Give it up, Po, you're just making yourself look worse. Everybody can see that you took numbers out of context to try and make your argument, and everybody can see that you got caught. Nobody is coming to your defense, because your position is indefensible. Let it go.

dude i know your hurt for being found wrong, but trying to save your pal in a lie is the worst thing to do.
 
So you presented raw data, then tried to form a conclusion based on that raw data without context. The context in this case, being that GDP for the Eurozone was in decline, which is why spending-to-GDP increased. But as we've seen from the charts posted by others on this thread, spending was cut...it just wasn't cut by as much as the GDP declined. You tried to argue that because spending-to-GDP increased, that means spending increased. Which isn't the case at all. Spending was cut, but GDP declined, so that's why the spending-to-GDP percentage increased. That's a pretty weak sauce argument you got there.

dude you are never going to get around the "omitted" statement

your altering my quote with your own words, made you look silly because of its nature and then lying, trying to cover it up, making you now a liar of the forum.
 
You omitted the context! Surely even you see that, right?

dude, i am going to explain to you 1 last time were you screwed up.

when you quoted me in #362, that quote LINKS back to post #353, JohnfrmClevelan in post #354 quoted me verbatim from #353, nothing was omitted when he quote me.

what trips you up is because when you quote someone it fixes the location of what postings it came from.

you changed what i posted #353 when you quoted it and posted it in #362

Never would i reply with the bold below , they are your words.

Quote Originally Posted by Master PO View Post
blah blah blah falsehood alternate fact falsehood
 
dude, i am going to explain to you 1 last time were you screwed up.

What was omitted from your conclusion that spending increased was the context that showed in relation to GDP, it didn't.
 
dude, i am going to explain to you 1 last time were you screwed up.

when you quoted me in #362, that quote LINKS back to post #353, JohnfrmClevelan in post #354 quoted me verbatim from #353, nothing was omitted when he quote me.

what trips you up is because when you quote someone it fixes the location of what postings it came from.

you changed what i posted #353 when you quoted it and posted it in #362

Never would i reply with the bold below , they are your words.

Quote Originally Posted by Master PO View Post
blah blah blah falsehood alternate fact falsehood

That's your big complaint? People do that all the time. Had he just changed a word or two, and not made it COMPLETELY OBVIOUS that those were not your actual words, that would have been something to bring up. I have people "misquoting" me in far worse ways every day.

Get over it. I know, you lost the debate point horribly, and now you want to find something else to complain about so you can save face. Don't bother, it's not helping.
 
That's your big complaint? People do that all the time. Had he just changed a word or two, and not made it COMPLETELY OBVIOUS that those were not your actual words, that would have been something to bring up. I have people "misquoting" me in far worse ways every day.

Get over it. I know, you lost the debate point horribly, and now you want to find something else to complain about so you can save face. Don't bother, it's not helping.

dude, are you new to the party, your the one thats being backing him all the way, even though you by what you have said, know he lied, now you are moving into justification for him.....you inability to defend, him and shown to be wrong in your assessment of my postings is staggering
 
dude, are you new to the party, your the one thats being backing him all the way, even though you by what you have said, know he lied, now you are moving into justification for him.....you inability to defend, him and shown to be wrong in your assessment of my postings is staggering

I'm not new to the party. I was the one who caught you using misleading, out-of-context numbers.

It's a big stretch to call what Incisor did - hyperbolic paraphrasing to make a point - lying. Give it up. You lost the debate, and you are losing the debate within the debate, too. Cut your losses.
 
I'm not new to the party. I was the one who caught you using misleading, out-of-context numbers.

It's a big stretch to call what Incisor did - hyperbolic paraphrasing to make a point - lying. Give it up. You lost the debate, and you are losing the debate within the debate, too. Cut your losses.

wrong.... i posted links, how can i be misleading with links you have the ability to read on your own AND post 353 contained NO personal text from Me, only what came from the links.

Incisor posted text to a quote from me , he created, YOU went along with it.:2razz:

you creditability is dead becuase you did not refute what i posted and you backed a lair.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom