(Citizen)Dr. GuyDecember 6, 2006 15:12:27

Glad you recognized that reference. I could not remember Dan's comeback.

first off it was "jane you ignorant slut" usually delivered by bill murry or dan ackroid.

(Citizen)Mike's Daily LogDecember 6, 2006 14:26:13

I want to thank you for proving my point in writing this. you have been rude, totally ignore any other view but your own, you dimiss people with a typical "you are stupid" or some such nonsense... in essence a typical ANGRY LIBERAL.

thank you.

MM

ModerateMan, you ignorant slut. How did you manage to misquote Doc's post?

(Citizen)Mike's Daily Log December 6, 2006 17:29:40

Moderate Man, you ignorant slut. How did you manage to misquote Doc's post?

I am an illiterate and nasty slut.. get it right!!

dunno, just hadda brain fart.

I could provide links and specific examples and maybe I'll write an article when I get the time with references, but if you had been following the news, you'd know what I was talking about. I don't believe you read the news. You don't like what's in the news so you discount it as having a liberal bias.

...Right. Because, you know, i don't follow the news. And your evidence for this is that I don't share your opinions...

Okay, thanks for making it clear that you don't know how to debate a topic. It's just endless "You're dumb if you don't agree with me" statements.

There are still a few traditional conservatives in the republican party, but they are rare.

You lost all credibility right there. You obviously have no clue.

You lost all credibility right there. You obviously have no clue.

What does he have no clue about? That there are no traditional conservatives in the Republican party anymore? That they've all jumped ship and given up on politics in general?

He has no credibility because all he seems to know how to do is make blanket, unsupported proclaimations and if you don't agree with them he'll simply call you dumb. And this from a guy who uses the old canard "if you support the war you should join the military" (and if you support law enforcement, you should become a police officer too I guess).

So why is the left so mad? Because they're made up of people like Mike.

...Right. Because, you know, i don't follow the news. And your evidence for this is that I don't share your opinions... Okay, thanks for making it clear that you don't know how to debate a topic. It's just endless "You're dumb if you don't agree with me" statements.

Okay, whiner. Guess who made these statements:

Your ignorance knows no bounds. before you utter more ignorance on history, You. Have. Got. To. Be. Kidding Me. Do you understand how to debate at all, Nonsense.

He has no credibility because all he seems to know how to do is make blanket, unsupported proclaimations and if you don't agree with them he'll simply call you dumb. And this from a guy who uses the old canard "if you support the war you should join the military" (and if you support law enforcement, you should become a police officer too I guess). So why is the left so mad? Because they're made up of people like Mike.

Alright, explain why you don't join the military if you support the war. They're short handed, so why don't you help out?

I had to break for dinner and didn't get a chance to fully respond...

And this from a guy who uses the old canard "if you support the war you should join the military" (and if you support law enforcement, you should become a police officer too I guess).

This statement is so illogical, it's hardly worth responding to, but I will anyway. You believe that our national security justifies this war, but you're not willing to fight. You want other people to fight your battles for you. Answer this question... If your neighborhood security was in jeopardy because the police were short handed, you wouldn't try to help out? If you answered no, you're a coward. If you answered yes, you're a hypocrite for not trying to help out in Iraq. After all... "our national security depends on it."

So what are you? A coward or a hypocrite? There's a third option. Join the military. Of course, that would require some integrity and sacrifice. Hell, you're not even willing to help pay for the war. You're pathetic.

(Citizen)Mike's Daily LogDecember 6, 2006 19:14:18

Alright, explain why you don't join the military if you support the war. They're short handed, so why don't you help out?

for one I am 60, have hep c and am busy dieing slowly.. for two I already fought in a war , vietnam 1965-1966 proudly served U.S.M.C.

Good gravy.

Look at what you just wrote:

If your neighborhood security was in jeopardy because the police were short handed, you wouldn't try to help out?

The answer is - Yes, if the police were short handed I would help out.

Are you arguing that our military is short-handed?  If our nation's security was in jeopardy and they needed my physical help to preserve it I would join. 

But I think most intelligent people (or as you call them "news watchers") would agree that the military is better served by me doing what I do best -- produce wealth. The $2+ million in taxes I generated last year probably does a lot more good for the military than some out of shape 35 year old in fatigues. But hey, what do I know?

All you seem to have are personal attacks. Which is pretty funny since you're  personally attacking the guy who owns the site over and over.  So let me put it like this - if you continue to make personal attacks, you're gone. 

If you can't argue the issue without personally attacking the person, you are not welcome on my site. 

Your responses get shriller and shriller.  Whereas before you were content to simply call those who don't agree with you as "dumb" and "weak minded".  Now you've upped it to those who don't agree with you as being cowardly and pathetic.

You seem totally oblivious to the fact that you are making the original article's case: Why is the left so angry.

So tell us Mike, why are you so angry? I gave my theory why -- you lack the skills to move your agenda forward.  Because you think those who think differently from you are just a bunch of "dumb, weak minded, cowards" you will never be able to persuade them that your point of view is valid. 

Rather than providing reasons to show merit for your point of view, you offer bile.  Your arguments, as a result are uncompelling and therefore you make no progress in moving your agenda forward.

I submit that your own responses in this article have only made the case stronger that the leftwing is populated by a bunch of arrogant, slightly unhinged wanna-be authoritarians.  I mean, heck, if we're just a bunch of weak minded, dumb, cowardly scum, surely what is needed (to replace that pesky democracy) is an elite council of learned scholars such as yourself to guide us.

And because that is the impression you give, you'll never be a leader.  You will always, no matter how shrill you get, be at the mercy of people like me. Fortunately, conservatives are quite tolerant of other points of view in real life.  It's a pity that liberals demonstrate (time and time again) their intolerance of others as you (Mike) have amply demonstrated in your responses.

 

for one I am 60, have hep c and am busy dieing slowly.. for two I already fought in a war , vietnam 1965-1966 proudly served U.S.M.C.

Sorry to hear that, MM. I was talking about people who support the war and are able but not willing to fight.

And because that is the impression you give, you'll never be a leader. You will always, no matter how shrill you get, be at the mercy of people like me. Fortunately, conservatives are quite tolerant of other points of view in real life. It's a pity that liberals demonstrate (time and time again) their intolerance of others as you (Mike) have amply demonstrated in your responses.

Wrong-o, dog breath. I've never shown disrespect towards anyone on this board and it wasn't until you were disrespectful towards me, that I gave the same in return.

You repeatedly call me a liberal even though every statement I've made has come from a true conservative viewpoint. But that is your only defense. Everything has to be in black-and-white for people like you. Even this site. What's your up-time for this site? 75%? From what I can tell, your server is running on MS Windows with MS .net and probably MS SQL Server. You're even a sheep to Microsoft products. You'd get a lot better performance with a LAMP system.

And so, you can ban me if you want. I know weak minded people like you can't handle dissension.

It's kind of interesting to see someone consider calling people "pathetic" and "cowards" and worse as being "dissension". That's the kind of thought process that leads people to thinking that assaulting people on stage or drowning out a public speaker with insults as being nothing more than expressing "dissent".

I sure didn't see very much dissension. To me, dissension involves him debating the issue. Attacking individuals on a personal level isn't dissension. It's attacking individuals on a personal level.

This discussion has been pretty informative.

I went back and looked at Mike's comments and each time they were listed statements of his opinions stated as facts and insults of the people who don't see the "truth" in his statements. I'm content that reponses #66 make the case how quick Mike was to start getting pretty nasty. 

He says how he didn't get nasty until I showed a lack of respect. My first response to him was #64 where I asked him to provide evidence for his claims. To which he responded that I needed to start reading books rather than watching FoxNews.  In other words, asking him to back up his claims because I don't agree with them is disrespectful.

It's also really interesting because you saw how he took my criticism of his arguments as being the same as him literally calling me a moron or a coward of whatever. That is, to him, attacking the individual is the same as attacking the argument.

He even attacks the site itself as a way of attacking me. This is another great example of left-wing thought - attack those that do things.  Does Mike have a site that he put up? (incidentally, the home page of JU has a Sitemeter button that anyone can click on and see that we have an uptime >98%). Left-wingers don't build. They just criticize. But to move your agenda forward, you have to lead. To build something. You can't move your agenda forward by just sitting back and crapping on what other people are DOing.

And this gets back to Moderateman's original point: The left just can't seem to participate in any debate civilly. Their opponents aren't just dumb and and unenlightened. As soon as you peel away the surface you get to "real" thoughts -- we're a bunch of weak minded, pathetic cowards.

I don't know about you but does anyone want to be led by someone who thinks they're sub-human? I sure don't. And hence, the left just can't get things going because they're so full of hate and vitriol.

 

 

So, ostensibly defending himself against an accusation of being a smart ass, MDL becomes... a bigger smart ass. Priceless.

Perhaps, through moral relativism, this makes his prior posts less smart ass?

Just a thought.

so far I have this fight scored.. Draginol. 6 rounds

Mikes daily log 4 rounds

2 even.

this leave 3 more rounds.. mike can still win, but he will have to take all three rounds to do so.

No, Mike's gone now. 

DraginolDecember 8, 2006 11:44:45

No, Mike's gone now.

I keep warning people about getting on your last nerve.

winner by TKO Brad the dragon draginol!

  

(Citizen)DaiwaDecember 8, 2006 14:53:40

gee two more replies and I will have my 15th 100 or more reply articles

Well then, party on, MM. 100 is a magical number.

I've never had that many.

Oh well.

Always willing to help a friend.

I've never had that many.

That is cause you are young.   100!

Reply By: San ChoninoPosted: Friday, December 08, 2006 Well then, party on, MM. 100 is a magical number. I've never had that many. Oh well. Always willing to help a friend.

thank you for naming me friend. what an honor.