Nee Rule on TDS

[Sabre]

Re: New Rule on TDS

I don't know why you are butting in on this conversation that is not with you. Nonetheless, I will answer your question. When you attack the media and say it is fake truths when facts are clearly evident that Trump has done the deeds and then not address the proof provided by me and call me a troll and run away, you are in "effect" running away.

I was not providing "nonsense" given that mine were not opinions but facts. If you can disprove them as facts then do so. Otherwise, your post is just another example of Trump supporters blindness and fantasy living and answering by attacking the poster.

Can't deal with facts, can you?

Not sure what you are on about but, I did not attack the media, I did not say it is fake truths, I did not call you a troll you and I did not attack you, you directly made it "with me" in your own post quoting me, about a post you clearly did not understand:

Quote Originally Posted by Sabre View Post

Did not watch it, will not bother. "If you are a Trump sympathizer I dare you to watch it, all of it." is a simplistic grade school dare, shoulda said I double dog dare you. If it had been something like: I ask you to watch all of it and give your opinion - then I would have but, phrased the way it was I knew the obvious gist of it and judging from the replies I was correct.

Truth hurts doesn't it? Trump supporters have a habit of running away from it..........like you have done.

 

[Deuce]

I heard that Maher used to be funny. Is that true?

Nope.

 

[Luckyone]

Re: New Rule on TDS

Not sure what you are on about but, I did not attack the media, I did not say it is fake truths, I did not call you a troll you and I did not attack you, you directly made it "with me" in your own post quoting me, about a post you clearly did not understand:

I apologize but I thought you were butting into a conversation with eman623 that was attacking the media.

Nonetheless, taking that portion of my answer away, the rest is on point. You are not watching a video that is about what Trump is doing and that to me is running away from addressing the problem.

Listening to people that have opposite opinions and that are providing facts to back their opinions is the only way that you can debate intelligently. Evidently you are a Trump supporter but it is also a fact that Trump has done countless things to be criticized and abased for. How come you never address any of them?

 

[haymarket]

Re: New Rule on TDS

LOL

That's a fun out your trying. As usual, my friend.

"That's a fun out your trying." - what in heavens name does that even mean?????

 

[Sabre]

Re: New Rule on TDS

I apologize but I thought you were butting into a conversation with eman623 that was attacking the media.

Nonetheless, taking that portion of my answer away, the rest is on point. You are not watching a video that is about what Trump is doing and that to me is running away from addressing the problem.

Listening to people that have opposite opinions and that are providing facts to back their opinions is the only way that you can debate intelligently. Evidently you are a Trump supporter but it is also a fact that Trump has done countless things to be criticized and abased for. How come you never address any of them?

I do read and listen to opposing opinions and have addressed them where I feel it would be accepted to do so. Unfortunately I find that if my opinion differs it is attacked by many of those who do not consider their opinions as opinions, but as facts. I welcome honest and civil discussions, stressing civil.

I have addressed many things Trump has done but, you are asking for only negative things (to be criticized and abased for) while I prefer the positives. If you want a point I where I disagree it would be on Saudi Arabia, I am against sending troops there because I believe SA is fully capable of taking care of themselves. But, in reality with Iran's rhetoric I can only assume it will not be long before they do something foolish against us directly. Of course I am not in a position to know all factors involved so that is just my opinion.

So there is a criticism, but I do not deal in abasing.

 

[calamity]

Re: New Rule on TDS

"That's a fun out your trying." - what in heavens name does that even mean?????

Other than the level of intelligence we are dealing with being limited?

 

[Craig234]

Nope.

Maher is occasionally funny, which is what he has used to get media power for his other views.

 

[Craig234]

Re: New Rule on TDS

I do read and listen to opposing opinions and have addressed them where I feel it would be accepted to do so. Unfortunately I find that if my opinion differs it is attacked by many of those who do not consider their opinions as opinions, but as facts. I welcome honest and civil discussions, stressing civil.

I don't think the issue is often 'considering their opinions as facts'. Do you understand that 'right and wrong' are opinions? Do you think they matter? For example, it's one thing to consider the 'facts' of the Holocaust. But whether you say the Holocaust was a good thing, or didn't matter, or was a bad thing, is 'opinion'. Do you think that opinion matters, or only the 'facts'? People can care about those opinions.

 

[Craig234]

Re: New Rule on TDS

If you want a point I where I disagree it would be on Saudi Arabia, I am against sending troops there because I believe SA is fully capable of taking care of themselves. But, in reality with Iran's rhetoric I can only assume it will not be long before they do something foolish against us directly. Of course I am not in a position to know all factors involved so that is just my opinion.

It's nice to know you are concerned with Saudi Arabia's ruling regime's security, and the only objection you have to our having American lives spent to protect the dictatorial, criminal regime who runs the country is that they are already secure and don't need it.

I'm wondering, though, where your concern is for Yemen's security from the attacks by Saudi Arabia? Are the innocent people facing starvation in Yemen because of Saudi Arabia just that much less deserving of your concern than the murderers who run Saudi Arabia, that you are ok with their being killed?

Not to mention your concern for the well-being of the people of Iran.

I see you are concerned about Iran attacking us. Little historical question: who overthrew democracy and put a brutal dictator in power over the other for decades, Iran or us? Who, for example, had their military shoot down a civilian airliner of the other with no punishment, them or us? Who helped Saddam Hussein attack the other in a war causing a million casualties, including from chemical weapons, them or us?

 

[Luckyone]

Re: New Rule on TDS

I do read and listen to opposing opinions and have addressed them where I feel it would be accepted to do so. Unfortunately I find that if my opinion differs it is attacked by many of those who do not consider their opinions as opinions, but as facts. I welcome honest and civil discussions, stressing civil.

I have addressed many things Trump has done but, you are asking for only negative things (to be criticized and abased for) while I prefer the positives. If you want a point I where I disagree it would be on Saudi Arabia, I am against sending troops there because I believe SA is fully capable of taking care of themselves. But, in reality with Iran's rhetoric I can only assume it will not be long before they do something foolish against us directly. Of course I am not in a position to know all factors involved so that is just my opinion.

So there is a criticism, but I do not deal in abasing.

Unfortunately, for every 1 thing that Trump does that is positive, there are 20 things he does that are negative. It is very difficult to key on the positives where there are so many negatives. In addition, the president of the United States is supposed the be the "best of us" and in Trump's case he is the worst of us.

I understand what you are trying to say, but nothing normal applies to Trump. It is mostly extremes to the bad side.

 

[Sabre]

Re: New Rule on TDS

I don't think the issue is often 'considering their opinions as facts'. Do you understand that 'right and wrong' are opinions? Do you think they matter? For example, it's one thing to consider the 'facts' of the Holocaust. But whether you say the Holocaust was a good thing, or didn't matter, or was a bad thing, is 'opinion'. Do you think that opinion matters, or only the 'facts'? People can care about those opinions.

Basically you are asking me to give my opinion on opinions, OK. Right or wrong is also subjective, they can be an opinion but can also be a fact. We are said to have inalienable rights under the U.S. Constitution and it is wrong to commit murder. There is an old saying about opinions and a specific body orifice. Opinions are just that: a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge. Whether or not an opinion matters is also subjective, to the one that opines I am sure it matters but to others, maybe, maybe not. For example, the opinion of my wife matters to me, the opinion of some stranger on a community forum may be of interest but would be low on the list of does it matter. Whether or not someone cares about my opinion is up to them, but my main concern would be if my family and friends care about my opinions, as to anyone else, nice if they care but if they do not that is alright also. - Just my opinion on opinions.

 

[Sabre]

Re: New Rule on TDS

It's nice to know you are concerned with Saudi Arabia's ruling regime's security, and the only objection you have to our having American lives spent to protect the dictatorial, criminal regime who runs the country is that they are already secure and don't need it.

I'm wondering, though, where your concern is for Yemen's security from the attacks by Saudi Arabia? Are the innocent people facing starvation in Yemen because of Saudi Arabia just that much less deserving of your concern than the murderers who run Saudi Arabia, that you are ok with their being killed?

Not to mention your concern for the well-being of the people of Iran.

I see you are concerned about Iran attacking us. Little historical question: who overthrew democracy and put a brutal dictator in power over the other for decades, Iran or us? Who, for example, had their military shoot down a civilian airliner of the other with no punishment, them or us? Who helped Saddam Hussein attack the other in a war causing a million casualties, including from chemical weapons, them or us?

You are purposely misstating my concerns. First statement in red: if anything my post clearly pointed out I do not care about SA and its ruling regimes security - as in I believe they can take care of themselves.. we do not need to be their policemen, or in fact, the worlds policemen.
Second red: You are again positing that I am concerned about "murderers who run Saudi Arabia", as to the rest they are just straw men based on your own misreading (purposeful) of things I have said. I do not respond to straw man arguments.

 

[TurtleDude]

Re: New Rule on TDS

Wait...I'm not joking about them.

I think Mars Attacks is your vision for the future

 

[Craig234]

Re: New Rule on TDS

You are purposely misstating my concerns. First statement in red: if anything my post clearly pointed out I do not care about SA and its ruling regimes security - as in I believe they can take care of themselves.. we do not need to be their policemen, or in fact, the worlds policemen.
Second red: You are again positing that I am concerned about "murderers who run Saudi Arabia", as to the rest they are just straw men based on your own misreading (purposeful) of things I have said. I do not respond to straw man arguments.

I'll accept your post as a clarification, but when you say you oppose our sending troops to help them because they can take care of themselves, the implication is that if they couldn't take care of themselves, you would support sending our troops to help them because you think it's worth sending our troops to protect them. Maybe you meant it as a figure of speech saying something else.

But you go beyond making the mistake you made, assuming it was one, to say accusations such as 'purposeful misreading', which is both false and, ironically, purposeful misreading. Whether you respond to straw man arguments or not, which isn't relevant here, you make them.

 

[OrphanSlug]

Re: New Rule on TDS

Naturally everyone on the right watching this video will not approve but you gotta admit Maher is the best Smackdown artist in the world. This is SmackDown taken to a high art

If you are a Trump sympathizer I dare you to watch it, all of it.

In this case, Bill Maher was completely right.

 

[Sabre]

Re: New Rule on TDS

I'll accept your post as a clarification, but when you say you oppose our sending troops to help them because they can take care of themselves, the implication is that if they couldn't take care of themselves, you would support sending our troops to help them because you think it's worth sending our troops to protect them. Maybe you meant it as a figure of speech saying something else.

But you go beyond making the mistake you made, assuming it was one, to say accusations such as 'purposeful misreading', which is both false and, ironically, purposeful misreading. Whether you respond to straw man arguments or not, which isn't relevant here, you make them.

OK, first, when I said I believe Saudi Arabia was capable of taking care of themselves - that was it, a definite, final statement of what I believe.... any other implication you reach for from that is entirely your own creation.

Second, it was not a mistake it was a statement of what I believe, as stated above.... but more importantly I made no straw man argument.. that is entirely on you>

Items not in any of my original postings and irrelevant to what I did post, i.e., straw mans are:

*where your concern is for Yemen's security from the attacks by Saudi Arabia..
*Not to mention your concern for the well-being of the people of Iran...
*who overthrew democracy and put a brutal dictator in power over the other for decades, Iran or us?... .... etc...

None of which have anything do with anything I posted. You posed them in question form as though they were contained within my posts, thereby making a straw arguments of each of those.
If you do not think so, then go to my original post and point out where I ever mentioned Yemen, Iran or a brutal dictator or any of the other things you brought up that were nowhere in evidence except in your own creation.

For you edification: The straw man is a fallacy in which an opponent's argument is overstated or misrepresented in order to be more easily attacked or refuted. The technique often takes quotes out of context or, more often, incorrectly paraphrases or summarizes an opponent's position.

 

[Craig234]

Re: New Rule on TDS

OK, first, when I said I believe Saudi Arabia was capable of taking care of themselves - that was it, a definite, final statement of what I believe.... any other implication you reach for from that is entirely your own creation.

Second, it was not a mistake it was a statement of what I believe, as stated above.... but more importantly I made no straw man argument.. that is entirely on you>

Items not in any of my original postings and irrelevant to what I did post, i.e., straw mans are:

*where your concern is for Yemen's security from the attacks by Saudi Arabia..
*Not to mention your concern for the well-being of the people of Iran...
*who overthrew democracy and put a brutal dictator in power over the other for decades, Iran or us?... .... etc...

None of which have anything do with anything I posted. You posed them in question form as though they were contained within my posts, thereby making a straw arguments of each of those.
If you do not think so, then go to my original post and point out where I ever mentioned Yemen, Iran or a brutal dictator or any of the other things you brought up that were nowhere in evidence except in your own creation.

For you edification: The straw man is a fallacy in which an opponent's argument is overstated or misrepresented in order to be more easily attacked or refuted. The technique often takes quotes out of context or, more often, incorrectly paraphrases or summarizes an opponent's position.

LOL at you explaining what a straw man is. I was going to respond more and try to help you with some of your problems, but I see there's not much point.

You said more than you claim, and perhaps more than you understand, when you said *the only reason* you don't supporting sending troops for Saudi Arabia is that they don't need them - that implies you do supporting sending them if they did need them, whether or not you understand that. If you say the only reason you don't kill your wife is not wanitng to get caught, you have said some things about how you feel about her, your morals, and so on.

 

[Sabre]

Re: New Rule on TDS

LOL at you explaining what a straw man is. I was going to respond more and try to help you with some of your problems, but I see there's not much point.

You said more than you claim, and perhaps more than you understand, when you said *the only reason* you don't supporting sending troops for Saudi Arabia is that they don't need them - that implies you do supporting sending them if they did need them, whether or not you understand that. If you say the only reason you don't kill your wife is not wanitng to get caught, you have said some things about how you feel about her, your morals, and so on.

Waste of time, you are determined to twist things to support your straw men so now you need to jump to the typical conclusion of a straw man, declare you have won at defeating your own straw man and therefore the argument you created. Congrats.

 

[Craig234]

Re: New Rule on TDS

Waste of time, you are determined to twist things to support your straw men so now you need to jump to the typical conclusion of a straw man, declare you have won at defeating your own straw man and therefore the argument you created. Congrats.

Someone learned a phrase. Keep saying it over and over, to not admit your error.

 

[calamity]

Re: New Rule on TDS

Someone learned a phrase. Keep saying it over and over, to not admit your error.

I wouldn't exactly call it "learned." I liken it more to a child incessantly repeating a swear word he heard for the very first time.

 

[ocean515]

Re: New Rule on TDS

"That's a fun out your trying." - what in heavens name does that even mean?????

That means your nonsense was just a desperate way to run for cover. You know, "an out", as in a way out of losing situation.

 

[bluesmoke]

Re: New Rule on TDS

Naturally everyone on the right watching this video will not approve but you gotta admit Maher is the best Smackdown artist in the world. This is SmackDown taken to a high art

If you are a Trump sympathizer I dare you to watch it, all of it.

Being accused/berated for having "TDS" after pointing out absurd/worrisome behavior of the POTUS, and leader (though in Amexit) of the Free World, is like being called defensive for defending oneself after being attacked for whatever reason in some way, shape or form.