Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
How childish--running away when your bullshit is called on you. It's almost as if one could expect this sort of behavior from a liberal.
Originally posted by King Kandy
I had hoped that you would have mellowed out after you got several threads closed through this kind of behavior. Evidently you would rather act with aimless trolling and aggression than have a discussion where you might have to change your opinions.
Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
Right. So demanding that you back up your opinions with facts is the equivalent of trolling, whereas making uncited claims of "hurr they're all corrupt!" is not. Full retard, son. You just went it.
Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Maybe "Zeal Ex Nihilo" is actually a sock of Ann Coulter? A lot of his posts are almost verbatim of lines in her books How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must) and If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans.Who'd have thunk that she had the time to post on a forum so often...
If it was the only thing I've read him say, then I might agree with you. However, I have heard him say some things that pretty easily illustrate he is not Mr. Coulter. Even Ms Coulter is smarter than the Frau Coulter she plays on talking head pseudo-news programs.
Originally posted by skekUng
If you are unwilling to discuss the specifics, then your entire assertion that he would have been the better president is a waste of your time, not mine.
No it is not because I've already taken the time to consider them and weigh them against my ideas of how shit should get done.
That's pretty obvious and you're getting towards the end of your troll rope, obviously.
Originally posted by skekUng
Also, you're coming across as paranoid. If you've really expereinced that many trolls, then there might be something wrong with your posting style that makes people troll you. I've been on forums long enough to know that the people who get trolled the most are typically half the problem, themselves.
Ah, here were go: a better attempt at trolling.
That's simply not the case. But, I'll take this post to be an indirect confession of "troll-hood."
Originally posted by skekUng
If you can't respond to a question without hurling accusations in the hopes that the moderators will just pick up on them and ban me simply because you're paranoid, then save yourself the time and effort and report me. OR, participate in the discussion and be willing to understand that everything you say isn't well-thought out and insightful, and won't be accepted simply because you said it. Not everyone that disagrees with you is automatically a troll. Standing on a soap box in the corner and screaming about trolls and socks is really a lazy way to participate in a discussion, and it gives you the leeway to never have to back up anything you say. Granted, you don't put much effort into discussing anything, as it is. You make an assertion, post a wiki link or two, say you hate me and won't be discussing anything from the massive and vague information found on your link and then start insulting.
lol
Didn't you want your sock account to last a little bit longer?
1. I never said I hated you.
2. Posted one wiki link (out of a total of 3 links) that listed out Romney's political positions...but posted a much larger one that included his voting record.
3. I have indicated, clearly, that I've thought about the political positions.
4. No matter what I post, no matter how correct it is and no matter how well thought out it is, you will find a reason to pretend there is something wrong because you're a troll. You do not deserve my opinions. However, if you really are that interested, you can find my of my opinions scattered throughout the forum and logically conclude, on your own, what exactly my political opinions are and how they sync up with Romney's positions. Go ahead: if you REALLY want to troll me that bad, you can do it.
5. Start insulting? Odd, as I never insulted you once.
Originally posted by skekUng
So, let's just both just shit the hell up and avoid one another.
Not gonna happen.
Now that you've had a little troll fest (Is that you, Lord Sorgo?), why don't you try to post on topic?
Obviously, Romney was the far better choice for the GOP presidential candidate as he's far from Palin: he's better spoken, has better economic policies, is not an idiot, and looks like a president, not a PTA member.
Originally posted by King Kandy
lol, i'm not going to waste my time trying to "prove" anything to you. You make clear every time you post "liberals are retarded", "liberalism is a mental illness", "incapable of critical thinking", etc, that you have absolutely zero intention of trying to have a productive discussion with the vast majority of people on this site. I decline to take part in your mental masturbation, thank you very much.
😆
I've posted this already, but couldn't find it: liberals and conservatives are not more stupid than each other. They each have smart and dumb on each end. The link said that they were remarkably the same.
Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Maybe "Zeal Ex Nihilo" is actually a sock of Ann Coulter? A lot of his posts are almost verbatim of lines in her books How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must) and If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans.Who'd have thunk that she had the time to post on a forum so often...
Nah. He's a handsome young man.
He doesn't strike me as a Coulter fan, either.
Originally posted by dadudemon
No it is not because I've already taken the time to consider them and weigh them against my ideas of how shit should get done
yeah? And they are? one wiki link is not my point. My point is that you make a statement, toss out very broad links to substantiate those statements and say "See! Look, I told everyone so." So far, the only thing I've seen you say is:
Originally posted by dadudemon
!!!>Obviously<!!!, Romney was the far better choice for the GOP presidential candidate as he's far from Palin: he's better spoken, has better economic policies, is not an idiot, and looks like a president, not a PTA member.
You think he's better than Palin and Obama, but won't tell us why you think he would have been a better choice. So, put up. Tell us what the hell you mean.
Originally posted by dadudemon
That's simply not the case. But, I'll take this post to be an indirect confession of "troll-hood."
Everything I've said you've taken as a confession of "troll-hood", why would my previous post be any different? It's not trolling to point out that you have been in my shit since the first time I found myself in the same conversation with you.
Originally posted by dadudemon
1. I never said I hated you.
2. Posted one wiki link (out of a total of 3 links) that listed out Romney's political positions...but posted a much larger one that included his voting record.
3. I have indicated, clearly, that I've thought about the political positions.
4. No matter what I post, no matter how correct it is and no matter how well thought out it is, you will find a reason to pretend there is something wrong because you're a troll. You do not deserve my opinions. However, if you really are that interested, you can find my of my opinions scattered throughout the forum and logically conclude, on your own, what exactly my political opinions are and how they sync up with Romney's positions. Go ahead: if you REALLY want to troll me that bad, you can do it.
5. Start insulting? Odd, as I never insulted you once.
1 Not literally, no. But it's apparent you're scared of me for some imaginary reason. I've seen your posts all over this site and you're excesively paranoid about trolls and socks and you cast anyone who disagrees with you as one. That seems a lot like hate to me.
2 again, wiki link all you want, or don't. My point remains a valid one. You make a statement, toss out a broad and general link to a site with massive amounts of information, and then say "See? Look how well-reasoned and insightful and intelligent my response was! What don't you get about it?" Well, I don't get anything from it, because you don't say anything, just post a lot of information to make yourself seem as though you've put any thought into your response.
3 I have just pointed out how you clearly HAVE NOT. If you had, you'd have something to say in your own words, rather than just posting links and claiming it was an intricate answer to a political question.
4 Then, by this definition, you are trolling me. Your paranoia seems to validate this sort of response to everyone on this site that isn't you.
5 yes, insulting. You've called me a troll in every response you've had to something I've said. You seem to just be pissed because you called me one a week ago in defense of Zeal, and that turned out to be a waste of time.
Originally posted by skekUng
yeah? And they are? one wiki link is not my point. My point is that you make a statement, toss out very broad links to substantiate those statements and say "See! Look, I told everyone so." So far, the only thing I've seen you say is:.
Broad links? They were very specific to Romney. 😬
Originally posted by skekUng
You think he's better than Palin and Obama, but won't tell us why you think he would have been a better choice. So, put up. Tell us what the hell you mean.
I'll give you a hint:
Do some google searching.
Compare Romney's economic stances against Obama's. See where they differ. There's your answer. I'm not going to do your thinking for you. You should come into this thread knowing more than nothing if you wish to discuss anything.
But we both know you're a sock troll just trolling.
In this community, I can say something like, "I like Romney's economic polices over Obama's" and we are more than intelligent and informed enough to understand exactly what that means. I will not waste my time and other members' time by treating them like highschool students and educating them on policies that they themselves already know and may even know them better than I do.
Originally posted by skekUng
Everything I've said you've taken as a confession of "troll-hood", why would my previous post be any different? It's not trolling to point out that you have been in my shit since the first time I found myself in the same conversation with you.
No, not everything you've said. You don't want to get banned before you've had your sick fun, right? 😬
It is trolling to troll from the very beginning of your membership, though.
Originally posted by skekUng
1 Not literally, no. But it's apparent you're scared of me for some imaginary reason. I've seen your posts all over this site and you're excesively paranoid about trolls and socks and you cast anyone who disagrees with you as one. That seems a lot like hate to me.
I have been wrong how many times? 😐
Also, why are you not banned, yet, for being a sock troll? This point here should be obvious that you are a sock troll.
Originally posted by skekUng
2 again, wiki link all you want, or don't. My point remains a valid one. You make a statement, toss out a broad and general link to a site with massive amounts of information, and then say "See? Look how well-reasoned and insightful and intelligent my response was! What don't you get about it?" Well, I don't get anything from it, because you don't say anything, just post a lot of information to make yourself seem as though you've put any thought into your response.
But that's not what I said or even remotely implied. 🙂
Why do you want to know SPECIFICALLY from me, though? Do you see why you're being too obvious as a troll? Also, I did answer your questions, already.
Originally posted by skekUng
3 I have just pointed out how you clearly HAVE NOT. If you had, you'd have something to say in your own words, rather than just posting links and claiming it was an intricate answer to a political question.
You have to do better than a "nuh uhhhh!"
And I never claimed it to be an intricate answer. 🙂
Originally posted by skekUng
4 Then, by this definition, you are trolling me. Your paranoia seems to validate this sort of response to everyone on this site that isn't you.
Aha! But, you are a little bit late to try the old sock troll tactic of: "Accuse valid members of trolling to get them in trouble."
Originally posted by skekUng
5 yes, insulting. You've called me a troll in every response you've had to something I've said. You seem to just be pissed because you called me one a week ago in defense of Zeal, and that turned out to be a waste of time.
I have not called you a troll in every single response. 😐
However, you are a sock troll and you've indirectly admitted to it.
Answer this: Are you Lord Sorgo's sock? If you are, I still don't hate you, I just think you're a sad person.
If not, are you a sock troll? If you are, I still don't hate you, but you need to get a life.
I will not post on anything I've commented on, above, anymore.
Stay on topic. If I refuse to answer your troll questions, feel free to PM me for an "intricate" answer, if I refuse.
I agree with portions of Romney's social policies, as well. I find them superior to Palin's stifling stances. Palin IS a moron but definitely has some skills at wooing the public. Part of the problem is people like how much of a moron she is but they fail to realize that the system was setup so that laymen could elect experts to properly represent their views in congress or in executive offices.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Broad links? They were very specific to Romney. 😬
Yeah, they were broad links on Mr. Romney's career. If you asked me what I agreed with President Obama about, and I handed you his autobiography, then claimed to have even come close to explaining why I agreed with him, much less which of the things in that 400 page book I agreed with, you would be no closer to having any idea what the hell I was talking about than before.
Originally posted by dadudemon
I'll give you a hint:This is my problem--->[Do some google searching]<---with your tactic
Compare Romney's economic stances against Obama's. See where they differ. There's your answer. I'm not going to do your thinking for you. You should come into this thread knowing more than nothing if you wish to discuss anything.
See, you're being lazy and passing off your answers as though they're brilliant, insightful and well-reasoned. But, what your answers really amount to is claiming victory in what ever conversational contest you think you're having, and then telling the other person(people) to look up your answers for you. You want us to do the foot work for yourargument, for you. That's not how a conversation works. You say you like Romney's economic policies, someone asks why and you tell them to look them up. That's not a conversation or an argument, thats you making an unfounded and unproven statement and putting the burden of proof on everyone to whom you made the statement.
Originally posted by dadudemon
In this community, I can say something like, "I like Romney's economic polices over Obama's" and we are more than intelligent and informed enough to understand exactly what that means. I will not waste my time and other members' time by treating them like highschool students and educating them on policies that they themselves already know and may even know them better than I do.
Yeah, well in the short time I've been here, I've read at least two members say that it was up to the person making the statement to prove it. One of those two members was someone you attempted to defend from me, but didn't need you to rescue them from anything.
Originally posted by dadudemon
No, not everything you've said. You don't want to get banned before you've had your sick fun, right? 😬It is trolling to troll from the very beginning of your membership, though.
I have been wrong how many times? 😐
Also, why are you not banned, yet, for being a sock troll? This point here should be obvious that you are a sock troll.
But that's not what I said or even remotely implied. 🙂
Why do you want to know SPECIFICALLY from me, though? Do you see why you're being too obvious as a troll? Also, I did answer your questions, already.
You have to do better than a "nuh uhhhh!"
And I never claimed it to be an intricate answer. 🙂
Aha! But, you are a little bit late to try the old sock troll tactic of: "Accuse valid members of trolling to get them in trouble."
I have not called you a troll in every single response. 😐
However, you are a sock troll and you've indirectly admitted to it.
Answer this: Are you Lord Sorgo's sock? If you are, I still don't hate you, I just think you're a sad person.
If not, are you a sock troll? If you are, I still don't hate you, but you need to get a life.
I will not post on anything I've commented on, above, anymore.
Stay on topic. If I refuse to answer your troll questions, feel free to PM me for an "intricate" answer, if I refuse.
I agree with portions of Romney's social policies, as well. I find them superior to Palin's stifling stances. Palin IS a moron but definitely has some skills at wooing the public. Part of the problem is people like how much of a moron she is but they fail to realize that the system was setup so that laymen could elect experts to properly represent their views in congress or in executive offices.
Direct answer: No, I'm not Lord Sargo. I'm not any of the dozen members who have been banned in the last two days, either. I'm asking you to provide specific examples, because you don't provide any. Of the dozens of older members here that I had dealings and conversations with, you're the only one that has decided to dodge questions and provide no substantiating evidence, all while insulting me and accusing me of finding you interesting enough to e-stalk. You strike me as arrogant enough to actually believe that once you joined, no one else need apply because this site found the answer to all it's member dreams.
Which social policies do you agree with, the most? Maybe just one? Or two. Illustrate that you know ANYthing about what you're saying. No links, just a straight forward answer to "With which of Mitt Romney's social policies do you agree?"
I agree Palin isn't that bright, but that's what makes her most loved by the largely undereducated and uninterested population of this country. I'm fairly certain there are people out there that think the chick from dancing with the stars might run for president.
Originally posted by skekUng
...A bunch of trolling...
yawn
Didn't I tell you I wouldn't address your silly attempts at trolling me?
Originally posted by skekUng
Which social policies do you agree with, the most? Maybe just one? Or two. Illustrate that you know ANYthing about what you're saying. No links, just a straight forward answer to "With which of Mitt Romney's social policies do you agree?"
I will not tell you, here, because you want to troll.
If you want to know, PM me and I'll give you some of the things I like about his social policies.
Originally posted by skekUng
I agree Palin isn't that bright, but that's what makes her most loved by the largely undereducated and uninterested population of this country. I'm fairly certain there are people out there that think the chick from dancing with the stars might run for president.
They are definitely not apathetic: their ignorance is certainly active and they are getting more and more active and organized. Sources: my own observations of the Tea Party movement.
Originally posted by dadudemon
yawn
Exactly, your arguments are lazy.
Originally posted by dadudemon
They are definitely not apathetic: their ignorance is certainly active and they are getting more and more active and organized. Sources: my own observations of the Tea Party movement.
I haven't asked for any sources. I've asked for quite the opposite, actually. What I've asked for are details regarding your position that Mr. Romney would have made a better President than both Mrs. Palin and President Obama. Something in your own words, not copy and pasted links that assume other people are going to research your opinion for you.
Originally posted by skekUng
Exactly, your arguments are lazy.
K.
Originally posted by skekUng
I haven't asked for any sources. I've asked for quite the opposite, actually. What I've asked for are details regarding your position that Mr. Romney would have made a better President than both Mrs. Palin and President Obama. Something in your own words, not copy and pasted links that assume other people are going to research your opinion for you.
Unrelated and unneeded.
You missed the point entirely.
Can you stop trolling for 2 seconds to have a civil conversation?
Originally posted by dadudemon
K.
I'm glad we agree on something.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Unrelated and unneeded.You missed the point entirely.
Can you stop trolling for 2 seconds to have a civil conversation?
I've only been calling for a civil conversation since you first decided to attack 'the new guy' for daring to address an established member. You do not want a civil conversation, though. You want me to do your research for you. That is not a civil conversation. See, when you provide no information that establishes your position (other than vague statements of support for a concept you refuse to define yourself) it makes it that much easier for you to claim that you're being trolled and that you're never wrong. The very first thing you said to me was that I was too new to have my points addressed, now you want me to have a conversation with you in PM for the sake of what? So you can hurl even more obtuse and hateful accusations with the benefit of none of the moderators seeing them? The PM button works both ways. If you have something civil to say to me for the first time since you decided to address me, then feel free to send them on their way. Otherwise, tell us which of Mr. Romney's social and economic policies would have made him a better President than Mrs Palin and President Obama.