Originally posted by skekUngalright, fair enough, after some googling it looks like he is a racist
If you've just "heard" what you're talking about, then you don't really know enough about it. Read the papers in question, consider the position his kid has when it comes to privte businesses waiting on gays or coloureds, or just anyone they don't like, compare it to the social progress of the country as a whole, and get back to us.
guess i still have nader?
Originally posted by Ushgarak
Alright, skekUng, no need to make it this personal with dadude. It's easy enough to turn a thread into a argument flame fest but I'd much prefer it if you did not.
I simplydon't understand why you tolerate a person who treats this site like it belongs to him. From the moment I joined this site, he's called me a troll sock, and then supported it by tossing old members in my face. Which is more sad; that I've figured out how he operates or that he sees a threat in every new member that doesn't kowtow to his gravitas? Just because he's been here longer doesn't mean he's right. In fact, I've noticed he has no real opinion, short of feeling threatened. Do you?
Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
No one takes you seriously because you throw ad hominem around in your posts like it's going out of style, and you talk like a jackass. "I know I am. -flex-"Just pointing out the elephant in the room.
Then point out what you're talking about, and we'll see if you know what you're talking about.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Regardless, instead of spending an hour wasting my time addressing your lengthy posts, I'll address this post (it's easier.)
I'm not suprised you won't take the time to respond to the on-topic accusations. It's always easier to say that everyone agrees with you, with posts no less, that ignore the position often taken by other supporters of Mr. Paul, that his message is too pure for popular support and ignoring just eaxctly how many people have also fallen for the dupe. You still ignore how naive Mr. Pauls position is on so many things, how naive and retroactive and counter-beneficial. You keep bring up the constitution he professes to understand so well, but ignore the intent of the document, it's authors and the reality of the world we all enjoy now. We're all in favor of streamlining the government, but not at the expense of the country in which we all live & thrive. Mr. Paul's understanding of the founding fathers and the documents they wrote is willfully ignorant, his espousing of Mr. Washington's foreign policy is naive and unrealistic considering the people who support his message and how they profess it -in this day and age-, and his assumption that getting rid of government while trying to further the ability of private business and individual ingenuity to progress -all the time ignoring that the government is and has been an extension of private business since the 1970s- is just factually ignorant and childish. If you or others in this thread feel I've insulted you by calling his supporters dipshits, then perhaps you should extend to yourself the same scrutiny you heap upon others when they dare to support another candidate (or all of them, because it's "easier"😉 or calling out your own. But you don't do that, do you? You just accuse others of being socks, provide no substantiation for on-topic claims or just flat out ignore the accusations leveled against your position through distraction. Even if I were this internet boogy man you need me to be everytime you can't defend your point, the points raised and claims made are still there for your response and rebuke. But you don't; you go instantly to socks and trolls and who else agrees with you and how else you can distract from backing up a damn thing you claim.
Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
I'm pretty sure that in elementary school, even before you learn adding and subtracting, you're taught that "he started it" is not a valid excuse for anything. 😐
I'm not the one who called for an end to the entire debate. Defend Mr. Paul if you can, not Mr. Dadude. Take the conversation back on track and don't be middle school, then. If you can't, then you have no point other than spitting in the wind.
Originally posted by skekUngDo what?
Do it, then.
Originally posted by skekUng
I'm not the one who called for an end to the entire debate. Defend Mr. Paul if you can, not Mr. Dadude. Take the conversation back on track and don't be middle school, then. If you can't, then you have no point other than spitting in the wind.
Who are you a sock of? Your posts sound so familiar. Sorgo..? No... I don't think it's sorgo. I could be wrong, though.
Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
Who are you a sock of? Your posts sound so familiar. Sorgo..? No... I don't think it's sorgo. I could be wrong, though.
It's not Sorgo. I asked him, today, on Facebook and he said it was not him.
Originally posted by skekUng
I'm not suprised you won't take the time to respond to the on-topic accusations. It's always easier to say that everyone agrees with you, with posts no less, that ignore the position often taken by other supporters of Mr. Paul, that his message is too pure for popular support and ignoring just eaxctly how many people have also fallen for the dupe. You still ignore how naive Mr. Pauls position is on so many things, how naive and retroactive and counter-beneficial. You keep bring up the constitution he professes to understand so well, but ignore the intent of the document, it's authors and the reality of the world we all enjoy now. We're all in favor of streamlining the government, but not at the expense of the country in which we all live & thrive. Mr. Paul's understanding of the founding fathers and the documents they wrote is willfully ignorant, his espousing of Mr. Washington's foreign policy is naive and unrealistic considering the people who support his message and how they profess it -in this day and age-, and his assumption that getting rid of government while trying to further the ability of private business and individual ingenuity to progress -all the time ignoring that the government is and has been an extension of private business since the 1970s- is just factually ignorant and childish. If you or others in this thread feel I've insulted you by calling his supporters dipshits, then perhaps you should extend to yourself the same scrutiny you heap upon others when they dare to support another candidate (or all of them, because it's "easier"😉 or calling out your own. But you don't do that, do you? You just accuse others of being socks, provide no substantiation for on-topic claims or just flat out ignore the accusations leveled against your position through distraction. Even if I were this internet boogy man you need me to be everytime you can't defend your point, the points raised and claims made are still there for your response and rebuke. But you don't; you go instantly to socks and trolls and who else agrees with you and how else you can distract from backing up a damn thing you claim.
You've convinced me that Ron Paul is a horrible person and his ideas are just terrible. Honestly, is that satisfactory enough to you?
Originally posted by dadudemon
[B]It's not Sorgo. I asked him, today, on Facebook and he said it was not him.
So you were thinking the same thing?
You've convinced me that Ron Paul is a horrible person and his ideas are just terrible. Honestly, is that satisfactory enough to you?
He wants you to kneel. Kneel before skekUng.
Originally posted by dadudemon
So why single me out and say I'm naive when my opinion is EXACTLY the same as Robtard's on Ron Paul? Obviously, your points were largely ignored (if read at all) an no one was "enlightened" to what a "poor choice" he would be.
Because he couldn't handle the sheer magnitude of Robtard's eBadassery. /fact
Robtard can power himself up to ePower-level of over 50,000,000. /fact
Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
Do what?Who are you a sock of? Your posts sound so familiar. Sorgo..? No... I don't think it's sorgo. I could be wrong, though.
Point out where I'm wrong and Mr. Paul is right. So much talk on forums about trolls and socks; it just comes across as distraction from the topic and inability to substantiate.
So why single me out and say I'm naive when my opinion is EXACTLY the same as Robtard's on Ron Paul? Obviously, your points were largely ignored (if read at all) an no one was "enlightened" to what a "poor choice" he would be.
Then you didn't see Mr. Tard's opinon that the platitudes so many of his followrs gobble up as naive. Perhaps Mr. Tard just wasn't willing to argue for someone he really has muddled feeling about? I can't speak for Mr. Tard. I simply know his point came across to me as "why not? what can it hurt? at the very least it will shut up people who adore him, once he accomplishes nothing.". Was that your point, Mr. Dadude? If so, then you've been babbling an awful lot about nothing. Or, perhaps that's why you suddenly change the topic from the conversation to socks and trolls and how paranoid you are when any new member dares to question your opinions. You aren't interested in any conversation on this website, only bringing up former members any time you can't defend your position in a effort to get anyone who disagrees with you banned. Belly up to the bar, big man. Have a conversation; a real one that you profess Ron Paul would respect, not some "I've been here longer, I don't get questioned!" crap. Let's talk about Ron Paul's positions, not your childish inability to handle anyone disagreeing with you. Or Mr. Tard's. Or anyone else, for that matter. You quote a lot of people you say disagree with me, but most of them posted before I did in this thread.
Originally posted by skekUng
I simplydon't understand why you tolerate a person who treats this site like it belongs to him. From the moment I joined this site, he's called me a troll sock, and then supported it by tossing old members in my face. Which is more sad; that I've figured out how he operates or that he sees a threat in every new member that doesn't kowtow to his gravitas? Just because he's been here longer doesn't mean he's right. In fact, I've noticed he has no real opinion, short of feeling threatened. Do you?
Regardless, you've put yourself in the worse position. If you want him to be seen as the bigger problem, then turn down your hostile behaviour.
I have no intention of arguing the matter with you.