Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Debate time

Posted 1 year ago on Nov. 2, 2012, 3:20 p.m. EST by DanielBarton (1345)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

To VQ

You wanted to debate so lets debate

So we get rid of all the right wingers now what happens to this nation?

lets make it an educated one with no insults no calling of names. Also lets spell the names of the parties correctly and no slander. If a source is called for the source must be provided

edit also any issue about OWS as a whole you want to debate thats fine too

96 Comments

96 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 4 points by engineer4 (362) 1 year ago

DB. I have tried to debate VQ many times but he reacts instead of discussing. And if one presents any type of opposing view, it quickly produces accusations of being a repub, right wing, anti Obama, a bush boy, a Romney boy, etc. besides, I believe he is more than one person. Too many different writing styles, plus his responses are as of it is the first time debating a particular topic with you. He is incapable of standing in another's shoes to even try to comprehend a differing view. Even DKA got into it with him the other day. Good luck.

[-] 2 points by DanielBarton (1345) 1 year ago

VQ response

i am not elf, do not really know elf. Just like Carlin.

I will NOT start a new post 'cause you wish it! if you choose to you may find one of my old posts add an honest, respectful, comment that is based in facts and I may answer you.

In regardsto your rules: I reject any rules you suggest, because you have only been dishonest and abusive. I will discuss as I always have, honestly, respectfully, based on facts. My comments/opinions do not require back up/proof.

Sorry. And you have no credibility with me so any "back up" you might offer will not be considered honest.

And if you choose to resort to the immature, useless insults you usually do, that is your choice. I will handle that as always.

Peace, Good luck in all your good efforts

here are his rules

[-] 1 points by engineer4 (362) 1 year ago

He has no concept of compromise or even good discourse. And the journey continues.........

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 1 year ago

i thought they were basic debate rules but he is only in for self interest of bashing republicans while i have to defend them even though i dont want to

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

I appreciate compromise. What compromise are you proposing?

[-] 3 points by engineer4 (362) 1 year ago

I have proposed many things with you. I have presented many opinions and points, sometimes offering a different view in order to discuss, even middle ground ideas. But you usually shout " your boy bush" or Romney boy or some other rhetoric about anti obama partisan, etc. etc. how about some compromising from you? Is it even possible? do you see why many of the posters here are not interested in your unwillingness to discuss without attacking or branding another's opinion? As I have said to you many times, you do not listen very well. It is the first step in understanding, discussion and compromising. Try stopping the reacting and do some contemplating before responding please.

[-] -2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Your criticisms of me are unfounded. I listen very well. I'm willing to consider any compromise. If I have suggested a repub partisan slant on your part that is my opinion.

I certainly don't become civil and disrespectful as most of my critics do.

And obviously I'm not yelling (this is a virtual txt based forum, yelling would be all caps, I refrain from that)

So I reject your accusation that I have been uncompromising when you have presented many opinions & points.

If you feel for it you could offer evidence, I will hear you out. Or not, makes no difference to me.

As it is you are just spewing personal attacks without evidence instead of discussing real issues.

[-] 2 points by engineer4 (362) 1 year ago

Not a personal attack, just reality. The evidence is all over this forum and your written words, and by the sheer number of people that have said the same thing. Time to look in the mirror VQ. And by the way, one does not have to use caps to yell.

[-] -2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

I ain't yellin'. I Always listen and converse respectfully. I reject you and your friends unfounded accusations.

If you feel for it you could offer evidence, I will hear you out. Or not, makes no difference to me.

As it is you are just spewing personal attacks without evidence instead of discussing real issues.

[-] 3 points by engineer4 (362) 1 year ago

"my friends".?? Your reply is so blatantly false, it's humorous. The evidence is within this entire ows forum. You know it, I know it and all who read your responses know it. I discuss issues. You react and spout same tired responses. Besides, you lost your integrity when you were caught bybthe mods and had to wear the "cone of shame" mantle for a while. So next question: why are you afraid to discuss issues with DB? All he asked for was some commonly accepted rules for a quality discussion. Yet you rejected this. Why is that? Why don't you challenge him then? You claim to listen and discuss real issues. Here is your chance. The ball is in your court!

[-] 2 points by DanielBarton (1345) 1 year ago

he will never play ball with me you saw the rules he thinks his opinions are greater than the facts that i bring to the table. The fact is he is scared that a 21 year old engineering student is more mature and smarter than he is. I picked basic debate rules for a reason to be fair and balanced

[-] 1 points by engineer4 (362) 1 year ago

I gave him a challenge. See below

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 1 year ago

good all people should be challenged and all ideas should be challenged its the only way to find the good ones. I doubt he will respond to you in a serious matter but he may. Challenge him on real subjects that are far away from politics

i did debate him on nuclear energy and he said to agree to disagree http://occupywallst.org/forum/this-is-repubs-trying-to-keep-al-qeada-their-war-o/#comment-870649

its clear that he is not knowledgeable are certian subjects and that is why he stays to his opinions and not facts

[-] -2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

I already told him I wuold never submit to rules dictated by someone who has been dishonest and abusive. I gave him a fair opportunity to discuss specific issues and we did to some exrent. He doesn't seem to really be interested.

In any event the little bit we did showed we disagree.

What about you. Wanna try your hand at debating me?

I didn't think so!

[-] 2 points by engineer4 (362) 1 year ago

We have debated many times....or have again you not listened? And you have responded at times with the usual political rhetoric instead of real debate. We have at times agreed and disagreed, but I have never been partisan where you label and write your standard replies. Have not seen much originality from you. Or any workable proposals, just a bunch of rhetoric. Any disagreement is met with labels of "your boy bush" or " your boy Romney" when no names or parties have ever been mentioned. Can you ever leave the political garbage out of any of your conversations? So then, here is a challenge: set up some rules for discussion and let's see if there can be some agreement....are you serious enough? Are you willing to have some rules of debate? Start a new thread with your rules proposals.

[-] -1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

The rules are set! not by me. Decent people have.

I reject your accusations that I have done anything wrong. I will not put politics aside, because I know that ALL our problems are rooted in pro 1% conservative policies.

So I will debate anyone, anytime based on the rules of decent discussion.

I won't submit to any special rules.

[-] 3 points by engineer4 (362) 1 year ago

LOL. you really just do not get it. It is not a question of right or wrong. You are so stuck inside your little world of self opinion that you will never learn and grow through good discourse. Not all problems are rooted in conservative policies. That is where you need to get a grip on the real world and not your own little sphere. You continue to reject any differing opinion without consideration by labeling it as repub or conservative, etc. must be quite the miserable life you have. I pity you.

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

You should not pity me. I am very happy, satisfied and comfortable.

"not a question of right and wrong"? Whaaaaat?? So wrong is ok with you. Duh! Wrong is not ok with me genius. LMFAO

"not all problems rooted in conservative policies"? NAME ONE!!

Perhaps you should redirect your energize away from criticizing me personally ("stuck inside your little world of self opinion" "You need to get a grip on the real world", "You continue to reject any differing opinion") and focus on specific issues you claim to be most interested in.

I think me focus on the conservative policy roots of all our problems is what bothers you.

That is a worthy debate, If we can avoid the personal attacks we might get somewhere.

Today I encourage you and everyone to reject the right wing extremist conservatives who have created all our problems.

Elect PROGRESSIVES!!

[-] 3 points by gsw (2687) 1 year ago

What if no progressive runs. What if our choice is right or ultra right.

The 1 percent chooses who are the top 2 in each corporate party.

How will we get progressive except by mere chance.

Is Obama really progressive. He seems more conservative than progressive.

I know he is better than Romney, but Obama isn't progressive. He hasn't really helped American workers, or fought for universal health.

We need to allow for true progressives to be in the mix. The corporate hold won't allow that.

[-] 2 points by DanielBarton (1345) 1 year ago

im not interested in defending party politics i am interested in discussing real issues

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

"The issues" always have at least 2 approaches.

The political spectrum has not been recsinded! We can take the right wing approach (conservative = "you're on your own") Or the left wing approach (Progressive = "we're in this together")

I don't have to talk about the 2 parties. The Greens have a great left wing progressive approach/solutions, but I don't need to discuss the Greens or any party.

But I will not pretend that the political spectrum doesn't exist, and I will not pretend that Conservative policies haven't screwed everything up.

So yeah real issues and the solutions (progressive) that will benefit the 99%.

[-] 2 points by DanielBarton (1345) 1 year ago

There is infinite approaches to every problem not just two, dont be so simple minded

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

If you can present an issue I can describe a progressive position if you like?

I'll start'

Energy.

I believe a progressive would support 21st century clean renewable green tech (solar, wind, geo thermal, algea,) And is against dirty 19th century fossil fuel tech. A progressive supports taking all the fossil fuel subsidies and use them on greentech industry/jobs. That's Progress!

I believe conservatives in America support the opposite.

What do you think Danny?

Peace, Wanna try another issue? Go ahead you do one now.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

I think perhaps you don't understand.

I don't have to talk about parties.

Can you talk about issues, and solutions without being so defensive when conservative policies are identified as the problem.

You know lotsa parties have conservative members. Was a time the dems were the conservative party. We only recently saw a couple of conservative blue dog dems get defeated. And I think we have a pro life dem running for senate in Missouri.

So don't sweat it. The repubs ain't the only conservatives. Dems are screwed up to!

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 1 year ago

what is progressive to you its this vague thing that you seem to have in your mind and i have yet to see it. So describe the perfect progressive what attributes does this person have

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

I'm talking about issues. About our problems, About the roots (which is required to resolve).

I don't need to discuss the parties. But I must talk about the different approaches.

There are approaches based on "you're on your own" and approaches based on "we're in this together" I support the solutions that conform to the "we're in this together" approach.

No parties. Just fundamental approach theory. Where do you stand in ragrads to taxes.? Shared burden (we're in this together) or keep the 1% unfairly protected (you're on your own)?

No parties. Issues and solutions.

[-] 0 points by DanielBarton (1345) 1 year ago

ok you're not understanding this at all

good luck to you with all of your efforts

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

I said "at least 2." are you ignoring my statement so you can inaccurately personally attack me ("simple minded")

So nothing else in response to my statement? Just an innacurate insult?

LOL.

Political spectrum rescinded?

Progressive solutions to resolve conservative policy catastrophe?

I guess you agree with everything else.!

Very good. We're makin progress.

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 1 year ago

Yes but you focus on two with the rest of your statement so i followed suit,No insult was there.

You just want to talk about parties i want to talk about problems not politics that may or may not get us our solution

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 1 year ago

Farming you believe that all humans should live in cities and the rest of the land should be used as farm land elaborate on this plan.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Well I believe people BELONG in cities. Suburbs were built as car centric cultures. We should admit their failure and bulldoze them.

Turn that land into farms.that serve the nearby cities. Definitely get everyone off the coast for sure (climate change/sea rise y'know)

Skyscraper tech is such that we can absorb massive numbers of suburbanites into the city which is served by mass transit.

"It's the only way to be sure"

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 1 year ago

ok but would we force people to live in all cities. i love cities but city life is not for me it isn't where i wouldn't want to raise a family there i want to raise one like how i was raised. Spending my time in parks camping hunting and fishing. Some of my best memories and thoughts were of me just sitting at the lake house and watching the sunset.

Sorry but there is somethings that cities give that i love but i dont see people like me moving back into them.

also dont need to worry about the water it wouldn't affect you as much as you think it would.

So to get everyone into cities would this just to increase farm production and decrease oil consumption

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

It would certainly improve farm prod/pollution creation. But also it would create more tolerant people!

Living in the city means learning to live amongst different nationalities. All on top of each other. It is too easy to create separate communities outside the city and exclude certain groups.

But I think it is wrong to force people into the cities.

We should accept the suburb/rural life is cleaner, quieter, less crowded, has more land for your money, safer & so better.

Once we acknowledge that it is an easy step to say you must pay a premium (tax) for all those benefits. In fact we already say that for those who live on the coast in private beach houses for instance. Really it isn't new. I propose only that it be extended beyonf justthe most exclusive suburban/rural homes.

We can also incentivize a migration to the cities with housing preferences, tax breaks, etc.

I suppose it will not be in our life times. But it is coming. tLogically we use less land/resources in small footprint skyscrapers.

Peace

[-] 1 points by stevebol (1269) from Milwaukee, WI 1 year ago

This is a good observation about suburban/rural life but why incentivize movement to cities? This leads to the issue of gentrification. I believe OWS's handling or mishandling of this is what will finally put OWS on the map because they are active in areas where gentrification can occur.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Gentrification is not a new problem. But the problem isn't the gentry moving in. It is the poor being displaced. We must have neighborhoods that have a mix of income levels.

Poor neighborhoods isolated from middle/upper income people/lifstyles is most damaging to the poor. It leads to poor govt svcs, fresh food islands, poor police protection etc.

So we must live together. It is the best way to lift people out of poverty.

[-] 1 points by stevebol (1269) from Milwaukee, WI 1 year ago

OWS is in a position to be mediators and to make sure that the gentry moving in benefits everyone.

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

no they ain't. They can weigh in, give an opinion, help those need in small ways. But OWS is NOT in a position to "make sure" of anything.

WE the people can make change if we come together in the street and fight for change that benefits the 99%.

OWS can only help us. But WE must do it.

[-] 1 points by stevebol (1269) from Milwaukee, WI 1 year ago

"We can also incentivize a migration to the cities with housing preferences, tax breaks, etc."

Why do this? This sounds like gov sponsored gentrification. Care to explain this?

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

It is simply a suggestion. Doesn't have to hurt existing residence by displacing them.

We must ALL live together. All income levels. No separate ghettos.

Convincing people to migrate to the city with tax incentives would serve all peoples. An investment ifyou will.

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 1 year ago

So your idea is more of a social one than anything?

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

I didn't say that. There is a social benefit, an environmental benefit, a financial benefit, a agricultural benefit. And others.

It's good all around.

[-] 0 points by DanielBarton (1345) 1 year ago

hey you finally posted in my forum

[-] 2 points by DanielBarton (1345) 1 year ago

i know he refuses to post in this forum

He may not be more than one person but he does seem to forget everything about you before that post. I argued with him several times over the same issue then i referenced it back to one of my other post and he didn't really seem to know how to respond to it.

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

I was looking forward to this.

So we get rid of all the right wingers now what happens to this nation?

You wind up with HuffPo? A gazzilion attempts to over simplify major issues into 2 1/2 paragraphs that do not do justice to any given situation or issue?

Let's not get rid of all of the right wingers. Let's get rid of the extremists. They talk so loudly that any rational points are muffled.

[-] 2 points by DanielBarton (1345) 1 year ago

And thats what i want i think America is to different and can not be one party

I do wish there was less extremism since i know most of this country is moderate on most major issues

[-] 0 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

We are different. However, there are some things as a society that we should recognize. There are groups that do not benefit society and should be exposed. Like these people here

that have a devestating impact on people like this

specifically for this:

Child care is big business in Indiana. Through the end of July, taxpayers paid out more than $131 million in child care subsidies to licensed centers, homes and faith-based ministries. More than 500 registered ministries are authorized to accept the funds, which can serve as incentive to accept more children than can be safely accommodated.link

So, am I to take this as you are willing to do this? I mean, we can keep it all even-Steven if that makes it easier to get it done.

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 1 year ago

I agree with everything in this post

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

Really? How do we classify these folks ?

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 1 year ago

yes really i may be somewhat conservative but it doesn't mean i"m uncompassionate

on the death of the child we can say that there should be regulations that are imposed to protect their lives since they can not protect it themselves. IM going to also look as this is what happens when we have a free market with out some type of regulation. The parent trusted the church in this case that the child was protected but the child wasnt. So we can see a good form and rule changes.

They are classified as conservative add group im confuse on what you are trying to ask.

[-] 1 points by BetsyRoss (-744) 1 year ago

One more thing you and I agree on. Extremists on BOTH sides are killing the possibility of compromise and rational agreement.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

You could have had that agreement back in December/January of last year. I stated this many times. Pull too far to the right, you force the push of the left. You know this is true. 11-12 months of wasted time.

[-] 0 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

I'm often guilty of soundbyting.

On this issue, I actually don't believe there are any extremists represented here.

Despite many differing views, and the occasional airing of angst, has there been mention of lynchings, looting, or taking down anyone with weapons?

Not that I can possibly read every post, and there was this one time, at band camp, etc.

[-] 0 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

Ya, we have periodic calls for civil war and militias and threats of that nature. I suspect that they are intentionally placed to stir up lots o' crap instead of having any real meaning. Nonetheless, the pen is mightier than the sword.

Soundbyting as a way of life is bad. You are old enough to know that it's fine but does not contain all there is to know about a subject or issue. You can spend hours reading news but still come up short if it is all reduced to soundbytes. I think that the above could have been phrased better-I meant something like-back in the day we read books. I'm just going to get some coffee.

John Paul Stevens was a conservative. The last conservative. Extremism is the new normal? Once you start looking at posts that are littered with "this is a Christian nation" or those that firmly believe that they have a right to interfere in someone's personal life, or those that are determined to choose profit over people 100% of the time, we have extremism. It goes the opposite way as well. I have come across posing as "liberal" but really it's about the cash.

[-] 1 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

It is about the cash. And that really sucks the big one.

That makes the whole game about consumerism, regardless of what flag you wave, or how you part your hair, or why you vote the way you do.

It's easy for me to write about raising chickens and planting pumpkins and pointing panels at the sun, because my child-raising days are behind me.

Not that I'm too old to start again with the Daddy thing, but with the world situation hovering around the grim reality stage of world domination (funny how comics used to dwell on that scenario) I'm not so sure I'd tell my boy to get it happening with making me some grandkids.

This world is not what you see in the glossy magazines, or soundbytes on the teevee. It's dog eat dog. That's the world the oligarchs won't show on their infotainment programs, but that's what the reality is.

There's a savagery in our current mindset, and nobody really wants to acknowledge that.

[-] 0 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

Well, I think that we have gone beyond consumerism into corporatists and non-profits that firmly believe they are entitled to our tax dollars. They want all of the rights and none of the responsibilities. They have a tendency to deflect and terrorize, in a multitude of ways, those with the least power.

It's easy to discuss land ownership and how to get by or alter lifestyles if you have it. However, much of the land here has the rights already sold or is not known to be land worth it. There are folks who do have land and operate the same as you and have children. I say more power to them.

It was never the world shown in glossy magazines and it has always been a dog eat dog world. That hasn't changed over time. That savagery has been in existence. It isn't new. Just buried. And why shouldn't it be? What is on the tv and the adverts on the radio are not meant for most people. They are tailored to a specific class of people.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

my friend says

she hopes other women vote with their vaginas

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 1 year ago

okay

[-] -1 points by Brython (-146) 1 year ago

What exactly is a right winger? Most African Americans are highly religious, are they right wingers? Or are they left wingers? I've often wonder how well either of them would fly with but one wing.

[-] 1 points by freakyfriday (179) 1 year ago

It must be very confusing to be a black in America today. I don't think the embrace leftist values, but all their so called Leaders are lefties and on the down low.

[-] 1 points by Brython (-146) 1 year ago

That's precisely it - the Left holds the reins but African Americas as a whole are actually more right than left on virtually all issues.

[Removed]

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by DanielBarton (1345) 1 year ago

i honestly dont know

[+] -4 points by gnomunny (6638) from St Louis, MO 1 year ago

That would be like trying to slow-dance with a woman in a wheelchair.

[-] -3 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

Insulting the disabled now?

Shame on you. I guess you're just another libe(R)tarian.

[-] 1 points by gnomunny (6638) from St Louis, MO 1 year ago

Leave it up to you, shooz, to completely twist a statement. My mom eventually died from a degenerative neurological disease that left her confined to a wheelchair, virtually a quadraplegic, for the last six or seven years of her life. I helped nurse her 24/7. Fuck you if you think I'd ever make fun of the disabled.

[-] -1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

You're the one who said it, not me.

You're the one who made excuses for saying it, not me.

You're the one who resorted to a "fuck you" to defend it, not me.

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 1 year ago

shooz none of that here

[-] -2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

I'm sorry Dan, but with a comment like that, I just couldn't help myself.

I know far too many disabled people to stand idle on a comment like that.

Perhaps you should have started with hchc's comment to me?

I was being honest and he just continued his usual attack.

But you didn't.

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 1 year ago

i know its a bad comment and should be deleted

i didnt understand the references so i didnt know how to respond but i made this thread not to attack people but to encourage discussion

[-] 2 points by LetsGetReal (1420) from Grants, NM 1 year ago

It really wouldn't be fair to debate him though. It would be like the boys versus the masters in a game of rugby. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8w6Vy3l9Gk4

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 1 year ago

yeah not my fault i read into scientific research

[-] 0 points by freakzilla (-161) from Detroit, MI 1 year ago

If the woman in the wheelchair was a Republican, would you be as mad?

[+] -4 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

I can answer this.

The country and world enters a better place.

There would no longer be a need for wingers at all.

[-] 3 points by DanielBarton (1345) 1 year ago

ok but why

[-] -2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

In a World that is changing in more ways than can be easily enumerated, it is necessary to work in forward thinking ways..

That does not occur in the right wing.

[-] 2 points by DanielBarton (1345) 1 year ago

OK but there is not one style that every country can run with what is good for us may not be good for others.

[-] -1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

Exactly why "winger" thinking needs to go.

I've explained till I'm blue in the face how misconstrued "duopoly" thinking really is.

In fact the reason, as an adult, I've leaned towards "leftist" thinking, is the simple fact that they rarely agree 100% on much of anything. they hash things out.

On the "right", it is all rigid, lockstep thinking.

For an example look at FLAKESnews' reaction to Christie, with Murdock insisting he renew his "contract" with Romney.

[-] 2 points by DanielBarton (1345) 1 year ago

Hmm alright

I think both need to go and no longer represent the people for what we stand for

[-] 1 points by freakzilla (-161) from Detroit, MI 1 year ago

But you've made comments in the past about how blacks who venture away from the Dem party line deserve any harsh treatment they receive. Is that not a support of rigid, lockstep thinking?

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

Feed your Bircher crap to hchc. He believes in those lies and misconstructions.

[-] 2 points by freakzilla (-161) from Detroit, MI 1 year ago

It's a yes or no question. Even you could answer it. Go ahead, I dare you.

[-] -1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

I already answered the question asked by the OP.

You?

Didn't address it at all.

[-] 2 points by freakzilla (-161) from Detroit, MI 1 year ago

Thanks for answering my question, but it is sad that you are a fan of rigid, lockstep thinking.

[-] -1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

Hardly, but one must fight the lockstep bullshit of Ailes, Rove, Murdock, Koch, etc, etc.

You should try it.

It's rewarding.

[-] 1 points by freakzilla (-161) from Detroit, MI 1 year ago

As long as you are not Mia Love or Stacey Dash it's rewarding. Otherwise it just leada to racist attacks.

[-] -1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

Once again.

You've got two, and I've provided many, many more.

Many more, that you have yet to comment on.

Here's a whole site full of your kind of bullshit.

Enjoy............:)

http://www.loonwatch.com/

[-] 2 points by freakzilla (-161) from Detroit, MI 1 year ago

Two you won't condemn. Hmmmmm. I wonder why?

[-] -1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

You shouldn't wonder.

You should know, it's because you haven't answered a single question asked of you, yet you are demanding cuss, about your own demands.

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 1 year ago

John Corzine would absolutely love you!!

[-] 2 points by DanielBarton (1345) 1 year ago

VQ response to me trying to debate him

i am not elf, do not really know elf. Just like Carlin.

I will NOT start a new post 'cause you wish it! if you choose to you may find one of my old posts add an honest, respectful, comment that is based in facts and I may answer you.

In regardsto your rules: I reject any rules you suggest, because you have only been dishonest and abusive. I will discuss as I always have, honestly, respectfully, based on facts. My comments/opinions do not require back up/proof.

Sorry. And you have no credibility with me so any "back up" you might offer will not be considered honest.

And if you choose to resort to the immature, useless insults you usually do, that is your choice. I will handle that as always.

Peace, Good luck in all your good efforts

here are his rules

[-] -2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

David Duke, already loves you.

I've heard the name Corzine before, but have no idea who he is and what he does.

I'll bet you could tell me in detail though.

[-] 1 points by freakzilla (-161) from Detroit, MI 1 year ago

Don't know about Corzine? How is that possible? Democrat, former governor, Obama fundraiser, criminal. Where do you get your news from?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/richardfinger/2012/08/27/mr-jon-corzine-criminal-or-just-plain-old-fashioned-stupid/

[-] -1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

Who's richard finger and why should I believe a single thing he says?

[-] 1 points by freakzilla (-161) from Detroit, MI 1 year ago

Well, if he says something bad about a Democrat, of course you shouldn't believe him. That's obvious. But if you aren't afraid of hearing something that goes against your beliefs, you could google Corzine and read one of the thousands of articles and news reports that dominated the news for weeks last year. Or you could keep your head planted in the sand. Or somewhere else.

[-] -1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

What has any of this to do with David Duke and your love for him?

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

Very good avoid the questions.

Any and all of them, all the while ignoring the OP.

Go puck a rubber.