The thread should be locked when people like dmz post hateful garbage like this. He is contributing nothing other than spreading hate and it makes you wonder what it would take to be banned from here. I have a feeling I already know what the answer is. The lack of people condemning this kind of thing tells me all I need to know. And don't give me thoe standard "we don't dignify such posts with a response" because your silence condones it.
The thread should be locked when people like dmz post hateful garbage like this. He is contributing nothing other than spreading hate and it makes you wonder what it would take to be banned from here. I have a feeling I already know what the answer is. The lack of people condemning this kind of thing tells me all I need to know. And don't give me thoe standard "we don't dignify such posts with a response" because your silence condones it.
Thread shouldn't be locked. There is a nice sticky at the top of the forum mentioning that the people should get temp bans. Some people are obviously being intentionally hateful to get the thread they are hateful in, locked.
Instead their hate should get them a temporary ban, and permanent if they can't get a clue.
The lone stand-out, heroically standing against the slings and arrows of barbarous 'Liberality'!!
how's this for an insult: you are acting like a spoiled pompous child . . . . dragging this thread on and on . . . whining over and over about how a 'backhanded' insult may or may not have happened . . . you are an embarrassment to Conservatives, just as Rall is an embarassment to 'Liberals'
and I will go on about the thread so far, even though THE ONLY THING that you are going to respond to is the 'backhanded insults' . . . (even though I thought they were pretty straight forward)
When you call someone's support for the soldiers mere 'platitudes' what would real support look like?
Is it not support to care about the soldiers well being and the countries' well being at the same time? isn't it support to hope that the duty for which a soldier is sacrificing is one that is worthy of that sacrifice? meaning that it is beneficial for the country and the world and not simply misguided?
As I said in another post -the one about how Wollfowitz didn't even know how many soldiers he had sent to their deaths-: in order to clarify what I mean by IDEOLOGICAL goals SEE THIS THREADoh yeah . . . . pay no attention to those other long winded posts therein besides mine
Quote:
Originally posted by groverat
Every trumptman thread should come with its own designer lock.
I think it is about time.
4. Excessive ad-hominem attacks of forum members will not be tolerated. We understand that things get heated, but it helps to maintain a modicum of respect for the membership. Attack ideas, not people. Be open-minded and try to help foster meaningful discussion (yes, meaningful discussion is possible if everyone respects each other).
And grove, I'll gladly show how this is the second thread of mine in a row you have called for a lock in without contributing a single bit to the discussion. You just come in, declare you hate it, and call for a lock.
I guess you would rather silence that which you cannot debate.
I guess you would rather silence that which you cannot debate.
Why are you focusing on this? Nobody is trying to censor you, the suggestion that the thread be locked was only made because you couched the issue in question in terms almost guaranteed to lead to flames over dialog.
If you do genuinely want debate, why not put your energy into providing a response to the points that people have made above?
Trumptman, we have been trying to find a way around your airtight arguments and, frankly, I don't think there is one. That's why we've been posting all this liberal mumbo-jumbo for months. You are totally right when you point out that there is no real content there. All we've been doing is trying to find a way to stop you from getting the truth out there. We've been PMing eachother for months about it.
So I have to agree with you. dmz needs to get a temp ban for his anti-conservative comments. White men (particularly divorced ones) are the most persecuted group in the US. And, yes, reading policy papers put out by policy makers makes one a conspiracy theorist.
Comments
Originally posted by 7E7
[B]The thread should be locked when people like dmz post hateful garbage like this.
Being that most of his posts are more "reactionary" (err, I mean "conservative") than yours, I think it's safe to say he was trying to be sarcastic.
Originally posted by 7E7
The thread should be locked when people like dmz post hateful garbage like this. He is contributing nothing other than spreading hate and it makes you wonder what it would take to be banned from here. I have a feeling I already know what the answer is. The lack of people condemning this kind of thing tells me all I need to know. And don't give me thoe standard "we don't dignify such posts with a response" because your silence condones it.
Chase your tail.
Originally posted by 7E7
The thread should be locked when people like dmz post hateful garbage like this. He is contributing nothing other than spreading hate and it makes you wonder what it would take to be banned from here. I have a feeling I already know what the answer is. The lack of people condemning this kind of thing tells me all I need to know. And don't give me thoe standard "we don't dignify such posts with a response" because your silence condones it.
Thread shouldn't be locked. There is a nice sticky at the top of the forum mentioning that the people should get temp bans. Some people are obviously being intentionally hateful to get the thread they are hateful in, locked.
Instead their hate should get them a temporary ban, and permanent if they can't get a clue.
Nick
Originally posted by pfflam
Poor Trumpty . . . got his feewings hurt . . . .
playing that victim status again hunh?!
The lone stand-out, heroically standing against the slings and arrows of barbarous 'Liberality'!!
how's this for an insult: you are acting like a spoiled pompous child . . . . dragging this thread on and on . . . whining over and over about how a 'backhanded' insult may or may not have happened . . . you are an embarrassment to Conservatives, just as Rall is an embarassment to 'Liberals'
and I will go on about the thread so far, even though THE ONLY THING that you are going to respond to is the 'backhanded insults' . . . (even though I thought they were pretty straight forward)
When you call someone's support for the soldiers mere 'platitudes' what would real support look like?
Is it not support to care about the soldiers well being and the countries' well being at the same time? isn't it support to hope that the duty for which a soldier is sacrificing is one that is worthy of that sacrifice? meaning that it is beneficial for the country and the world and not simply misguided?
As I said in another post -the one about how Wollfowitz didn't even know how many soldiers he had sent to their deaths-: in order to clarify what I mean by IDEOLOGICAL goals SEE THIS THREAD oh yeah . . . . pay no attention to those other long winded posts therein besides mine
Originally posted by groverat
Every trumptman thread should come with its own designer lock.
I think it is about time.
4. Excessive ad-hominem attacks of forum members will not be tolerated. We understand that things get heated, but it helps to maintain a modicum of respect for the membership. Attack ideas, not people. Be open-minded and try to help foster meaningful discussion (yes, meaningful discussion is possible if everyone respects each other).
And grove, I'll gladly show how this is the second thread of mine in a row you have called for a lock in without contributing a single bit to the discussion. You just come in, declare you hate it, and call for a lock.
I guess you would rather silence that which you cannot debate.
Nick
Originally posted by trumptman
I guess you would rather silence that which you cannot debate.
Oh, shit, guys! He found us out!
Originally posted by trumptman
I guess you would rather silence that which you cannot debate.
Why are you focusing on this? Nobody is trying to censor you, the suggestion that the thread be locked was only made because you couched the issue in question in terms almost guaranteed to lead to flames over dialog.
If you do genuinely want debate, why not put your energy into providing a response to the points that people have made above?
Originally posted by kneelbeforezod
Nobody is trying to censor you
I can't live a lie anymore.
Trumptman, we have been trying to find a way around your airtight arguments and, frankly, I don't think there is one. That's why we've been posting all this liberal mumbo-jumbo for months. You are totally right when you point out that there is no real content there. All we've been doing is trying to find a way to stop you from getting the truth out there. We've been PMing eachother for months about it.
So I have to agree with you. dmz needs to get a temp ban for his anti-conservative comments. White men (particularly divorced ones) are the most persecuted group in the US. And, yes, reading policy papers put out by policy makers makes one a conspiracy theorist.
Originally posted by BuonRotto
Thread locked because the people posting in it are being a bunch of assholes.
And to think I just found the right lock for it
Fellowship