| Author |
Message |
Link, the Hero of Time
Vice Admiral
Joined: 15 Sep 2001
Posts: 5581
Location: Kokori Forest, Hyrule
|
 Tue Aug 23, 2005 11:38 pm |
|
| Republican_Man wrote: | | They'll never give it up, Founder. They're so filled with hatred for this man now that no logical reason can get through them. Seriously. Founder's laying out the most solid case, and putting context that is NOT "his" or "my" context to his statements, and yet you have nothing to do but disagree because you simply do not like this man instantly. I must admit that I am disturbed by some of the things that he says, particularly with him being a religious leader and saying some of this stuff. But there is NO reason to be this up in arms about it, and to not let logic get through to you. |
That would be a good argument if you were using logic and not political biases
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Tue Aug 23, 2005 11:42 pm |
|
| Link, the Hero of Time wrote: | | Republican_Man wrote: | | They'll never give it up, Founder. They're so filled with hatred for this man now that no logical reason can get through them. Seriously. Founder's laying out the most solid case, and putting context that is NOT "his" or "my" context to his statements, and yet you have nothing to do but disagree because you simply do not like this man instantly. I must admit that I am disturbed by some of the things that he says, particularly with him being a religious leader and saying some of this stuff. But there is NO reason to be this up in arms about it, and to not let logic get through to you. |
That would be a good argument if you were using logic and not political biases |
Logic has been used by myself and by Founder. It's not political bias. This man is no political figure for the Republican Party. He's a man that has a TV show and is conservative. That's the only political relation, and I don't give a damn if he's liberal or conservative here. His statements DO make sense, and we HAVE been making logical arguments (particularly Founder in this debate---whoo-eee! He's on fire tonight!) but they just aren't clicking in to you guys.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
IntrepidIsMe
Pimp Handed
Joined: 14 Jun 2002
Posts: 13057
Location: New York
|
| Tue Aug 23, 2005 11:42 pm |
|
Wow, I don't remember saying that I hate him. I don't know him. I don't like what he has to say. But does that mean I hate him? No. It means I think hes a crazy freak who is trying to exploit his ability to appeal to the public for his own reasons.
Its easy to say that everyone's argument is tainted by hate so we should just ignore them, isn't it? I'll save that one for one of my future arugments. "Abortion is wrong... because... uh.... You hate babies!" Yup, I can see it now. You definitely have a nice strong argument on your side, if you use that.
Yeah, logic. Huh. Its also logical to the Son of Sam that his neighbors dog was talking to him (as God), telling him to kill innocent women. Smooth.
-------signature-------
"Nelly, I am Heathcliff! He's always, always in my mind: not as a pleasure, any more than I am always a pleasure to myself, but as my own being."
-Wuthering Heights
|
|
|
Founder
Dominion Leader
Joined: 21 Jun 2004
Posts: 12755
Location: Gamma Quadrant
|
| Tue Aug 23, 2005 11:50 pm |
|
| IntrepidIsMe wrote: | | Founder wrote: | I mean no offense, but now you're being stubborn. I just clearly explained what he meant, not my opinion of what he meant. You're CHOOSING to see it in another way. If you hate this man and think his status as "Christian leader" is questionable, then that is your own opinion, but you cant twist the facts to serve your personal opinion.
He was not calling for his assasination for "evil" reasons. |
"We have the ability to take him out, and I think the time has come that we exercise that ability,"
| IntrepidIsMe wrote: | | Its easy to say that everyone's argument is tainted by hate so we should just ignore them, isn't it? I'll save that one for one of my future arugments. |
What are you talking about?
I'm sorry, but that seems to say "We have the ability, so we should kill him." I'm not being stubborn, you're simply interpreting what he said you're way. Perhaps you're the one being stubborn, since most people here seem to support my side of the argument... |
Most people here are Liberals. So people supporting you means nothing. You, Link, and Puck can moan and complain all you want. Nothing will change the fact that this is a political thing.
Nothing is changing the fact at how hypocritical you three are. I'll say it again. When Moore and other Left Wing nuts pushed for assasinations of Conservatives, you all didn't complain. Strange....a coincidence I'm sure.
He wants to kill him. Again, you're taking his quote out of context. He is talking about killing a man who kills others. Through a covert means, not through war. You don't like it? Take it up with the First Amendment.
| Link, the Hero of Time wrote: | | Nice to see you're so apt to removing another human's civil rights. |
Where are you talking talking about Human civil rights when this stuff goes on in South America, Cuba, and Iraq? You're conviently quiet. Expect when a Conservative says something. Oh no, this isn't about politics. Its a....coincedence I'm sure....
| Link, the Hero of Time wrote: | | You really dont understand anything do you? |
Yes, do you?
| Link, the Hero of Time wrote: | To start off, no one here is supporting those people, Bush pushed us into a War with Iraq with ambiguous evidence that turned out false, Our economy is in shambles but slowly recovering without any sort of help from the government, the list goes on.
Simply put, fix your own country before you start fixing others. |
What does that have to do with anything? Are you trying to show a twisted way that somehow all of that makes it ok to assasinate Bush?
| Link, the Hero of Time wrote: | | Stop using political arguments, it just invalidates everthing you try to argue with because it shows that all your arguments come from a political bias and not from your own thought processes. |
I'll stop when its not so obvious that their is a political bias going on here. It invalidates everything? Not really. You're just angry that I'm saying bad things about Liberals.
| Link, the Hero of Time wrote: | | Again with the political parties. That seems to be your only arguing point. Have you noticed that there are conservatives against you in this argument as well? Probably not. |
My only point? Apparently you're unable to read. If you could, you would see its not my only point.
| Link, the Hero of Time wrote: | | No, you're just extrapalating what you want to hear out of it. He's saying we should assassinate him. It's plain, simple and in black and white. |
No, you're just trying to hear what you want to hear. Nothing is as plain and simple as you make it out to be.
| Link, the Hero of Time wrote: | | Again with the political parties as your only arguing point. No, this is because he's a RELGIOUS LEADER who just said the we should go and ASSASSINATE a POLITICAL LEADER. |
A political leader that murders people. A nice little fact that left out. How convienent...
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Tue Aug 23, 2005 11:53 pm |
|
| IntrepidIsMe wrote: | Wow, I don't remember saying that I hate him. I don't know him. I don't like what he has to say. But does that mean I hate him? No. It means I think hes a crazy freak who is trying to exploit his ability to appeal to the public for his own reasons.
Its easy to say that everyone's argument is tainted by hate so we should just ignore them, isn't it? I'll save that one for one of my future arugments. "Abortion is wrong... because... uh.... You hate babies!" Yup, I can see it now. You definitely have a nice strong argument on your side, if you use that.
Yeah, logic. Huh. Its also logical to the Son of Sam that his neighbors dog was talking to him (as God), telling him to kill innocent women. Smooth. |
1. You REALLY haven't watched his program, have you? He ALWAYS has commentaries on issues, as I've said before. It's been that way since the 700 Club started. I watch him on occasion, and have seen him give his commentaries before. It's not him exploiting his position. It's him giving commentary--like that part of the show is SUPPOSED to be for.
2. It seems like hatred to me. I could be wrong--and I may very well be--but it really seems that way. Your argument just doesn't make any sense to me. Founder's is logical, yours is not.
3. I believe that he was a crazy man, that Son of Sam. Definitely insane. No way in hell would God want him to kill innocent women. No way. Some people are just crazy.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
IntrepidIsMe
Pimp Handed
Joined: 14 Jun 2002
Posts: 13057
Location: New York
|
| Wed Aug 24, 2005 12:03 am |
|
| Founder wrote: | | IntrepidIsMe wrote: | | Founder wrote: | I mean no offense, but now you're being stubborn. I just clearly explained what he meant, not my opinion of what he meant. You're CHOOSING to see it in another way. If you hate this man and think his status as "Christian leader" is questionable, then that is your own opinion, but you cant twist the facts to serve your personal opinion.
He was not calling for his assasination for "evil" reasons. |
"We have the ability to take him out, and I think the time has come that we exercise that ability,"
I'm sorry, but that seems to say "We have the ability, so we should kill him." I'm not being stubborn, you're simply interpreting what he said you're way. Perhaps you're the one being stubborn, since most people here seem to support my side of the argument... |
Most people here are Liberals. So people supporting you means nothing. You, Link, and Puck can moan and complain all you want. Nothing will change the fact that this is a political thing.
Nothing is changing the fact at how hypocritical you three are. I'll say it again. When Moore and other Left Wing nuts pushed for assasinations of Conservatives, you all didn't complain. Strange....a coincidence I'm sure.
He wants to kill him. Again, you're taking his quote out of context. He is talking about killing a man who kills others. Through a covert means, not through war. You don't like it? Take it up with the First Amendment. |
I don't see how I'm taking it out of context. It seems obvious to me what he meant. I suppose that whole "killing someone who kills others" thing ties into the death penalty. I don't support anybody's death.
Are you saying that when people who are Liberal give an argument, we should automatically dismiss it because they're liberal? That seems to be what you're saying. Not to mention, neither Puck or I are liberal. But feel free to label everything you see. Thats your right.
I don't remember saying that I supported or didn't support the assasination of a conservative. Please find it for me? I'm sure as hell not, since I know I didn't say it.
| Founder wrote: | | IntrepidIsMe wrote: | | Its easy to say that everyone's argument is tainted by hate so we should just ignore them, isn't it? I'll save that one for one of my future arugments. |
What are you talking about? |
Was responding to RM, and how he said we all just hate him, blah blah blah.
| Republican_Man wrote: | 1. You REALLY haven't watched his program, have you? He ALWAYS has commentaries on issues, as I've said before. It's been that way since the 700 Club started. I watch him on occasion, and have seen him give his commentaries before. It's not him exploiting his position. It's him giving commentary--like that part of the show is SUPPOSED to be for.
2. It seems like hatred to me. I could be wrong--and I may very well be--but it really seems that way. Your argument just doesn't make any sense to me. Founder's is logical, yours is not.
3. I believe that he was a crazy man, that Son of Sam. Definitely insane. No way in hell would God want him to kill innocent women. No way. Some people are just crazy. |
1. No, I haven't watched the 700 Club. I have no interest. I gained my information from this artical, which is what we're supposed to be debating about.
2. I don't recall saying that I hate you anybody else. Please point it out. Founder's argument is logical? I fail to see it. He simply seems to be posting his opinion, and I'm sure he thinks I'm simply posting mine.
3. Yeah, you tell Son of Sam that hes crazy. He won't believe you. My point is that just because it seems a certain way to some people, doesn't mean that thats the way it is. And that works both ways.
Last edited by IntrepidIsMe on Wed Aug 24, 2005 12:22 am; edited 2 times in total
-------signature-------
"Nelly, I am Heathcliff! He's always, always in my mind: not as a pleasure, any more than I am always a pleasure to myself, but as my own being."
-Wuthering Heights
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Wed Aug 24, 2005 12:11 am |
|
| IntrepidIsMe wrote: | | Republican_Man wrote: | 1. You REALLY haven't watched his program, have you? He ALWAYS has commentaries on issues, as I've said before. It's been that way since the 700 Club started. I watch him on occasion, and have seen him give his commentaries before. It's not him exploiting his position. It's him giving commentary--like that part of the show is SUPPOSED to be for.
2. It seems like hatred to me. I could be wrong--and I may very well be--but it really seems that way. Your argument just doesn't make any sense to me. Founder's is logical, yours is not.
3. I believe that he was a crazy man, that Son of Sam. Definitely insane. No way in hell would God want him to kill innocent women. No way. Some people are just crazy. |
1. No, I haven't watched the 700 Club. I have no interest. I gained my information from this artical, which is what we're supposed to be debating about.
2. I don't recall saying that I hate your anybody else. Please point it out. Founder's argument is logical? I fail to see it. He simply seems to be posting his opinion, and I'm sure he thinks I'm simply posting mine.
3. Yeah, you tell Son of Sam that hes crazy. He won't believe you. My point is that just because it seems a certain way to some people, doesn't mean that thats the way it is. And that works both ways. |
1. You were saying that he was using his forum to push his agenda, and I was clarifying that it is PART OF THE PROGRAM for him to give commentaries. My intention.
2. That is the impression that I get from yours posts. And you are posting an argument, as is he. He just happens to have logic on his side. Spock must be over his shoulder 
3. I don't see your point. There's a difference between what that insane man says and what we're arguing about.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
IntrepidIsMe
Pimp Handed
Joined: 14 Jun 2002
Posts: 13057
Location: New York
|
| Wed Aug 24, 2005 12:16 am |
|
Commentaries? Sure. But if Michael Moore had a tv program and was advocating for Bush's murder, would you have a problem? I think perhaps.
Yeah, logic. All I see is "put it in context." Well, I have. The fact that most people seem to agree with me, including the mass media (oh wait, its run by liberals, nevermind!) agrees with me, seems to not have crossed your mind.
My point was that sure hes insane to you, but do you think that he really thinks hes insane? I'm trying to point out that it all depends on your POV.
-------signature-------
"Nelly, I am Heathcliff! He's always, always in my mind: not as a pleasure, any more than I am always a pleasure to myself, but as my own being."
-Wuthering Heights
|
|
|
Founder
Dominion Leader
Joined: 21 Jun 2004
Posts: 12755
Location: Gamma Quadrant
|
| Wed Aug 24, 2005 12:33 am |
|
| IntrepidIsMe wrote: | | Yeah, logic. All I see is "put it in context." Well, I have. The fact that most people seem to agree with me, including the mass media (oh wait, its run by liberals, nevermind!) agrees with me, seems to not have crossed your mind. |
So let me get this straight. If "most people" believed that Bush=God, you would believe that? Hhmm...how very Socialist of you.
Not to mention the people who "agree with you" don't like me. I doubt if they would ever admit that I'm right.
I haven't seen a good point from anyone so far. Sorry, but I haven't. All I hear is "He shouldn't have done it." Why?
|
|
|
IntrepidIsMe
Pimp Handed
Joined: 14 Jun 2002
Posts: 13057
Location: New York
|
| Wed Aug 24, 2005 12:40 am |
|
If most people did think Bush was God, the thought would cross my mind. I don't think it would go very far, though. It just seems that most people having a common view on a simple statement, would help to validate an argument.
Well, I didn't realize that people didn't like you. I don't see how this has to do with anything personal. But, I suppose you'd know.
Well, "he shouldn't have done it" because it just isn't right. I don't go out advocating for support of other people's murders. Thats a little weird. Sure, I may disagree with some people, but does that mean they should be killed, or that I should rally support for their killing? Nah.
-------signature-------
"Nelly, I am Heathcliff! He's always, always in my mind: not as a pleasure, any more than I am always a pleasure to myself, but as my own being."
-Wuthering Heights
|
|
|
LightningBoy
Commodore
Joined: 09 Mar 2003
Posts: 1446
Location: Minnesota, U.S.A.
|
| Wed Aug 24, 2005 1:44 am |
|
| Jeff Miller wrote: | | I thought Christians were spose to belive in peace? this isn't very peacefull |
Neither is leaving Chavez in power.
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Wed Aug 24, 2005 8:01 pm |
|
He has now apologized for his comments, FOX News has reported. 
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Wed Aug 24, 2005 8:03 pm |
|
| Quote: | Robertson Apologizes for Chavez Remark
Wednesday, August 24, 2005
VIRGINIA BEACH, Va. � Religious broadcaster Pat Robertson (search) has issued an apology for calling for the assassination of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez (search).
"Is it right to call for assassination? No, and I apologize for that statement. I spoke in frustration that we should accommodate the man who thinks the U.S. is out to kill him," Robertson's statement said.
Rev. Jesse Jackson told FOX News that an apology is not enough.
"The fact is that his impact is substantially great," said Jackson. "He supports the government, he is a former Republican presidential candidate. ... His statement carries weight."
Robertson's statement acknowledged the controversy that has surrounded his remarks, but said the situation has shed light on an important topic.
"There are many who disagree with my comments, and I respect their opinions. There are others who think that stopping a dictator is the appropriate course of action," he said. "In any event, the incredible publicity surrounding my remarks has focused our government's attention on a growing problem which has been largely ignored."
Robertson explains in the statement the context of the comment and the reasons why he believes Chavez is a dangerous leader saying that he seeks to overthrow democracies, "found common cause with terrorists," and calls Fidel Castro (search) and Saddam Hussein "comrades."
Jackson, who plans to travel to Venezuela, stressed the danger of Robertson's comments especially in light of the downfall of Saddam Hussein.
"It was illegal for us to go into Iraq on the basis of false information, so we have a credibility problem there," he said. "Our government must be very clear that we are against the desire to overthrow another government."
Jackson told FOX News his trip to Venezuela has been in the works for more than two months, and coincides with the anniversary of the March on Washington. He said he will be there to talk to religious leaders about human rights and pro-democracy concepts, "not assassination and coups."
When asked if he's going to Venezuela this weekend to apologize to Chavez, Jackson said, "Oh no, that's not my role."
The televangelist had previously said Wednesday that his comments were "misinterpreted."
"I didn't say 'assassination,'" Robertson clarified during a broadcast of his "The 700 Club" Wednesday morning. "I said our special forces should go 'take him out,' and 'take him out' could be a number of things, including kidnapping."
He blamed The Associated Press for making him seem to advocate the assassination of a foreign leader.
"There are a number of ways to take out a dictator from power besides killing him," Robertson said. "I was misinterpreted by the AP, but that happens all the time."
However, during the original "700 Club" broadcast Monday night, Robertson clearly mentioned assassination.
"You know, I don't know about this doctrine of assassination, but if he thinks we are trying to assassinate him, we should go ahead and do it," Robertson said Monday. "It's a whole lot easier than starting a war, and I don't think any oil shipments will stop."
Unless American agents acted decisively, the evangelist argued Monday, Venezuela would become "a launching pad for communist infiltration and Muslim extremism."
"We don't need another $200 billion war to get rid of one, you know, strong-arm dictator," he continued. "It's a whole lot easier to have some of the covert operatives do the job and then get it over with."
But Jackson disagrees that pre-emptive measures are a good course of action. "We made a big mistake [in Iraq], we should not make that mistake again," he told FOX News. "Chavez was elected democratically. Here's a chance to build some bridges. We should not drive them into isolation."
Robertson's comments, picked up by the AP, quickly became Tuesday's major news story and drew reactions from liberal groups, the government of Venezuela, Jackson, and even the State Department and Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld (search).
State Department spokesman Sean McCormack on Tuesday called Robertson's remarks "inappropriate."
"This is not the policy of the United States government. We do not share his views," McCormack said.
Rumsfeld said he knew of no consideration ever being given to the idea of assassinating Chavez.
"Our department doesn't do that kind of thing. It's against the law," he said.
Political assassination was made off-limits by former President Ford in an executive order in the mid-1970s.
Jackson issued a statement denouncing Robertson's remarks as "morally reprehensible and dangerously suggestive."
In Caracas, Vice President Jose Vicente Rangel said Venezuela was considering legal action against Robertson.
"There is a legal measure in the United States that condemns and punishes statements of this nature," Rangel said, referring to laws dealing with television broadcasts.
"The 700 Club" is syndicated to local television stations across the United States, which makes it subject to Federal Communications Commission rules. It is also carried by the cable ABC Family Channel and satellite television, neither of which fall under FCC jurisdiction.
Venezuela is the world's fifth-largest oil exporter, the only member of OPEC in the Western Hemisphere and the supplier of an estimated 8 percent of the petroleum the United States consumes.
Chavez, elected president of Venezuela in 1998, has irritated U.S. officials with his fiery rhetoric against American "imperialism" and his increasingly close ties to U.S. enemies such as Cuba and Iran. He says he is leading Venezuela toward socialism.
In 1999, his first year in office, Chavez reorganized the judiciary, bypassed the established Congress and wrote a new constitution that made sweeping changes to the national government, including increasing the presidential term to six years. The constitution was ratified by popular referendum later that year.
In 2000, elections solidified his control over the new national legislature and he was re-elected president. Later that year, he passed a law enabling him to rule by decree for a period of one year, which allowed him to basically write his own laws.
Venezuela's middle and upper classes, as well as its business community and large labor unions, largely oppose Chavez and have accused him of trying to create a Cuban-style Communist dictatorship. But he enjoys overwhelming support among the country's poor.
Chavez has accused Washington of backing a short-lived 2002 coup against him, a charge U.S. officials have denied.
In 2004, a popular referendum over whether to recall Chavez � a provision he wrote into his new constitution � resulted in nearly 60 percent of voters urging him to stay in office.
Chavez has made anti-Americanism a central part of his foreign policy, going so far as to call George W. Bush a "pendejo" (a--hole). Earlier this year, he said the United States had plans to assassinate him.
He is a strong supporter of Castro, whom he considers a close friend, visited Saddam Hussein in Iraq in 2000 and has reached out to Iran and China.
Neighboring Colombia has accused Venezuela of giving shelter to left-wing Colombian guerrilla groups, and there have been allegations of Venezuelan influence in unrest in Bolivia earlier this year.
However, Chavez's relations with most other South American countries have remained good, especially with the moderate leftist governments of Brazil and Argentina.
Despite threats to do so if the United States tries to overthrow him, Chavez has done nothing to impede the flow of oil to the United States � PDVSA, the state-owned oil company, owns the American oil company Citgo � and some foreign-policy experts regard him as little more than a blowhard.
The former paratrooper is up for re-election next year, and polls suggest he is the favorite.
FOX News' Paul Wagenseil and The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Source |
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Theresa
Lux Mihi Deus
Joined: 17 Jun 2001
Posts: 27256
Location: United States of America
|
| Wed Aug 24, 2005 8:20 pm |
|
Huh, even he realized it wasn't the brightest thing to say.
And he shouldn't have said it, even if it was a personal commentary. It was irresponsible.
| Quote: | "You know, I don't know about this doctrine of assassination, but if he thinks we are trying to assassinate him, we should go ahead and do it," Robertson said Monday. "It's a whole lot easier than starting a war, and I don't think any oil shipments will stop."
|
Good thing laws don't apply to us,
-------signature-------
Some of us fall by the wayside
And some of us soar to the stars
And some of us sail through our troubles
And some have to live with our scars
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Wed Aug 24, 2005 8:27 pm |
|
Where did I EVER say that it wasn't the brightest thing to do? Obviously it wasn't, with all the controversy that would come from it.
And yeah, he shouldn't have said that. I don't think I ever said that it was good that he said it--just that I agreed with it--that is, his point that it's better to take him out if he thinks that we're trying to assassinate him than to start a war over it, and I defended his right to say it. First you take his statements out of context, and now you take mine and Founder's and spin 'em. Good job. 
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Theresa
Lux Mihi Deus
Joined: 17 Jun 2001
Posts: 27256
Location: United States of America
|
| Wed Aug 24, 2005 8:30 pm |
|
| Republican_Man wrote: | Where did I EVER say that it wasn't the brightest thing to do? Obviously it wasn't, with all the controversy that would come from it.
And yeah, he shouldn't have said that. I don't think I ever said that it was good that he said it--just that I agreed with it--that is, his point that it's better to take him out if he thinks that we're trying to assassinate him than to start a war over it, and I defended his right to say it. First you take his statements out of context, and now you take mine and Founder's and spin 'em. Good job. |
Dude, take your persecution complex somewhere else, k? I didn't mention your name, which I do believe I said I'd do when speaking directly to you. It'd behoove you to remember that, this time. Nor did I quote you. You posted the article, and it was the article I was responding to.
Act like a five year old again, and find out how "never posting in WN" feels.
-------signature-------
Some of us fall by the wayside
And some of us soar to the stars
And some of us sail through our troubles
And some have to live with our scars
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Wed Aug 24, 2005 8:43 pm |
|
All right, then. My apologies. Then to what EXACTLY were you referring to in this comment:
| Theresa wrote: | | Huh, even he realized it wasn't the brightest thing to say. |
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Theresa
Lux Mihi Deus
Joined: 17 Jun 2001
Posts: 27256
Location: United States of America
|
| Wed Aug 24, 2005 8:44 pm |
|
That Pat Robertson himself thinks he could have made his point better... I mean, come oooooon... Even his contemporaries were staying away from this one.
-------signature-------
Some of us fall by the wayside
And some of us soar to the stars
And some of us sail through our troubles
And some have to live with our scars
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Wed Aug 24, 2005 8:49 pm |
|
| Theresa wrote: | | That Pat Robertson himself thinks he could have made his point better... I mean, come oooooon... Even his contemporaries were staying away from this one. |
You did not answer my question, it seems.
You said, "Huh, even he realized it wasn't the brightest thing to say."
Who didn't think that it wasn't a bright thing to do? Obviously somebody didn't think so, and I was wondering to whom you were referring? I would really like that clarification. 
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Theresa
Lux Mihi Deus
Joined: 17 Jun 2001
Posts: 27256
Location: United States of America
|
| Wed Aug 24, 2005 8:52 pm |
|
How about the masses? The media? His friends?
Get over yourself, RM. And quit trying to find the "hidden meaning that is bashing RM" in every post. When I "bash" you, you'll have no doubt.
And I did answer your question. You chose not to see it, and to try to manipulate it to serve your purposes. Now I suggest* that you get back on topic.
*Not really a suggestion,
-------signature-------
Some of us fall by the wayside
And some of us soar to the stars
And some of us sail through our troubles
And some have to live with our scars
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Wed Aug 24, 2005 9:03 pm |
|
| Theresa wrote: | How about the masses? The media? His friends?
Get over yourself, RM. And quit trying to find the "hidden meaning that is bashing RM" in every post. When I "bash" you, you'll have no doubt.
And I did answer your question. You chose not to see it, and to try to manipulate it to serve your purposes. Now I suggest* that you get back on topic.
*Not really a suggestion, |
It HONESTLY did NOT seem like you were giving me the right answer, especially considering that the masses and the media disagreed with his comments. But okay, I'll drop it. Back on topic.
I think it was good that he apologized, although I do think that SOMETHING--done by someone, not necessarily America--needs to be done to stop these brutal dictators.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Founder
Dominion Leader
Joined: 21 Jun 2004
Posts: 12755
Location: Gamma Quadrant
|
| Wed Aug 24, 2005 11:24 pm |
|
| Theresa wrote: | Huh, even he realized it wasn't the brightest thing to say.
And he shouldn't have said it, even if it was a personal commentary. It was irresponsible. |
Not really. He probably got a lot of c**p over it and just apologized to appease a certain group of people who kept complaining.
I LOVE how IntrepidIsMe used the quote "We have the ability to take him out, and I think the time has come that we exercise that ability." but IntrepidIsMe stopped the quote RIGHT there. To make it look like they were right. There is a little more to the quote...
"We don't need another $200 billion war to get rid of one, you know, strong-arm dictator. It's a whole lot easier to have some of the covert operatives do the job and then get it over with."
He was clearly saying that he would prefer that over another war like Iraq. Not because he was "being evil" or "irresponsible". The man can't have his opinion? This is ridiculous that people are actually up in arms with his comment.
|
|
|
IntrepidIsMe
Pimp Handed
Joined: 14 Jun 2002
Posts: 13057
Location: New York
|
| Wed Aug 24, 2005 11:30 pm |
|
I'm glad you LOVE how I do things. I'm feeling all warm and fuzzy inside. Almost. Anyway, I scanned the article again, and just saw this paragraph right at the top:
| Quote: | | "We have the ability to take him out, and I think the time has come that we exercise that ability," Robertson said Monday on the Christian Broadcast Network's "The 700 Club." |
Thats why I only included that part, I saw it and grabbed it. But you're welcome to make all the assumptions you want.
And its not as if these are the only ingnorant remarks hes made. Hes just one giant idiot, as far as I can see.
-------signature-------
"Nelly, I am Heathcliff! He's always, always in my mind: not as a pleasure, any more than I am always a pleasure to myself, but as my own being."
-Wuthering Heights
|
|
|
Founder
Dominion Leader
Joined: 21 Jun 2004
Posts: 12755
Location: Gamma Quadrant
|
| Wed Aug 24, 2005 11:32 pm |
|
| IntrepidIsMe wrote: | I'm glad you LOVE how I do things. I'm feeling all warm and fuzzy inside. Almost. Anyway, I scanned the article again, and just saw this paragraph right at the top:
| Quote: | | "We have the ability to take him out, and I think the time has come that we exercise that ability," Robertson said Monday on the Christian Broadcast Network's "The 700 Club." |
Thats why I only included that part, I saw it and grabbed it. But you're welcome to make all the assumptions you want.
And its not as if these are the only ingnorant remarks hes made. Hes just one giant idiot, as far as I can see. |
He is pretty contreversial for many other remarks like you said. He even said something about how "we deserved 9/11" or we're "being punished by 9/11". That you can say is ignorant, but to say killing a Dictator whos paranoia has him halfway mobilising his army is ignorant is just crazy.
|
|
|
IntrepidIsMe
Pimp Handed
Joined: 14 Jun 2002
Posts: 13057
Location: New York
|
| Wed Aug 24, 2005 11:36 pm |
|
Murder is pretty much wrong for any reason, but I can accept that a person in great power, who has the ability to start a war and if there is evidence that they're going to progress with lethal action, should be assasinated; since it would save lives.
However, publically advocating for murder? Thats a different story.
Last edited by IntrepidIsMe on Wed Aug 24, 2005 11:37 pm; edited 1 time in total
-------signature-------
"Nelly, I am Heathcliff! He's always, always in my mind: not as a pleasure, any more than I am always a pleasure to myself, but as my own being."
-Wuthering Heights
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Star Trek �, in all its various forms, are trademarks & copyrights of Paramount Pictures
This site has no official connection with Star Trek or Paramount Pictures
Site content/Site design elements owned by Morphy and is meant to only be an archive/Tribute to STV.com
|
Search
FAQ
Log in
