Cutting myself off? LOL In case you haven't noticed, we're posting on a conservative news forum where there are thousands of opinions posted every day about almost any topic under the sun by some of the wisest conversationalists in America. I've studied things that would spin your mind, that's for sure. You wrap yourself in the Civil War exclusively here. If anyone is isolating himself in ignorance, it's you. You are one-issue.
Now you are different and look at the results. You believe crazy things Out of curiousity, what would those so-called "crazy things" be?
Let's see. You believe slavery had nothing to do with secession. You believe Lincoln was a communist. You believe the steel industry in this country can be quickly rebuilt in an emergency from nothing.
Now that's a peculiar assertion for you to make. After all, am I not subjecting what you say to scrutiny rather than taking it as is in the fashion of a gullible person?
No. You play stupid by playing with semantics.
It seems that you are at a lack of words by which to describe me, thus you simply assign what comes to mind without any basis beyond that.
Lack of words? Only one is needed: crazy. You believe nutty things.
I do? Would you mind quoting me where I asserted that belief then? If you cannot do so, you should not shoot your mouth off in such a fashion.
See, you're proving my point. You spend a lot of time implying that slavery had nothing to do with secession but you won't confirm or deny what you believe now. Subtle lies.
I do? Would you mind quoting me where I asserted that belief then? If you cannot do so, you should not shoot your mouth off in such a fashion.
You're proving my point again about other people's opinion. You spend a lot of your time implying Lincoln was a communist but now you won't confirm or deny it now. Subtle lies.
Wait a moment there. You have yet to establish that I believe what you assert me to believe. Having failed to do so, you cannot logically develop, with any basis in fact, a theory to explain a behavior you have yet to even establish. Until then, your allegation is without substance. It's a simple matter of reality - quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur.
Subtle lies. That's what you find in other people's opinion. You're not confirming or denying anything now, so you use subtle lies. You have proven my point. If you're opinion wasn't laced with subtle lies, then you would be more forthright. You are not being bold at all in these posts because you know I'm right and you know if you were to make a bold statement one way or the other, you would get nailed for it because of the subtle lies you have told.
In some ways, that is a fancy theory you've developed for yourself.
It's true. A lot of opinion is laced with subtle lies.
Now, would you mind demonstrating to me what basis in reality, if any, that it has? If you cannot do that, you should not shoot your mouth off by alleging it in the first place.
I see you're getting defensive. If you don't want to believe that some are experts at subtle lies, then have at it. Have a good trip through life. LOL You will continue to be fooled.
Put in other terms, you look for people who support your view, determine them to be factually correct even though you personally lack the background or knowledge to make that determination by way of your own choice to ignore the statements of others, lend your endorsement to them since they support your view, and proceed to neglect everything else for no other reason than your dislike of what they have to say. BTW, is that not essentially what you just accused me of doing?
You're missing a big part of what I said. I said they have to have their fundamentals right. You listen to liars. I don't.
You have repeatedly admitted to me that you refuse to read anything that you do not desire to see, so yes. Cutting yourself off.
I've studied things that would spin your mind, that's for sure.
You are correct. The inane ramblings of intellectually shallow fools you surround yourself with are enough to make any rational person's head spin due to the impossibility of making sense out of the utterly senseless.
Let's see. You believe slavery had nothing to do with secession.
As I stated previously, would you mind quoting me where I asserted that belief then? If you cannot do so, you should not shoot your mouth off in such a fashion.
You believe Lincoln was a communist.
As I stated previously, would you mind quoting me where I asserted that belief then? If you cannot do so, you should not shoot your mouth off in such a fashion.
You believe the steel industry in this country can be quickly rebuilt in an emergency from nothing.
If the market demands it...
No. You play stupid by playing with semantics.
I only play semantics in response to your heavy but imprecise dependence upon that very same artform. If you wish to continue your semantical endeavours, you should be able to defend them under scrutiny. If you cannot defend them from scrutiny, your should not play them in the first place.
See, you're proving my point. You spend a lot of time implying that slavery had nothing to do with secession
Oh, so now it's only "implying that slavery had nothing to do with secession" rather than the old line of "believing that slavery had nothing to do with secession"? You're backpeddling and it shows. You backpeddle because you know your position is a fraudulent one - you know you shot your mouth off in haste with an allegation you could not support. To explore this further, I will press you on your new allegation. Please quote me where I "imply" that slavery had nothing to do with secession.
You spend a lot of your time implying Lincoln was a communist but now you won't confirm or deny it now. Subtle lies.
Oh, so again it is no longer believing or asserting, but rather "implying." To explore this further, I will press you on your new allegation. Please quote me where I "imply" that Lincoln was a communist.
Subtle lies.
No. Neither subtle, nor a lie. You shot your mouth off and made an allegation in haste. Now that I press you on it, you cannot back up that allegation to save your life. Face it - you're in way over your head on this one.
You're missing a big part of what I said. I said they have to have their fundamentals right. You listen to liars. I don't.
So let me get this straight. You listen to and endorse certain other people because you do not know enough for yourself. Yet you know that everything they say as their fundamentals is right, despite having just admitted that you do not know enough to make that judgment. Strange...