You need to get ahold of yourself, and pick up a dictionary. “Libel” is a false statement, solely for the purpose of defamation; “logic” is the creation of an inference, based upon the criteria of validity and demonstration. You may want to also look up the definition of “system building”. Everything I have stated has been easily-researched FACT. Your hysterical disagreement does not alter these facts, except perhaps in your mind.
These facts were used by me to infer that we may need to keep an eye on the newly elected RNC Chair, because his past choices are not neccessarily conservative. Again, you may disagree with my conclusion, but that does not alter the facts.
As for the rest of your babbling, you are so far off the mark that you should probably go back and read my definition of logical inference. How exactly does my being against corrupt lawyering make me against Social Security? “Gramps”? Cash SSI checks? You will probably not be able to put this together on your own, so I’ll help you: you’re an idiot for casting aspersions to my age as I have given you nothing from which to infer that. I’m 40.
If you claim the mantle of TEA party representative, you had better be prepared to back it up. The absolute last thing we need is another chameleon who changes his color according to which way the political wind is blowing, and Priebus is skating right up to the edge of that definition based upon his past political leanings. Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it, a’la George Bush and Scott Brown. Is Priebus better than Steele? Probably, but only time will tell.
As for my representation of conservatism, take a look at my posting history, dumbass, and think before you open your mouth: your misunderstanding of the words “logic”, “semantics”, and “libel” alone disqualify you from further discourse.
“Libel” is a false statement, solely for the purpose of defamation;
Your lie in post #4 that Reince is a RINO certainly qualifies for that definition.
“logic” is the creation of an inference, based upon the criteria of validity and demonstration [blah, blah, blah...]
None of this can justify your lies.
Everything I have stated has been easily-researched FACT.
None of which has done anything to support your libelous slur.
These facts were used by me to infer that we may need to keep an eye on the newly elected RNC Chair
No, you clearly presented them to fraudulently bolster your lie.
How exactly does my being against corrupt lawyering...
So you are adding even more libel to your failed argument? You are pathetic!
you’re an idiot for casting aspersions to my age as I have given you nothing from which to infer that. I’m 40.
I retract implying that you were innocently behind in your reading and I now assert that you are simply poorly educated.
If you claim the mantle of TEA party representative, you had better be prepared to back it up.
Yet another false statement. I never asserted that.
The absolute last thing we need is another chameleon who changes his color according to which way the political wind is blowing, and Priebus is skating right up to the edge of that definition based upon his past political leanings.
I have little doubt that Reince was more honest in both his past and current "political leanings" than you have been in this thread!
As for my representation of conservatism, take a look at my posting history, dumbass
If had to pick a word to characterize your posting history on this thread, that would certainly be the word!
and think before you open your mouth: your misunderstanding of the words “logic”, “semantics”, and “libel” alone disqualify you from further discourse.
The readers of this thread can only hope that you'll stop embarrassing yourself here with further discourse!