Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Gailbraithe wrote:
"That is not a rain drop. That is just a drop of water in the air. It could be anything. There is no storm."

Whatever dude, your Jedi mind tricks will not work on me. Back to ignore you go.

You know, I'd place you on ignore as well, but I pride myself on being open to divergent ideas.

Erecting an ideological bubble around oneself is...something I will refrain from describing in 'polite' company.

Phryxis wrote:That whole worldview is so foreign, I don't even know how to understand it. There's no "pro subsidy" party. Both parties like them when it suits their agenda. Neither party tries to pretend they don't exist.

bs. The GOP constantly pretends they don't exist. Every time the right accuses liberals of being socialists for interfering with the "free market" as if it weren't already being interfered with on a grand scale every single day, that are implicitly denying the existence of these corporate subsidies. Every time the GOP argues that the poorest members of society to not deserve welfare while turning a blind eye to the corporate welfare they support they are trying to pretend they don't exist. When Dick Cheney claimed that outrage over Halliburton was just an expression of the left's hatred of "the free market," that was pretending (on an EPIC scale) that those subsidies don't exist.

Reading your posts gives a very strong impression that your sole goal is to reinforce your worldview, shoehorn as many people as possible into your "right wing evil" stereotype, and generally feel like a frustrated, persecuted genius.

How is this not a personal attack? Why are you not being banned? Given that you right around the time you were posting this character assassination crap, you were sending me a PM asking me --"asking a question. Question. Not a statement, accusation or attack. Asking." ( ) -- if I'm mentally ill. Gee, why would you do that? Maybe you're a troll, trying to provoke a response.

Could that be it? Back to ignore for you.

When Dick Cheney claimed that outrage over Halliburton was just an expression of the left's hatred of "the free market," that was pretending (on an EPIC scale) that those subsidies don't exist.

You seem willing to read VERY deeply into things when it suits you, and then to generalize those conclusions widely.

It's simply not accurate.

Nobody is trying to deny that subsidies and tax breaks exist. Instead, they're trying to explain why the ones they support are "good" and the ones they oppose are "bad."

How is this not a personal attack? Why are you not being banned?

Do you really not know?

You called dogma a "liar" and a "douche." You didn't say that something he said was a lie, you said he, himself, in all things, was nothing more than a liar. That's a personal attack. And calling him a "douche" is just a direct insult, it's not even relevant to the discussion. It's not saying "you're lying as a means of forwarding your argument" which, while insulting, may potentially be true. Calling somebody a "douche" is just plain insulting. There's no reason to do it, besides to be insulting.

Now, by way of comparison, I told you what impression your posts give. I didn't say you WERE doing this. I said it was the impression I was given by your post. Quite frankly, I think its a fact. But out of respect, I state it as being nothing more than my perception.

You really have an odd perspective on "fairness." You constantly insult and personally attack people, and then when they don't agree, you feel like you're the victim.

Given that you right around the time you were posting this character assassination crap, you were sending me a PM asking me --"asking a question. Question. Not a statement, accusation or attack. Asking." ( ) -- if I'm mentally ill.

Yeah, dude, AGAIN, why do you keep bringing this out in the open? I'm trying to avoid embarassing you by taking it offline, and you just keep yelling about it to everyone, like they're gonna get your back and be all mad at me.

Dude, EVERYONE is wondering if you have a personality disorder. I asked you about it offline so it wouldn't seem like I was doing it just to show off. But now you're bringing it up in front of everyone, embarassing yourself.

DO NOT DO THIS.

The fact is, I don't want to argue with and criticize somebody who's mentally ill. I don't want to find out that I've been hard on somebody who's got a genuine problem. If you really have a personality disorder, you deserve some understanding and some slack. If you don't fine, you're just a very trying personality, who has no idea how he presents himself in a forum. That's cool, I'm happy to keep telling you.

I'm just trying to find an out for you.

Back to ignore for you.

You do a lot of this threatening, and then right back to responding. Stop with this.

Gailbraithe wrote:When Dick Cheney claimed that outrage over Halliburton was just an expression of the left's hatred of "the free market," that was pretending (on an EPIC scale) that those subsidies don't exist.

Are you really going to cite the right as being an entity that uses political discourse to its advantage when an ideology you espouse (Critical Race Theory) is predicated on using ideology to control what is publicly discussed?

Gailbraithe wrote:
Could that be it? Back to ignore for you.

No, I suspect its really that you feel that words like 'moron' are objective descriptors.

What assumption? That CRT necessarily states that it is predicated on developing advantage for its subjects?

There appears to be some confusion on the part of some posters as to what is and isn't acceptable posting behaviour on the boards, even on the soulless and doomed realms of the OT zone. And this thread appears to be nothing but a massive argument over things that are really nothing to do with the OT, and apparently is even continuing in PMs and the like.

C'mon people, you could be arguing over deff rollas, assaulting out of wrecked/exploded land raiders or other, really important issues.

Or go outside, meet some girls/guys, have a few drinks,relax, smile. Whatever.