Reply to Stop Using the term Class Warfare

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Stop Using the term Class Warfare"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=TheManWithAUsername][quote=Anonymous][quote=TheManWithAUsername]Anyone can compare my statement with your paraphrase and see your twisting.[/quote]
I don't understand, I quoted your statement. I'm not paraphrasing it.[/quote]
You quoted and then (mis)paraphrased.
Quote: "’Get a username - seriously. If you think you're posts are being misjudged and/or quickly dismissed, it will help prevent that.’"
Paraphrase: “his position that he only engages respectfully (i.e., not respond to posts with 'you are just being led by "Faux" news') with those who also have names.”

The twist was between those two. When you first started complaining about my focus on Faux/Rep tactics, I laid out very clearly why and how I distinguish between carriers of the disease, so to speak, and people with legitimate, considered ideas, only with the latter of which am I willing to engage fully.

I think you’re playing this rhetorical game now, painting me as petty, because you’re frustrated with your inability to distinguish yourself from Faux parrots – if in fact you even agree with them, which I don’t think you’ve made clear (see below). As I said, rather than either backing up your public statements or amending your position, you’re telling yourself that I’m a big meanie for demanding that you back them up.

[quote=Anonymous]It was in response to my request for more substance and less name calling, for lack of a better term.[/quote]
I don’t think you’re trying very hard to find a better term. We’re not talking about name calling or anything like it.

Let’s say I don’t believe in global warming. Someone starts a thread on how terrible it is. I could just say, “There’s no such thing as global warming.” That’s a legitimate, on topic statement, but it’s a little flat – it leaves a bunch of questions about why I hold this contrary view. So instead, I say either: 1) “I think it’s a myth – what’s your evidence;” or 2) “I think you’ve been fed a bunch of lies by tree-huggers – what’s your evidence?”

Unless you’re complaining about the “tree-hugger” part, we’re talking about perfectly legitimate points. In response, one could do as you did and say, “Baloney – I KNOW you believe in global warming.” That’s more legitimate?

As I said, if you think that there is “class warfare” and “vilification” occurring, then you can back it up and prove me wrong. If you don’t think it’s occurring, then I can’t imagine why you’re getting involved, at least in opposition to me.

[quote=Anonymous]That request by me was not brought on by an earlier exchange between us; it was brought on my just reading your posts for a few days. [/quote]
Here it is, from my 8:21 post on page 16 of the “DCUM class warfare” thread:
[quote=TheManWithAUsername][quote=Anonymous][quote=TheManWithAUsername][quote=Anonymous][quote=TheManWithAUsername][quote=Anonymous]A little off topic, but pertinent to the discussion of why everyone should pay some federal income tax if they earn wages.  We have close to 50% of the population paying no federal income tax.  Those individual's have no incentive to elect leaders who will be good use our federal monies prudently.[/quote]
Of course they do. My kids don't contribute to my HHI, but they have a big interest in how we spend our money. Those called "takers" have [b]more[/b] incentive to ensure that money is well spent, since they (supposedly) rely on it more.

Besides, the voting problems in this country don't result from deficiencies in incentive but in knowledge and judgment.[/quote]

They have an incentive to want the efficient use of money. They also have an incentive to take as much as possible from those who pay taxes and have it redistributed to them. [/quote]
Profound observation. Everyone, rich and poor, has an incentive to maximize their money.

PP said something incentives to spend wisely, and I addressed it. I don't know why you're raising this separate (and very obvious) point.[/quote]

(I am asking myself why I should continue to engage with you, MWUN. You've become more hostile and more of a jerk. Yet, here I am).[/quote]
Get a username - seriously. If you think you're posts are being misjudged and/or quickly dismissed, it will help prevent that.[/quote]

In summary:
1)	PP makes point.
2)	I counter it.
3)	You step in.
4)	I call you point obvious and irrelevant. I don’t say anything about Faux, tactics, sheep, etc.
5)	You complain about me being a jerk.
6)	I suggest that you get a username.

You’re now saying that it was more of a complaint about me harping on about Faux/Rep tactics. If so, you picked a strange time to bring it up, when I hadn’t mentioned them at all.
[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics