Oh flock...

[spence]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Actually, as for WHATEVER the neocon "school", in your biased opinion "would argue" (as if you knew), I'll answer a la Spence--WHO CARES?

You obviously, as you feel obligated to respond line for line.

I'd note your text has gone from green to red, further proof that non-violent techniques can be perfectly effective at breaking an adversary!

And you're perhaps spending more time attacking me and how I speak than you are the ideas I present. More fodder for my assertion that conservatives tend to be obsessed with personality rather than substance.

-spence

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by spence

And you're perhaps spending more time attacking me and how I speak than you are the ideas I present. More fodder for my assertion that conservatives tend to be obsessed with personality rather than substance.

-spence

Agreed.

[scottw]

oh... waaaaaa...Spence Alynski, the great condescender can dish it out but can't take it, he simply pointed out that your "ideas" are flawed and "presented" in a most slippery way...it's one thing to deal with substance but when you continually deal in false assertions and outright misstatements of fact it becomes a personality thing...the only way to respond to you is line by line as you create falsehoods and straw dogs in nearly every line...you should like the RED Spence...

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by scottw

oh... waaaaaa...Spence Alynski, the great condescender can dish it out but can't take it, he simply pointed out that your "ideas" are flawed and "presented" in a most slippery way...it's one thing to deal with substance but when you continually deal in false assertions and outright misstatements of fact it becomes a personality thing...the only way to respond to you is line by line as you create falsehoods and straw dogs in nearly every line...you should like the RED Spence...

Agreed.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by JohnnyD

Agreed.

Disagree.

[fishbones]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Disagree.

Butch, you have to keep in mind that Spence likes to play devil's advocate. And he'll usually come up with something that's worded in a way that makes it sound a little convincing, if not confusing enough to have some people believe him. He definitley knows the right language to spin things to sound good to people like JD who is like Marci to Spence's Peppermint Patty.

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by fishbones

He definitley knows the right language to spin things to sound good to people like JD who is like Marci to Spence's Peppermint Patty.

Haha... I just like fanning the pissing match fires. I've just been reading this thread for comedy's sake now. Nothing really going on in it any more.

[fishbones]

Originally Posted by JohnnyD

Haha... I just like fanning the pissing match fires. I've just been reading this thread for comedy's sake now. Nothing really going on in it any more.

I actually forgot what this is about. And since I usually have nothing of substance to add to threads anyways, I resort to trying to get a rise out of you and Spince.

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by fishbones

I actually forgot what this is about. And since I usually have nothing of substance to add to threads anyways, I resort to trying to get a rise out of you and Spince.

Exactly. 4 pages and about 10 topics covered.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

You obviously, as you feel obligated to respond line for line.


I don't feel any more "obligated" than you do. You post much more than I do. BTW, my "who cares?" response was, as I made clear, specifically to your opinion of the neocon "school", not to your whole thread. And it was an exact copy or your response to Fly Rod in his thread on John Edwards.

I'd note your text has gone from green to red, further proof that non-violent techniques can be perfectly effective at breaking an adversary!

There, I've gone from red to purple, so I guess I've started to recover from the thrashing of your non-violent techniques. Actually, the reason I've gone to color responses is purely technical. I don't know how or what buttons to push to block off the quotes to which I'm responding, so I tried the bold fonts, but that looked too "violent"/angry. Then I tried the color stuff, which is fun/playful. Now that I see that this will be interpreted as having some psychological meaning, I'm at a loss as what to do. Oh, well, I'll just go on having fun with the colors. I suppose, when I use green again, it'll mean that I have been convinced to support man-made global warming.

And you're perhaps spending more time attacking me and how I speak than you are the ideas I present. More fodder for my assertion that conservatives tend to be obsessed with personality rather than substance.-spence

I certainly don't mean to attack you, personally, Spence. From what I've seen in these threads, I'd say your a great guy. You're certainly fun to argue with. We could probably have some long, fruitless, entertaining debates over some brewski. I try, I think, to respond to your ideas. In rereading my post, it is clear to me that I directly responded, line by line, to a statement you made, and when I referred to you, it was the persona you presented with your words, not whoever YOU actually are. And, yes, your diction is, quite often, to me, not precise enough. It loses the impact it should have because it is too hedgy, as if avoiding being too direct. Maybe, rather than seeing my opinion as an attack, you might take it, or leave it, as a correction, such as those statements, to which you refer, that some perceive to be anti-american, but are actually meant to strengthen America. Of course, you are rather specific and direct when you attack (in your red, violent mode) others in these threads.