If you read the definition, you'll see that it doesn't say anything about them being deserving of your hatred. You don't get off because you think hating them is justified.
You're a bigot regardless. See how reading for comprehension is valuable? Try it once.
As to when you displayed it, how fucking stupid are you? I posted YOUR QUOTE. Is someone ghostwriting your stuff? You should fire them because they're making you look like a bigoted ignoramus.
So, after all these replies, all you have to show for your effort is proof that you're a bigot, that you can't read very well, and that you have very little skill in differentiating between facts and opinions.
The FACT is you're a bigot. As to your "facts" I'm still waiting for your sources.
I didn't "miss" anything, you posted a statement that never appeared in your "facts" anywhere previously. I stated that. You'll notice I never said it wasn't RELEVANT, only that you never stated it before. Guess that makes YOU the stupid one huh? Reading comprehension is your friend.
"YOU NEVER SAID THAT IN YOUR PREVIOUS POSTS."
How did you misunderstand something so simple?
Source your "facts" or shut your mouth. We both know you can't do either, so I'll be interested to see what you do to avoid admitting you're a liar now.
"Fact: The election of Reagan was the final nail in the coffin of the old Republican party."
Are you really so ignorant that you think that is a fact? By the way, YOU NEVER SAID THAT IN YOUR PREVIOUS POSTS. So now, not only are you not intelligent enough to discern the difference between "fact" and "opinion", you're making up new "facts" as well.
"There are several more facts there which you are unable to refute. Hint that's why they're *facts*"
First of all, there aren't said facts anywhere in your post. You're a liar. Second, I like very much your tactic of putting the burden of proof for your "facts" on me, but alas, you know very well it's on YOU to prove the veracity of your "facts", not on me to disprove them (especially since you're lying about their existence).
"You have nothing to back up whatever delusional positions you hold and so do nothing but whine about how people are being mean merely because they speak the truth."
I never once called anyone mean, stop lying. But then, if you stopped lying, you'd have nothing to post.
You lost, got shut up, and lied. Now you're calling me troll. Again, I don't think that's you trying to be ironic.
Post your "facts" (and not that idiotic drivel you attempted in this post, neither of your "facts" are facts by any definition of the word) then SOURCE YOUR FACTS REPUTABLY OR SHUT YOUR FUCKING MOUTH.
I'll wait for your "facts" and sources. I suspect it will be a long wait.
"Main Entry: bigot : a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group with hatred and intolerance "
So let's see, did you do that?
"Now, these people that you have chosen to ally yourself with have a long track record of being thieves, liars, mass murderers, anti-American religious extremists, and generally demonstrating no redeeming characteristics whatsoever."
Okay guy, I can see I have to spell this out for you. I thought I was done with retards after I finished my internship...
MY DEFINITION OF "help" IS NOT THE SAME AS YOUR DEFINITION OF "help". You made an assumption and ran your cocksucker before clarifying what I meant by "help". See now why you're wrong?
As to your anecdote, IT'S ONE fucking anecdote. How about you broaden your thinking a little instead of assuming your short sighted assessment of the situation applies?
"But, then again, I'm "stupid" and "ignore reality", "
Finally, we agree on something.
Here is what happened, PAY ATTENTION. You decided to respond to something, but missed the point completely. NORMALLY, I would have attempted to elucidate, but you were a twat, so you got the hand.
This is YOUR fault for assuming you knew WTF I was talking about and shooting off your mouth. You didn't know. Stop assuming your ONE perspective is all encompassing and you won't get called stupid anymore.
I live on the planet where assigning positions to people when they haven't taken them on themselves is know as "the straw man" fallacy. You just used it. You happen to live here too.
As to your points, you did nothing to refute me. I stated support for not one of the positions you attempted to foist on me, so why do you think you said anything of value here? Government runs things badly. There is no disagreement, so fabricating an argument to use against me was your only shot, and it failed. You know I'm right, that's why you avoided my point and went straight to fallacy.
I guess the answer to my original question is "You're very fucking stupid".
"- Providing adequate health care to all citizens of the country we live in - Sensible foreign policy - Finding alternatives to oil - Abolishing capital punishment - Making taxation more fair - Taking better care of our environment"
You just proved his point. None of these things are attainable goals, as they are so undefined and nonspecific as to be useless. They are simply ginned up references to social ills, with happy little vagaries included to avoid answering the hard questions like "what the fuck does sensible foreign policy" mean.
"Yep, nothing but total mud-slinging at the Republican party...."
What the hell is the point of this? You KNOW the Democrats attack the Republicans, and vice versa, and you know they use policy differences to do it, so stop with this crap. Just ask yourself what the genesis of the phrase "tax cuts for the rich" is and you'll see why you're wrong.
YOU are why our two party system sucks, we're stuck with stupid Democrat fanatics on one side, and Republican zealots on the other, and every time someone with a legitimate criticism finds the courage to speak, they get shouted down by the likes of you and yours.
Shut up and listen, maybe you'll learn a thing or two.
Your post would make sense if it weren't for freely available student loans (with the easiest qualification requirements possible, apart from none) and Junior/Community colleges.
Blather all you like about how money is the determinant, but when it comes to higher education, you are dead fucking wrong.
"that conservatives and Bush-defenders can only resort to a mock "hurt sensibilities" and accusations of name-calling in the light of egregious misbehavior, failed policies, and Machiavellian gumption is both a sign of complete intellectual poverty and utter bald-faced hypocrisy."
So why resort to the same behavior?
OOOH! Your argument helped ME! Sucks to know you destroyed your own attempt at an argument doesn't it?
Yes it does, my question is, what does a blowhard with delusions about the importance of his opinion say when he's cornered after saying something stupid and needs to backpedal, but still wants to include his emotionally charged, sub-human bigotry.
I said "hate" not mean. Reading is clearyl not your strong suit.
As to the "facts", had you posted some instead of a hate filled rant maybe I'd have refuted them.
And it speaks to the strength of your argument that your reply is to begin calling names. What else would I expect from someone for whom the height of commentary is to hatefully pander to the childish prejudices of his audience.
"Since forever. The FBI's job is to discover who committed crimes."
You act like the FBI is supposed to sit around waiting until a crime occurs then investigate it after the fact. As though they aren't also tasked with investigating crimes that are occurring or will occur.
"Having to prove that you don't deserve to be on those lists, that it is a case of mistaken identity, seems like having to prove your innocence."
Innocence of what? It's not a "committed a crime" list, it's a "watch" list. You're not being presumed guilty of anything.
Based on your inability to see that, I can't really find a reason to say anything else to you. Being stupid like you are doesn't mean you can ignore reality, and discussing things like this with zealots like you bores me.
"Would it be OK for Bush to eat Jew baby brains if Clinton did too?"
No. It would make those who stood silently while Clinton feasted, but freaked out when Bush did the same hypocrites, however.
The point you and your kind miss when this happens is that large portions of the people so vehemently denouncing Bush for his wrongs ignored the wrongs when it was their guy. Hypocrites. By the way, I said impeach both of them.
"My fucking goodness are people stupid...in this country..."
Every time one of you socialized medicine, more taxes buffoons pipes up, I have to ask, what government run programs aren't bloated messes run by incompetents?
And you want your health care run by these people? You genuinely want a bureaucrat in charge of when and how you recieve your medical care? HAVE YOU BEEN TO THE DMV?
And yet, in two responses now, you've said nothing that demonstrates that. In fact, your responses make it clear you can't do so.
"Privacy matters blah blah blah"
Please try to avoid non-sequiturs like this one, I NEVER ONCE SAID ANYTHING ABOUT PRIVACY, one way or the other. Your mental diarrhea is not of any interest to me.
"Media that is widely available on the internet is not in any way personal, and as such does not come under this."
And what happens when your "private" information becomes available on the internet? Such as when some Best Buy employeee posts it? Oh right, your point falls apart.
Nope, you tried, but I was right, you couldn't get it done. I'm not surprised.
If you plan to respond, please answer my original question without the ridiculous, childish attempts to inject your screed.
"b) cameras won't even help after the fact, if they're a cell of suicide bombers. There's no one to track down."
This is wrong, Information about the how of a particular act went down can be gained by watching tapes of it occurring. That will most certainly "help" even after the fact.
The cameras are a pretty bad idea, but overstating your point like you did helps no one.
Slashdot Mirror
"It's not as if you're an anonymous commenter jumping in on someone else's conversation. No sir."
Fair point.
It's doesn't make you any less wrong, or any less of a weasel though.
See, instead of owning up, you wriggle. Just like before you pathetic fuck.
If you read the definition, you'll see that it doesn't say anything about them being deserving of your hatred. You don't get off because you think hating them is justified.
You're a bigot regardless. See how reading for comprehension is valuable? Try it once.
As to when you displayed it, how fucking stupid are you? I posted YOUR QUOTE. Is someone ghostwriting your stuff? You should fire them because they're making you look like a bigoted ignoramus.
So, after all these replies, all you have to show for your effort is proof that you're a bigot, that you can't read very well, and that you have very little skill in differentiating between facts and opinions.
The FACT is you're a bigot. As to your "facts" I'm still waiting for your sources.
Or shut up.
I didn't "miss" anything, you posted a statement that never appeared in your "facts" anywhere previously. I stated that. You'll notice I never said it wasn't RELEVANT, only that you never stated it before. Guess that makes YOU the stupid one huh? Reading comprehension is your friend.
"YOU NEVER SAID THAT IN YOUR PREVIOUS POSTS."
How did you misunderstand something so simple?
Source your "facts" or shut your mouth. We both know you can't do either, so I'll be interested to see what you do to avoid admitting you're a liar now.
"No, you wouldn't because I did and you didn't."
Fine then, point to one.
"Fact: The election of Reagan was the final nail in the coffin of the old Republican party."
Are you really so ignorant that you think that is a fact? By the way, YOU NEVER SAID THAT IN YOUR PREVIOUS POSTS. So now, not only are you not intelligent enough to discern the difference between "fact" and "opinion", you're making up new "facts" as well.
"There are several more facts there which you are unable to refute. Hint that's why they're *facts*"
First of all, there aren't said facts anywhere in your post. You're a liar. Second, I like very much your tactic of putting the burden of proof for your "facts" on me, but alas, you know very well it's on YOU to prove the veracity of your "facts", not on me to disprove them (especially since you're lying about their existence).
"You have nothing to back up whatever delusional positions you hold and so do nothing but whine about how people are being mean merely because they speak the truth."
I never once called anyone mean, stop lying. But then, if you stopped lying, you'd have nothing to post.
You lost, got shut up, and lied. Now you're calling me troll. Again, I don't think that's you trying to be ironic.
Post your "facts" (and not that idiotic drivel you attempted in this post, neither of your "facts" are facts by any definition of the word) then SOURCE YOUR FACTS REPUTABLY OR SHUT YOUR FUCKING MOUTH.
I'll wait for your "facts" and sources. I suspect it will be a long wait.
Hmm let's see...
"Main Entry: bigot
: a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group with hatred and intolerance "
So let's see, did you do that?
"Now, these people that you have chosen to ally yourself with have a long track record of being thieves, liars, mass murderers, anti-American religious extremists, and generally demonstrating no redeeming characteristics whatsoever."
WHY YES YOU DID!!!
"I mean is lying all you're truly capable of?"
I'm guessing this isn't you trying to be ironic.
Okay guy, I can see I have to spell this out for you. I thought I was done with retards after I finished my internship...
MY DEFINITION OF "help" IS NOT THE SAME AS YOUR DEFINITION OF "help". You made an assumption and ran your cocksucker before clarifying what I meant by "help". See now why you're wrong?
As to your anecdote, IT'S ONE fucking anecdote. How about you broaden your thinking a little instead of assuming your short sighted assessment of the situation applies?
"But, then again, I'm "stupid" and "ignore reality", "
Finally, we agree on something.
Here is what happened, PAY ATTENTION. You decided to respond to something, but missed the point completely. NORMALLY, I would have attempted to elucidate, but you were a twat, so you got the hand.
This is YOUR fault for assuming you knew WTF I was talking about and shooting off your mouth. You didn't know. Stop assuming your ONE perspective is all encompassing and you won't get called stupid anymore.
"What fucking planet do you live on?"
I live on the planet where assigning positions to people when they haven't taken them on themselves is know as "the straw man" fallacy. You just used it. You happen to live here too.
As to your points, you did nothing to refute me. I stated support for not one of the positions you attempted to foist on me, so why do you think you said anything of value here? Government runs things badly. There is no disagreement, so fabricating an argument to use against me was your only shot, and it failed. You know I'm right, that's why you avoided my point and went straight to fallacy.
I guess the answer to my original question is "You're very fucking stupid".
"- Providing adequate health care to all citizens of the country we live in
- Sensible foreign policy
- Finding alternatives to oil
- Abolishing capital punishment
- Making taxation more fair
- Taking better care of our environment"
You just proved his point. None of these things are attainable goals, as they are so undefined and nonspecific as to be useless. They are simply ginned up references to social ills, with happy little vagaries included to avoid answering the hard questions like "what the fuck does sensible foreign policy" mean.
"Yep, nothing but total mud-slinging at the Republican party...."
What the hell is the point of this? You KNOW the Democrats attack the Republicans, and vice versa, and you know they use policy differences to do it, so stop with this crap. Just ask yourself what the genesis of the phrase "tax cuts for the rich" is and you'll see why you're wrong.
YOU are why our two party system sucks, we're stuck with stupid Democrat fanatics on one side, and Republican zealots on the other, and every time someone with a legitimate criticism finds the courage to speak, they get shouted down by the likes of you and yours.
Shut up and listen, maybe you'll learn a thing or two.
Your post would make sense if it weren't for freely available student loans (with the easiest qualification requirements possible, apart from none) and Junior/Community colleges.
Blather all you like about how money is the determinant, but when it comes to higher education, you are dead fucking wrong.
"that conservatives and Bush-defenders can only resort to a mock "hurt sensibilities" and accusations of name-calling in the light of egregious misbehavior, failed policies, and Machiavellian gumption is both a sign of complete intellectual poverty and utter bald-faced hypocrisy."
So why resort to the same behavior?
OOOH! Your argument helped ME! Sucks to know you destroyed your own attempt at an argument doesn't it?
"Does that answer your question?"
Yes it does, my question is, what does a blowhard with delusions about the importance of his opinion say when he's cornered after saying something stupid and needs to backpedal, but still wants to include his emotionally charged, sub-human bigotry.
I think you answered it quite clearly.
I said "hate" not mean. Reading is clearyl not your strong suit.
As to the "facts", had you posted some instead of a hate filled rant maybe I'd have refuted them.
And it speaks to the strength of your argument that your reply is to begin calling names. What else would I expect from someone for whom the height of commentary is to hatefully pander to the childish prejudices of his audience.
"Since forever. The FBI's job is to discover who committed crimes."
You act like the FBI is supposed to sit around waiting until a crime occurs then investigate it after the fact. As though they aren't also tasked with investigating crimes that are occurring or will occur.
"Having to prove that you don't deserve to be on those lists, that it is a case of mistaken identity, seems like having to prove your innocence."
Innocence of what? It's not a "committed a crime" list, it's a "watch" list. You're not being presumed guilty of anything.
Looks like you are trying to "wriggle out of admitting you were wrong".
Why am I not surprised.
"It's really helping in London, isn't it?"
Yes, it seems to be.
Based on your inability to see that, I can't really find a reason to say anything else to you. Being stupid like you are doesn't mean you can ignore reality, and discussing things like this with zealots like you bores me.
Stop pretending that spewing a moronic screed on a page is "responding" to my argument.
It's no surprise you can't tell the difference, but for those of us who can, it's pretty fucking obvious.
"Yeah, insult me, that'll make up for your inability to respond to my argument. Oh, wait"
Why would I waste time responding to an argument? YOU NEVER RESPONDED TO MINE.
Do what you accuse me of not doing or admit you're a lying hypocrite.
You lost, you're wrong, and you're too stupid to realize it. Stop blaming that on me.
"Would it be OK for Bush to eat Jew baby brains if Clinton did too?"
No. It would make those who stood silently while Clinton feasted, but freaked out when Bush did the same hypocrites, however.
The point you and your kind miss when this happens is that large portions of the people so vehemently denouncing Bush for his wrongs ignored the wrongs when it was their guy. Hypocrites. By the way, I said impeach both of them.
"My fucking goodness are people stupid...in this country..."
Don't be so hard on yourself.
You know, it's a sad state of affairs when a hate filled screed like yours gets modded "interesting".
Every time one of you socialized medicine, more taxes buffoons pipes up, I have to ask, what government run programs aren't bloated messes run by incompetents?
And you want your health care run by these people? You genuinely want a bureaucrat in charge of when and how you recieve your medical care? HAVE YOU BEEN TO THE DMV?
How fucking stupid are you?
"Though they had to be running Windows"
Q TH
Come on man, you knew this, but in case you didn't
http://www.amazon.com/Macsoft-Halo-Mac/dp/B00006I
http://www.apple.com/games/articles/2003/11/halo/
"No, you asked me the difference between two situations"
And you failed to give it. Three times now. Badly.
Give up, or get smarter, you're simply not intelligent enough to share an opinion.
"don't worry about me dude. if people like me get uppity enough, you can always shoot me, right? ;-)"
Nah, we wouldn't have to. All we have to do is let you speak and you'll shoot yourself in the foot.
"what a retard"
Thanks for signing your post at least.
"You're wrong, plain and simple"
And yet, in two responses now, you've said nothing that demonstrates that. In fact, your responses make it clear you can't do so.
"Privacy matters blah blah blah"
Please try to avoid non-sequiturs like this one, I NEVER ONCE SAID ANYTHING ABOUT PRIVACY, one way or the other. Your mental diarrhea is not of any interest to me.
"Media that is widely available on the internet is not in any way personal, and as such does not come under this."
And what happens when your "private" information becomes available on the internet? Such as when some Best Buy employeee posts it? Oh right, your point falls apart.
Nope, you tried, but I was right, you couldn't get it done. I'm not surprised.
If you plan to respond, please answer my original question without the ridiculous, childish attempts to inject your screed.
But you'll fail. Again.
"b) cameras won't even help after the fact, if they're a cell of suicide bombers. There's no one to track down."
This is wrong, Information about the how of a particular act went down can be gained by watching tapes of it occurring. That will most certainly "help" even after the fact.
The cameras are a pretty bad idea, but overstating your point like you did helps no one.