Bowfinger
Lifer
- Nov 17, 2002
- 15,776
- 392
- 126
Whatever, rationalize it however you wish. The fact remains you are quite one-sided in your attacks, routinely blasting the left while offering only token criticisms -- at most -- of the right. That is why you are perceived to be Republican, whether you accept it as accurate or not.B.S. I said liberals because that's who I was talking to, liberals. ...
In short, actions speak louder than words.
(I'll also note the irony of you freely assigning labels to others while crying about others applying them to you. "That's who I was talking to, liberals.")
Those are words. The fact remains you are quite one-sided in your attacks, routinely blasting the left while offering only token criticisms -- at most -- of the right. That is why you are perceived to be Republican, whether you accept it as accurate or not.I've already said I'm not a NeoCon, not a Rep, certainly I'm not a liberal...
You also parroted pretty much verbatim all the neo-con excuses for invading Iraq, and summarily dismissed all evidence to the contrary. That is why you are perceived to be a neo-con, whether you accept it as accurate or not.
Once again, actions speak louder than words.
Frankly, I don't care. My responses to you aren't based on labels. They're based on your actions, i.e., the positions you've taken and the attacks you've made.I guess I'm fiscally conservative, socially liberal, all Realist. What does that make me on the label scale?
Yes, labels sometimes simplify discussion, and yes they can lead people to start with bad assumptions, but ultimately they don't really matter. You can call yourself whatever makes you feel better about yourself or helps you sleep at night. People generally don't care. While they may make generalizations about you, it will be prompted by an action, not a label.
Those are words. The fact remains you are quite one-sided in your attacks, routinely blasting the left while offering only token criticisms -- at most -- of the right. You also parroted pretty much verbatim all the neo-con excuses for invading Iraq, and summarily dismissed all evidence to the contrary. That is why you are perceived to be a neo-con, whether you accept it as accurate or not.Please read earlier in the thread. I've already debunked that I'm a NeoCon. Keep trying to label me though, it'll be easier to target once you've got a label that'll stick.
Once again, actions speak louder than words.
Nor did I say otherwise. I just pointed out it was liberals and only liberals you had blamed at that point in the discussion.I never said, All liberals are the 100% reason why we have illegal invasion...but, we both know I didn't say that, don't we.
Whatever. I can guarantee you I would not be doing that because I'm not an idiot. It's stupid, reckless, and far more likely to lead to your own injury or death. It would appear most of his neighbors are also not idiots since apparently none of them have been sued -- twice -- for taking the law into their own hands as he did. When we start seeing hundreds of such stories, maybe then we'll agree the residents of the area have been forced to act. For now, his actions are far outside the norm.The illegal invasion has long since passed the point of shoot from the hip. I guaran godd@mn t you, if it was you and your family and property on the border down there, and your neighbor was murdered, your friends and family were endangered, assaulted, vandalized, and your Fed government was basically doing almost everything it could do to not stop the invasion, you'd be right out there with your gun rounding up illegals in your spare time. You'd be a total and complete F'ing idiot not to. The invading illegals have turned it back into the Wild West for the US locals there...hard to keep following laws in that environment, and I'm sure not blaming the guy from 1800 miles away.
Chuck
