What can I say but...Berkeley?

<< Unfortunately for them, we tried that after the bombing of the US barracks in Saudi, 2 American embassy bombings, and the attack upon the USS Cole. We gave peace a chance after those acts of war waged against our (and other) citizens. What kind of reward did we get for "giving peace a chance"? Over 3000 civilians dead........ >>



Yup, I dare the Berkeley kids to walk up to Al Qaeda with a flower and a granola bar and see what peace gets them.

 

[Texmaster]

<<

<< Wrong. Nothing in that article was about race but about what a group of kids stood for and their response was to try and squash the first ammendment rights of a deferring opinion by destroying newspapers. You need to read more. >>



The Hispanic kids were against the white kids, maybe you didn't read well enough. blah blah blah. >>



Wrong again. Are you saying only white kids read conservative newspapers? Quit trying to make a racial issue out of a political issue. But then again, that is where some of you liberals really strive for.



<< and the school did not support the conduct in the class but may actually support a class on sexuality. Whether the class was opened again or not only has meaning if the same conduct will go on. >>



LOL Then why did it count as college credit if the school didn't support it? You are fading fast.

 

[Fausto]

Way to pick at tiny details and continue to ignore all significant points made against your position.

Still dying to know why the extent of your political life is apparently confined to ATOT.....

Fausto

 

[Vic]

<< While Tex occasionally gives the rest of us "conservatives" a bad rap by association, I think that calling him a "Nazi" is a little over the top. No one has said "If you don't get in line, we'll lock you away!" like you've said. Instead of understanding the reasons for the criticism againt Ms. Lee's grandstanding, you've only focused upon upon the fact that she's being criticized.

I enjoy listening to the pacifists preach "give peace a chance".

Unfortunately for them, we tried that after the bombing of the US barracks in Saudi, 2 American embassy bombings, and the attack upon the USS Cole. We gave peace a chance after those acts of war waged against our (and other) citizens. What kind of reward did we get for "giving peace a chance"? Over 3000 civilians dead........

Some people have a difficult time accepting the truth that some people don't want peace, that there really isn't any "honorable" intent within the violence, pain, death, and suffering they impose upon innocents--and that no amount of coddling to their "demands" will satisfy their thirst for destruction.

Sometimes you have to fight for what's right (or just more right that what you are fighting against). I understand that some people are afraid of the consequences of agression, today we call them sheep, 60 years ago, we called them "the French". 60 years ago someone came to their rescue, problem is that today we don't have the luxury of anyone other than ourselves to protect us. >>



Excellent post.
You're right, I did go a little "over the top." Too much coffee for me this morning, I guess.
You're also right that I do not care one whit about Ms. Lee or her "grandstanding." It is the people who are so upset about what she did that give her power. Especially when obscurity is the fate that she most deserves. Like I said before, I do not agree with her position or her views and I am not defending her.
What I am defending is our right to peacefully dissent, even in time of public crisis or war. I agree completely that violence and war does have its place and that sometimes you can only be pushed so far and then you have to push back. But that does not mean the US then has to stop being a free country.
My advice: quit giving these nutjobs the fame that they don't deserve.

 

[Texmaster]

<< LOL! I'm very familiar with what a Nazi is (or more appropriately, was). As I'm very sure that you yourself aren't old enough to have lived through WWII, I pretty sure that you have no personal knowledge either. >>



Then Define how I am a Nazi you ignorant piece of trash.



<< But let's leave that alone and get to your argument, shall we? >>



Ah running away from your point now I see like a gutless coward. What a shocker.



<< The funny thing about professional flamers/ranters like yourself on internet message boards is that you think that just being intimidating is enough to win. >>



LOL Oh boy this is going to be fun.



<< The facts that your post had an actual content of something close to ZERO and that your insults were based on little to no fact whatsoever is meaningless to you. >>



Then prove it. Debate the facts.



<< You simply fling insults in the dark, hoping that one will stick, and act intimidating, believing that if that person never posts in this thread again that you have somehow won. Your reason for thinking so if most likely based on the fact that most people DON'T respond back to your posts and you (thinking exactly like the noisy barking dog in someone's backyard, an analogy which, I think, is best for the way you post here) think that you have won when in fact all you have done is disgusted someone. >>



This little temper tantrum you are displaying is amusing.

I have great respect for people who back up their arguements. If you notice in my sig, I am nominating someone for ELITE status that has vastly different political idiology from me. But he does some things you don't:

#1 He doesn't run away from an arguement or statement he made
#2 He backs up his arguements with factual evidence.

I respect him for that. You however don't back up your facts and instead want to cry about my behavior to people like you that dodge arguements instead of answering them.



<< We are not at war. Constitutionally, this is a "time of public crisis." >>



Tell that to the soldiers in Afganistan you Moron.



<< (learn to fscking spell, you moron) >>



HAHAHA The voice of the doomed. When the spellcheaker men in tights show up, you know someone can't debate! LOL



<< However, even during time of war, most intelligent people agree that peaceful dissent is required in order for the public debate to proceed smoothly and for the public cause. We are not slaves here in the US, much as you would like otherwise. >>



You want to dissent? Fine. Give me a viable alternative for your decent to the problem at hand. You can't? There's a shocker.

You are slamming me for disagreeing with someone else is at the hight of your own ignorance. I never said once that she should'nt be allow to speak you Ignorant Moron! LOL



<< You are correct, I admit to being slightly ignorant about this particular subject. Maybe that's because there's nothing interesting in it. >>



LOL To you perhaps. But you have no prolbem displaying that ignorance for all to see.



<< A Congressional Representative, from a state and district far away from mine, chose to be the sole dissenting vote on the issue of whether or not to give GW wartime-like powers. Yawn... >>



Thats right. Go back to your cartoons and fruitloops. If you don't want to be up to date on the issues fine, but don't slam those that are.



<< As for my accusation, it is dead fscking on. I know your type. You hate everyone who disagrees with you. You would change the world in your image, by force if you could. So yeah, you're a Nazi. Wake up and smell the gas chambers. >>



Then prove it you gutless Coward. What posssible characteristics have I displayed here that make me a Nazi?

Back it up.

 

[Optimus]

1) I disagree with her stance and statements almost completely.

2) I agree with her right to say those things and vote her conscience.

3) I resent Moonbeam's labelling everyone who agrees with the military actions in Afganistan as "nazis".

4) I will continue to dismiss anyone who stands against the military actions IF they cannot provide ANY viable alternative actions.

 

[Corn]

<< The funny thing about professional flamers/ranters like yourself on internet message boards is that you think that just being intimidating is enough to win. >>



Dude, Tex is hardly a professional flamer. But more to the point, you use the same intimidation "tactics" you assail. Here are but a few examples:



<< ....and that your insults were based on little to no fact whatsoever is meaningless to you.... >>



Kinda like how the following "insult" was not based on any "fact"?



<< If you don't get in line, we'll lock you away!" If you only knew just how this reveals you for the Nazi that you really are.... >>



This one is precious:



<< Your reason for thinking so if most likely based on the fact that most people DON'T respond back to your posts and you (thinking exactly like the noisy barking dog in someone's backyard, an analogy which, I think, is best for the way you post here) think that you have won when in fact all you have done is disgusted someone. >>



My, what a mis-mash of creative grammar and spelling, and an armchair phychologist to boot!!! Lovely!!!! Foul you say? Instulting you for your grammatical errors? Nope, it's all good because you said so:



<< learn to fscking spell, you moron.... >>



.....hmmm, "meaningless insults".........



<< I know your type. You hate everyone who disagrees with you. You would change the world in your image, by force if you could. So yeah, you're a Nazi. Wake up and smell the gas chambers. >>



Where are your "facts" again to back up this "meaningless insult" against Tex?


So, what have we learned about [/b]you[/b] PSYWVic?

Well, for one we've learned you're a hypocrite who can say "fsck" a couple times in his posts.



Damn, now I'm starting to sound like you......

 

[CKDragon]

<< You simply fling insults in the dark, hoping that one will stick, and act intimidating, believing that if that person never posts in this thread again that you have somehow won. Your reason for thinking so if most likely based on the fact that most people DON'T respond back to your posts and you (thinking exactly like the noisy barking dog in someone's backyard, an analogy which, I think, is best for the way you post here) think that you have won when in fact all you have done is disgusted someone. >>



Alright, political issues aside - who didn't see some bit of truth in this observation? I'm sure it can be applied to more than one in the forums...

CK

 

[drewshin]

im not sure what texmaster has against mexicans, maybe one ran off with his wife???

i say the more mexicans born here the better...they work hard (when was the last time you saw a mexican begging for change?), and have more "family values" than those families that the conversative right likes to talk about.

this country wouldnt be anywhere without immigrants. of course there's going to be bad apples and freeloaders, but dont you think there were probably around the same percentage of criminals when the irish came, then germans, then the italians, then the asians?

in every period you had the ignorant and dim-witted calling for closing of borders or a stop to immigration, with cries of 'theyre taking our jobs, or they're criminals', but america kept on growing and will keep on growing as long as we have immigrants coming here, legally or illegally.

hmm i wonder where the co-founders of intel came from, mr. andy grove? and the list goes on and on.

 

[Texmaster]

<< im not sure what texmaster has against mexicans, maybe one ran off with his wife??? >>



And Where did I use the word Mexicans? Are all non english speaking illegal aliens Mexicans to you?

LOL How ignorant you are



<< i say the more mexicans born here the better...they work hard (when was the last time you saw a mexican begging for change?), and have more "family values" than those families that the conversative right likes to talk about. >>



Illegal aliens (I wont generalize them as Mexicans as you are doing) Are not paying any taxes and using public services.

This is a slap in the face to every immigrant who come over here and is over here going through the process.



<< this country wouldnt be anywhere without immigrants. of course there's going to be bad apples and freeloaders, but dont you think there were probably around the same percentage of criminals when the irish came, then germans, then the italians, then the asians? >>



America is now an established country. We cannot afford literally to keep funding illegal aliens.



<< in every period you had the ignorant and dim-witted calling for closing of borders or a stop to immigration, with cries of 'theyre taking our jobs, or they're criminals', but america kept on growing and will keep on growing as long as we have immigrants coming here, legally or illegally. >>



Judges on the border are in such high demand to hear illegal immigrant cases that they have to start at 5 in the morning.

And even then the illegals know that they can plea down to get out of a court case because the system is so overrun.

You really need to read more about the situation before spouting this ignorance.

 

[Fausto]

<< << You simply fling insults in the dark, hoping that one will stick, and act intimidating, believing that if that person never posts in this thread again that you have somehow won. Your reason for thinking so if most likely based on the fact that most people DON'T respond back to your posts and you (thinking exactly like the noisy barking dog in someone's backyard, an analogy which, I think, is best for the way you post here) think that you have won when in fact all you have done is disgusted someone. >>

Alright, political issues aside - who didn't see some bit of truth in this observation? I'm sure it can be applied to more than one in the forums... >>



Well, duh.



<< Dude, Tex is hardly a professional flamer. >>


Uh, yes he is. He spends all his time in here either contributing to posts that he can either really get behind or really rip on. If this is the extent of his political and social activity, this makes him a professional flamer. Put up or shut up.

Fausto

 

[b0mbrman]

<< "She voted her conscience in Congress," Berkeley
Chancellor Robert Berdahl said as he introduced Lee. >>


I'm all for free speech but I wish the Chancellor of all people would stay out of this. Him getting into this business sorta makes it seem like Lee's position is the *official* position of the University whereas the only official position the University takes should be in support of free thinking.

And of course
<==-- in Berkeley

 

[CKDragon]

<< "She voted her conscience in Congress," Berkeley
Chancellor Robert Berdahl said as he introduced Lee.

I'm all for free speech but I wish the Chancellor of all people would stay out of this. Him getting into this business sorta makes it seem like Lee's position is the *official* position of the University whereas the only official position the University takes should be in support of free thinking. >>



Well, all the Chancellor said was that she voted her conscience. He didn't really say whether he agreed or disagreed, but it depends on how it was said and how far you read into it, I suppose.

CK

 

[Texmaster]

<< Uh, yes he is. He spends all his time in here either contributing to posts that he can either really get behind or really rip on. If this is the extent of his political and social activity, this makes him a professional flamer. Put up or shut up.

Fausto >>



HAHAHA I'll take this one Corn. First you were STUPID enought to say I've never been out of Texas and I had to smack you down on the 3 other countries and 3 other states I have lived in, including California.

And now you make this Moronic Claim.

Allow me to smack you down once again! LOL

Not a Political Thread

Not a Political Thread

Not a Political Thread

Not a Political Thread

Not a Political Thread and I even congradulate a Liberal for Getting Elite Status!

Not a Political Thread

Not a Political Thread

Not a Political Thread

Not a Political Thread



And thats just the first Page!

You Sir have been OWNED once again

 

[Corn]

Tex, for the love of god, please quit with the "bring the facts". This is an argument that you've provided no "facts" to support your position--and as a matter of fact, this "argument" is solely one of opinion's.



<< LOL How ignorant you are >>




You know Tex, you bring these insults against yourself. I don't think your a Nazi, but I have serious doubts about your cognative ability. PSYWvic called you a "professional", but you're just a rank amateur that embarasses those whom might have similar values.

I'm starting to think I made a mistake in my earlier defense of you.........

 

[Fausto]

<< << You simply fling insults in the dark, hoping that one will stick, and act intimidating, believing that if that person never posts in this thread again that you have somehow won. Your reason for thinking so if most likely based on the fact that most people DON'T respond back to your posts and you (thinking exactly like the noisy barking dog in someone's backyard, an analogy which, I think, is best for the way you post here) think that you have won when in fact all you have done is disgusted someone. >> >>


How Texmaster "debates" an issue: a primer.

The totals so far in this thread alone:

Use of the word "liberal(s)" as a derogatory term: 7
Use of the word "ignorant" or "ignorance" applied to another poster: 8
Use of (my personal favorite) "LOL": 8
Use of the word "moron" or "moronic" in reference to another poster: 5
General questioning of other posters' respective intellectual capacities: 3

Just an observation.

EDIT: one more "moron" and "LOL" added while I was typing.

 

[b0mbrman]

<< Well, all the Chancellor said was that she voted her conscience. He didn't really say whether he agreed or disagreed, but it depends on how it was said and how far you read into it, I suppose.
CK >>


Right...how far I read into it...well never mind that *I was there*...

 

[Corn]

<< Uh, yes he is. He spends all his time in here either contributing to posts that he can either really get behind or really rip on. If this is the extent of his political and social activity, this makes him a professional flamer. Put up or shut up. >>



Uh, no he's not. IMHO to be considered "professional", one must be skillful in his craft. Tex aint.

 

[Texmaster]

<< Tex, for the love of god, please quit with the "bring the facts". This is an argument that you've provided no "facts" to support your position--and as a matter of fact, this "argument" is solely one of opinion's. >>



If you look closely Corn, I only asked for facts on political issues. He made quite a few accusations about me and my statements so I asked him to back them up. I'm not sorry for a second.



<< You know Tex, you bring these insults against yourself. I don't think your a Nazi, but I have serious doubts about your cognative ability. PSYWvic called you a "professional", but you're just a rank amateur that embarasses those whom might have similar values.

I'm starting to think I made a mistake in my earlier defense of you......... >>



thats your decesion. But I'm the one who has made good friends with Elledan, Czar, Nemesis 77 and BaliBabyDoc.

Can you say the same?

These guys think their arguements out and they don't accuse someone of being someone they are not. So, if I do get accused you bet I'm going to demand facts.

 

[Texmaster]

<<

<< << You simply fling insults in the dark, hoping that one will stick, and act intimidating, believing that if that person never posts in this thread again that you have somehow won. Your reason for thinking so if most likely based on the fact that most people DON'T respond back to your posts and you (thinking exactly like the noisy barking dog in someone's backyard, an analogy which, I think, is best for the way you post here) think that you have won when in fact all you have done is disgusted someone. >> >>


How Texmaster "debates" an issue: a primer.

The totals so far in this thread alone:

Use of the word "liberal(s)" as a derogatory term: 7
Use of the word "ignorant" or "ignorance" applied to another poster: 8
Use of (my personal favorite) "LOL": 8
Use of the word "moron" or "moronic" in reference to another poster: 5
General questioning of other posters' respective intellectual capacities: 3

Just an observation.

EDIT: one more "moron" and "LOL" added while I was typing. >>



If those are the numbers here for the Liberals what attacked me for attacking her statement then they are not high enough

You are the one Making ignorant and moronic comments about me that I am routinely distroying.

You wont see me do this to all liberal because some have well thought out and balanced arguements.

You just don't.

 

[b0mbrman]

Berkeley talk...here ==> click

 

[Texmaster]

<< Uh, no he's not. IMHO to be considered "professional", one must be skillful in his craft. Tex aint. >>



LOL thats your opinion.

 

[flavio]

<< Wrong again. Are you saying only white kids read conservative newspapers? Quit trying to make a racial issue out of a political issue. But then again, that is where some of you liberals really strive for. >>



I'm saying the issue that sparked the whole thing was hispanics against whites, which it was. But you want to make it a liberal issue as your kind really strives for.



<< LOL Then why did it count as college credit if the school didn't support it? You are fading fast. >>



Clearly the school didn't support it if they took action to stop it. Who's fading now? LOLLOLOLOLOLOLOL

 

[Red Dawn]

<< say the more mexicans born here the better...they work hard (when was the last time you saw a mexican begging for change?), and have more "family values" than those families that the conversative right likes to talk about. >>

They wouldn't be Mexicans if they were born here, they'd be Americans.

Somebody said that she was representing his constituents well (well representing their feelings about this War) and that's true.
Being a Bay Area Resident for over 30 years I'm very familiar with the Hypocritical Liberal BS Rhetoric that eminates from the Ivory Towers in Peoples Republic of Bezerkley. They say they are open minded but in reality they are as close minded and obnoxious as Texmaster. It's usually best not to pay much attention to them becuasse most of the time what they beive defies all logic. Their opposition to the War against Terrorism isn't a surprise, in fact I would have put money on it. During the Gulf War they were just as Anti American as they are today.

 

[Vic]

<<

<< LOL! I'm very familiar with what a Nazi is (or more appropriately, was). As I'm very sure that you yourself aren't old enough to have lived through WWII, I pretty sure that you have no personal knowledge either. >>



Then Define how I am a Nazi you ignorant piece of trash.



<< But let's leave that alone and get to your argument, shall we? >>



Ah running away from your point now I see like a gutless coward. What a shocker.



<< The funny thing about professional flamers/ranters like yourself on internet message boards is that you think that just being intimidating is enough to win. >>



LOL Oh boy this is going to be fun.



<< The facts that your post had an actual content of something close to ZERO and that your insults were based on little to no fact whatsoever is meaningless to you. >>



Then prove it. Debate the facts.



<< You simply fling insults in the dark, hoping that one will stick, and act intimidating, believing that if that person never posts in this thread again that you have somehow won. Your reason for thinking so if most likely based on the fact that most people DON'T respond back to your posts and you (thinking exactly like the noisy barking dog in someone's backyard, an analogy which, I think, is best for the way you post here) think that you have won when in fact all you have done is disgusted someone. >>



This little temper tantrum you are displaying is amusing.

I have great respect for people who back up their arguements. If you notice in my sig, I am nominating someone for ELITE status that has vastly different political idiology from me. But he does some things you don't:

#1 He doesn't run away from an arguement or statement he made
#2 He backs up his arguements with factual evidence.

I respect him for that. You however don't back up your facts and instead want to cry about my behavior to people like you that dodge arguements instead of answering them.



<< We are not at war. Constitutionally, this is a "time of public crisis." >>



Tell that to the soldiers in Afganistan you Moron.



<< (learn to fscking spell, you moron) >>



HAHAHA The voice of the doomed. When the spellcheaker men in tights show up, you know someone can't debate! LOL



<< However, even during time of war, most intelligent people agree that peaceful dissent is required in order for the public debate to proceed smoothly and for the public cause. We are not slaves here in the US, much as you would like otherwise. >>



You want to dissent? Fine. Give me a viable alternative for your decent to the problem at hand. You can't? There's a shocker.

You are slamming me for disagreeing with someone else is at the hight of your own ignorance. I never said once that she should'nt be allow to speak you Ignorant Moron! LOL



<< You are correct, I admit to being slightly ignorant about this particular subject. Maybe that's because there's nothing interesting in it. >>



LOL To you perhaps. But you have no prolbem displaying that ignorance for all to see.



<< A Congressional Representative, from a state and district far away from mine, chose to be the sole dissenting vote on the issue of whether or not to give GW wartime-like powers. Yawn... >>



Thats right. Go back to your cartoons and fruitloops. If you don't want to be up to date on the issues fine, but don't slam those that are.



<< As for my accusation, it is dead fscking on. I know your type. You hate everyone who disagrees with you. You would change the world in your image, by force if you could. So yeah, you're a Nazi. Wake up and smell the gas chambers. >>



Then prove it you gutless Coward. What posssible characteristics have I displayed here that make me a Nazi?

Back it up. >>




Texmaster, have you considered reading a post in its entirety before you dissect it in order to attack it? Or what that the whole point of your rebuttal? Anyway, I'm hardly going to rebut myself to this rant when you clearly missed all the arguments contained inside.
I'll give you a little help: I'm not going to respond to your first rant that you posted after my first sentence, "Define how I am a Nazi you ignorant piece of trash," when I oh so clearly defined how you are in Nazi in my last sentence (which somehow, I don't know how, you missed).