Clark steps up the competition...

And it''s pretty obvious that Bush lied about the Trifecta. So?
What does either prove, except that politics is sleazy? Clark
hasn''t lowered the tone, or done anything Bush hasn''t.

Could be you''re now making up quotes from Bush to bolster your case
I have long been of the opinion that Democrats yell ""liar!"" at every opportunity just to distract from the fact that so many Democrat politicians really are liars...thank you for giving me another example.

Do you still think I was lying, or that I was distracting from the
discussion? I''m just questioning whether that was really
necessary. Does that make you the bad guy? No. It just
makes your arguments look weak, if you have to go ad
hominem to feel like they are complete.

Besides, I can be convinced; I can change my views. But
if you are just yanking the liberal''s chain, why bother? That''s
an important data point all on it''s own.

Robear

Quote:

Could be you''re now making up quotes from Bush to bolster your case

Quote:

I have long been of the opinion that Democrats yell ""liar!"" at every opportunity just to distract from the fact that so many Democrat politicians really are liars...thank you for giving me another example.

Do you still think I was lying, or that I was distracting from the
discussion? I''m just questioning whether that was really
necessary. Does that make you the bad guy? No. It just
makes your arguments look weak, if you have to go ad
hominem to feel like they are complete.

I didn''t say either one of these two things.

Yeah, that was me. Robear, you said:

He stated he had said it in a speech on the campaign trail. Bush said that. And it was wrong. I mean, that''s pretty blatant. When the reporters checked the speech he
referenced, it was not there.

As far as I can tell, Bush never has referenced a specific speech that reporters checked out. If so, you are lying - by your own standard. Not my standard for lying, but hey, you should at least be consistent if you are going to accuse others... (and by the way, by suggesting that Gorack said the quotes above, you are lying again... Boy, that is a really tough standard to live up to.)

I have long been of the opinion that Democrats yell ""liar!"" at every opportunity just to distract from the fact that so many Democrat politicians really are liars...thank you for giving me another example.

This isn''t an ad hominem attack - it''s just the best explanation I can come up with to explain the psychology of people who worship at the feet of admitted perjurers and then yell liar at others without any proof...

Ralcydan ->IMAGE(http://www.gamerswithjobs.com/modules/PNphpBB2/images/avatars/gallery/custom/drivingcatxx.jpg)

Gorack ->IMAGE(http://www.gamerswithjobs.com/modules/PNphpBB2/images/avatars/gallery/custom/bill.JPG)

Certis -> IMAGE(http://www.gamerswithjobs.com/modules/PNphpBB2/images/avatars/upload/icon-certis2.jpg)

Hey, this is fun!

D''oh! Okay, I''m an idiot. Bah. Too much stress at work.

Gorack, I''m sorry, I got totally confused. I''ll try to keep track
of posters better in the future. You have my apology.

Ral, well, I guess we reach an impasse again. As far as I know,
Bush stated when pushed that this occured at a speech in
Chicago, when it didn''t. That''s the evidence I''m working on.

Couching insults as psychology, and dodging the lying remark,
though, I still take issue with that.

Man, how did I walk into this particular blender? And who
makes walk-in blenders anyway? Sigh.

Robear

And who
makes walk-in blenders anyway?

How big a margarita could you make in one?

Couching insults as psychology, and dodging the lying remark,
though, I still take issue with that.

I''m not dodging the lying remark. By your ridiculous standard of calling even an inadvertant untruth a ""lie"", your statement that Bush cited a particular speech is a ""lie"", as far as I can tell. Now, as your rightly pointed out, I am jerking your chain a bit, but I am only doing so to point out how silly that kind of standard is.

As far as couching insults as psychology, I am still not sure what you are talking about. Republicans call people liars when their own quotes conflict with one another - but even then only when we think this is an intentional change of position made for personal gain, as with Clark''s position on the war. We also are willing to call people liars when their own semen testifies against them (damn you semen for your disloyalty!). Both instances are supported by direct evidence, whether it came from the liar''s mouth, or other orifice.

The Democrats these days, seem to have bought into the idea that pointing out your opponent''s lies is politically advantageous, but seem to have missed out on silly little details - like knowing what constitutes an actual lie. The fact that you confuse inadvertant mistakes with lies and then equate those with admitted perjury tells me that you have bought into this as well. I call this a mindset (psychological) issue, because the alternative reasons to explain this would reflect on those who would think this way much more poorly...

The indavertent I should not have included. That was a mistake. I''m
well aware of the difference, but I was thinking quickly and inaccurately.

Calling me a Democrat and a liar, even indirectly, is inaccurate on
both counts. Neither was I lying when I brought the Bush quote up,
as you stated. Clear enough?

I''m flabbergasted that your first thought is that someone who disagrees
with you is *knowingly* being dishonest, but frankly, I''ve heard that
before. I make mistakes; I admit them; life goes on. And I try to avoid
arguing personally. Clearly, I''m a bit too leery to step on toes; I''ll
keep that in mind in the future, if you wish.

Robear

How big a margarita could you make in one?

Not big enough.

Robear

LeapingGnome ->

oh, wait...

Calling me a Democrat and a liar, even indirectly, is inaccurate on both counts. Neither was I lying when I brought the Bush quote up, as you stated. Clear enough?

If you are going to apply an ""inadvertant"" standard to lies, then that means you are ""lying"" whenever you misspeak. So in fact, by applying your standard to your own post, I was not calling you a liar - you were. Now that you have backed away from this standard, you may quit calling yourself dishonest.

Also, if you are not a Democrat, perhaps you shouldn''t get so huffy when I make sweeping statements that don''t include you...

Ah, but then you''d believe they applied to me, and where''s the
fun in that? This way, you know that when you believe they
apply to me, you were wrong, so you can come up with
another argument, and I can step on my crank again trying to
keep it all straight. Everyone wins!

My head is spinning. I''m going to leave the field on this one.
And I''ll try to avoid posting when I''m having hard days at
work. Apparently, I don''t think so quickly, then. Or too
quickly. Anyway, you get the idea.

Robear