tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7342454496014200176.post3703708491113411611..comments2023-05-05T06:38:34.592-04:00Comments on IMHO: Government Welfare or Private Charity?Niceguy Eddiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03896896323840121445noreply@blogger.comBlogger314125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7342454496014200176.post-36265423870976216542014-05-30T16:05:20.691-04:002014-05-30T16:05:20.691-04:00"Then you agree that I was not talking about ..."Then you agree that I was not talking about past events."<br /><br />Me: "You were referring to behavior that you claim to have witnessed up to that point, which would "have already happened"."<br /><br />What are you going to claim, that anytime the present tense is used, you're referring to things that are occurring <i>while you type</i>? If not, you're talking about things that have already happened. In any event, you clearly don't understand what "inevitable" means.<br /><br />This really isn't any better for you than your utter failure to show "irrational" quotes, even after you said it "wouldn't be difficult" for you. And that wasn't any better for you than your whining about my replying to you instead of posting first on a thread. And that wasn't any better for you than when you tried to claim that I was misrepresenting your "soldiers" comment. And so on, and so on...Brabantiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02183512606468901460noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7342454496014200176.post-77546295916339166922014-05-30T11:21:17.065-04:002014-05-30T11:21:17.065-04:00It's not future tense, either.
Then you agree...It's not future tense, either.<br /><br />Then you agree that I was not talking about past events.<br /><br />Think, then post.williamhttp://www.autopsychic.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7342454496014200176.post-47065169796634820902014-05-30T07:07:46.115-04:002014-05-30T07:07:46.115-04:00""are" is not past tense."
It...""are" is not past tense."<br /><br />It's not future tense, either. You were referring to behavior that you claim to have witnessed up to that point, which would "have already happened".<br /><br />Think, then post.Brabantiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02183512606468901460noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7342454496014200176.post-44926482822807080532014-05-30T03:19:23.719-04:002014-05-30T03:19:23.719-04:00That didn't even make sense. "Inevitable&...That didn't even make sense. "Inevitable" would refer to something that is guaranteed to happen, not something you're claiming to have already happened.<br /><br />"are" is not past tense.williamhttp://www.autopsychic.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7342454496014200176.post-11437050659120604482014-05-29T10:57:39.748-04:002014-05-29T10:57:39.748-04:00"Prove it! If you can."
It's your j..."Prove it! If you can."<br /><br />It's your job to prove your assertions.<br /><br />"That you are lying. Bring it."<br /><br />That didn't even make sense. "Inevitable" would refer to something that is guaranteed to happen, not something you're claiming to have already happened. There's nothing "inevitable" for me, because you're not proving anything by letting your claims wither and die.<br /><br />"Stop your crying. You ARE hilarious ... and a toy"<br /><br />You're the one whining that I won't bring evidence regarding <i>your</i> claims, and then crying about how that makes you the loser. If you couldn't make the argument, then you shouldn't have said that you could. Your claim, your responsibility, your problem. As for "toy", I'm making you dance just by standing firm. Talk about easy.Brabantiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02183512606468901460noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7342454496014200176.post-76088329498432850712014-05-29T10:24:07.904-04:002014-05-29T10:24:07.904-04:00No, it means I know you're lying.
Prove it! I...No, it means I know you're lying.<br /><br />Prove it! If you can.<br /><br /><br />What would be "inevitable"?<br /><br />That you are lying. Bring it.<br /><br /><br />You pouting isn't going to change that.<br /><br />Stop your crying. You ARE hilarious ... and a toywilliamhttp://www.autopsychic.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7342454496014200176.post-72318924650884608222014-05-06T11:00:20.091-04:002014-05-06T11:00:20.091-04:00"You found the quote, that means you know I&#..."You found the quote, that means you know I'm correct."<br /><br />No, it means I know you're lying.<br /><br />"Because your MO is to bring shit that you think proves you right."<br /><br />As opposed to <i>you</i>? Did you really just admit to <i>not</i> proving what you say? That was hilarious.<br /><br />"Since you have not brought it, that means you are admitting you are wrong and are delaying the inevitable as long as possible."<br /><br />What would be "inevitable"? Do you imagine that if you squat down here and lie long enough, that I'm going to ignore your dishonesty? You said you could show "irrational" statements, obviously you can't do that without bringing the statements you're talking about.<br /><br />So, no matter how many times you <i>say</i> that something is true, you haven't done what you thought "wouldn't be difficult". That means that as things stand now, I've won. You pouting isn't going to change that.Brabantiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02183512606468901460noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7342454496014200176.post-42492080325141623312014-05-06T08:10:14.131-04:002014-05-06T08:10:14.131-04:00You found the quote, that means you know I'm c...You found the quote, that means you know I'm correct. Because your MO is to bring shit that you think proves you right. Since you have not brought it, that means you are admitting you are wrong and are delaying the inevitable as long as possible.<br /><br />Anything else? Or, are you done with honest discussion?williamhttp://www.autopsychic.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7342454496014200176.post-15419615969076522272014-05-06T00:50:29.650-04:002014-05-06T00:50:29.650-04:00"How can I prove a negative?"
It's ..."How can I prove a negative?"<br /><br />It's not proving a negative. Again: "Then back up your claim that there were three examples. You can easily post what came after, to show the stopping point."<br /><br />"You claim to know the truth, bring that truth."<br /><br />That applies to you, since you're the one who said that you could prove the existence of irrational comments. If you aren't smart enough to find what I <i>actually</i> said, then you can't possibly come up with a valid reason for me to give you a handout.<br /><br />"Unless you don't know the truth."<br /><br />I know exactly what I said. I've even found the original quote, just so I know how easy it is to do.<br /><br />"Bring your proof or admit you're lying."<br /><br />No, either you prove <i>your</i> assertion, or you lose. It's your responsibility to back up your claims, and reneging on that demonstrates that you couldn't do what you thought "wouldn't be difficult". Until you make an effort, I'm not obligated to do anything except watch you choke on your own hubris.Brabantiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02183512606468901460noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7342454496014200176.post-82721259670896773032014-05-06T00:21:43.692-04:002014-05-06T00:21:43.692-04:00No, you're the one who claimed there were thre...No, you're the one who claimed there were three. I'm telling you that you're wrong. You need to prove what you say.<br /><br />How can I prove a negative? You claim to know the truth, bring that truth. Unless you don't know the truth. In which case you are simply lying. As usual. Bring your proof or admit you're lying.williamhttp://www.autopsychic.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7342454496014200176.post-4680065807891685722014-05-05T08:00:53.904-04:002014-05-05T08:00:53.904-04:00"You're the one claiming there were 4, no..."You're the one claiming there were 4, not me. You need to do your own work and prove it."<br /><br />No, you're the one who claimed there were three. I'm telling you that you're wrong. You need to prove what you say.<br /><br />"I know how many I referred to, it is your claim there are 4 instances of you making irrational statements."<br /><br />My claim is that there were four parts to the paragraph. If you referred to less, then you wrongfully left one out. That suggests, at best, that your memory isn't reliable enough to be credible.<br /><br />"You need to prove your own claims [sic] I am not responsible for proving what YOU say is true."<br /><br />Then back up your claim that there were three examples. You can easily post what came after, to show the stopping point.<br /><br />You say it "wouldn't be difficult" to prove your point, but you can't even seem to find the quotes you want to talk about. Remember, what you say isn't automatically true. If you want to show that I said that there actually was a global conspiracy at all, you need to provide evidence of that. Until then, you lose. Any questions on that?Brabantiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02183512606468901460noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7342454496014200176.post-7882821146607447142014-05-04T08:30:07.352-04:002014-05-04T08:30:07.352-04:00Since it's your claim, it's your job to pr...Since it's your claim, it's your job to prove it. <br /><br />You're the one claiming there were 4, not me. You need to do your own work and prove it. I know how many I referred to, it is your claim there are 4 instances of you making irrational statements. You need to prove your own claims I am not responsible for proving what YOU say is true. Do your own work.williamhttp://www.autopsychic.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7342454496014200176.post-80440043367658798082014-05-03T04:26:58.086-04:002014-05-03T04:26:58.086-04:00"So, you're admitting that none of them a..."So, you're admitting that none of them are true?"<br /><br />The entire point is that the things that <i>you</i> have to believe in order to maintain your bigoted attitude are not true. Also, you went from asserting that "2 of the examples you insinuated are present and currently happening" to "you're admitting that none of them are true?" Which is it? You claimed that things were "happening", then you act as if it's an <i>admission</i> when I say that they're not happening. You're doing even worse than I expected, and that's quite the accomplishment.<br /><br />"Are you afraid of what it actually shows, and what you said about the other statements besides the vast conspiracy theory?"<br /><br />Obviously not, since I repeated it many times on that thread in order to show how your accusation was false. Since it's your claim, it's your job to prove it. Do your own work.Brabantiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02183512606468901460noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7342454496014200176.post-86930571127725128822014-05-02T21:40:44.014-04:002014-05-02T21:40:44.014-04:00Actually, there were four, and none of them are cu...Actually, there were four, and none of them are currently happening.<br /><br />So, you're admitting that none of them are true?<br /><br /><br />I'm not surprised that you didn't provide the quote.<br /><br />I'm also surprised you didn't provide it. Are you afraid of what it actually shows, and what you said about the other statements besides the vast conspiracy theory?williamhttp://www.autopsychic.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7342454496014200176.post-77791857129459340852014-05-02T18:50:15.903-04:002014-05-02T18:50:15.903-04:00"You used 3 examples of "it wouldn't..."You used 3 examples of "it wouldn't make sense" and 2 of the examples you insinuated are present and currently happening."<br /><br />Actually, there were four, and none of them are currently happening.<br /><br />"How could I have misinterpreted if you use the same phrase to describe 3 things that wouldn't make sense when there is no qualifier to be able to deny the 3rd possibility?"<br /><br />The phrase "it makes no sense" <i>is</i> the denial. That's what shows that I don't believe any of them are true, because the ideas <i>make no sense</i>. That was easy, just as I predicted.<br /><br />I'm not surprised that you didn't provide the quote. Can't you find it, or is it just easier to lie about something if you don't show the actual text for comparison?Brabantiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02183512606468901460noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7342454496014200176.post-82702489904981300362014-05-02T17:42:52.025-04:002014-05-02T17:42:52.025-04:00That's a perfect example of how your interpret...That's a perfect example of how your interpretations are so wildly off the mark.<br /><br />I don't think so. You used 3 examples of "it wouldn't make sense" and 2 of the examples you insinuated are present and currently happening. The 3rd, you deny the possibility. How could I have misinterpreted if you use the same phrase to describe 3 things that wouldn't make sense when there is no qualifier to be able to deny the 3rd possibility?williamhttp://www.autopsychic.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7342454496014200176.post-79021916457866569572014-05-02T10:34:56.591-04:002014-05-02T10:34:56.591-04:00"Like how you said there was a global conspir..."Like how you said there was a global conspiracy concerning gays then deny you said it?"<br /><br />That's a perfect example of how your interpretations are so wildly off the mark. You could have brought a quote for one of your claims above, but that would prove the point just as well.<br /><br />"If I really cared about doing it."<br /><br />If you thought you could. Feel free to humiliate yourself on that claim, if you think that's any better than how you're faring at the moment. Or, people can see my straightforward comment and your insanely desperate efforts to change its meaning to suit your petty purposes on that thread, if you don't care.<br /><br />I couldn't care less, that's a certainty. Bring up any sore point you've been stewing over for however long, and I'll prove you wrong now just as easily as I did then.Brabantiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02183512606468901460noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7342454496014200176.post-47617877801322771362014-05-02T10:14:05.240-04:002014-05-02T10:14:05.240-04:00That would be criticizing. You'll have to show...That would be criticizing. You'll have to show what's "irrational" about anything I've said.<br /><br />Like how you said there was a global conspiracy concerning gays then deny you said it? I think it wouldn't be difficult to show that you make irrational statements. If I really cared about doing it. Since all you've said is still there for all to read, I'll let your own words stand on their own irrationality.williamhttp://www.autopsychic.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7342454496014200176.post-68252052333824331412014-05-02T05:04:02.938-04:002014-05-02T05:04:02.938-04:00"I'm not criticizing, I am highlighting y..."I'm not criticizing, I am highlighting your irrational behavior when it is pointed out. I think your irrational behavior does, in fact, reflect negatively on you."<br /><br />That would be criticizing. You'll have to show what's "irrational" about anything I've said. Since you didn't provide any quotes to justify your misinterpretations, it seems that you're not up to bringing evidence at this stage. Or ever, really.<br /><br />Anything else?Brabantiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02183512606468901460noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7342454496014200176.post-7397863120217285622014-05-01T22:00:48.608-04:002014-05-01T22:00:48.608-04:00I don't think it's an issue at all, so I d...I don't think it's an issue at all, so I don't see what you can criticize here.<br /><br />I'm not criticizing, I am highlighting your irrational behavior when it is pointed out. I think your irrational behavior does, in fact, reflect negatively on you.williamhttp://www.autopsychic.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7342454496014200176.post-10889198073871408252014-05-01T17:45:40.213-04:002014-05-01T17:45:40.213-04:00"You want me to challenge an invalid point?&q..."You want me to challenge an invalid point?"<br /><br />I want you to show that a point is invalid instead of merely asserting it.<br /><br />"I take it that you have none."<br /><br />It's irrelevant. It has zero bearing on my posts, so it doesn't prove "unreasonable bigoted hatred" as you so desperately wish it would.<br /><br />"Using that standard, then you've said that unborn human beings are horses and/or dogs."<br /><br />No, because that wasn't a reasonable conclusion on your part. Feel free to bring the comment you're referencing, as you should have done already.<br /><br />"And, by the same standard you say the universe was created by a collection of dust that used a normal DNA transformation process and became the collective galaxies that we can look up to the sky and see."<br /><br />As above, bring a quote so your claims can be evaluated. Your bizarre interpretations don't automatically equal my use "sexist" to represent your "her sexist bigotry" comment.<br /><br />"Using that same standard, you say man was a monkey at some point in time even though there are no intermediate examples of that happening."<br /><br />Same as above. That one will be especially tough for you, since it's based on your personal misunderstanding of evolution.<br /><br />Besides that, it's not as if you always use my exact words, so you can hardly protest every time I convey your indisputable meaning. For one example, out of dozens;<br />Me: "Where did I use the phrase "no big deal"?"<br />You: "You didn't. You implied it and when I brought it up you didn't deny it."<br />So, you've already admitted that you think that "implied" is grounds for interpretation, and that includes using quotation marks as if I actually said it. Bearing that in mind, you clearly can't complain about my comments.<br /><br />"So, you are blaming Eddie's blog site for incorrectly placing your post?"<br /><br />I don't think it's an issue at all, so I don't see what you can criticize here. You chose to bring it up, and I told you what happened. It's not apparent what the alternative to that is supposed to be. Obviously, you're struggling to create a false choice between "can't figure out" and "blame others", while the obvious third option doesn't reflect negatively on me whatsoever.Brabantiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02183512606468901460noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7342454496014200176.post-21753021932602190992014-05-01T16:42:27.338-04:002014-05-01T16:42:27.338-04:00In other words, you're not challenging my poin...In other words, you're not challenging my point.<br /><br />You want me to challenge an invalid point? <br /><br /><br />That's irrelevant, because it doesn't magically affect the validity of any other posts.<br /><br />I take it that you have none.<br /><br /><br />It's a perfectly fair representation of what you said, ...<br /><br />Using that standard, then you've said that unborn human beings are horses and/or dogs. And, by the same standard you say the universe was created by a collection of dust that used a normal DNA transformation process and became the collective galaxies that we can look up to the sky and see. Using that same standard, you say man was a monkey at some point in time even though there are no intermediate examples of that happening.<br /><br /><br />Factually, I did hit "reply".<br /><br />So, you are blaming Eddie's blog site for incorrectly placing your post? Good liberal ... blame others for your own actions.williamhttp://www.autopsychic.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7342454496014200176.post-58998950499782794112014-05-01T15:45:52.473-04:002014-05-01T15:45:52.473-04:00"In other words, your points are invalid and ..."In other words, your points are invalid and you are full of shit."<br /><br />In other words, you're not challenging my point.<br /><br />"Are you continuing your "petty tactic"?"<br /><br />I'm correcting your wording in order to make it sensible. You're talking about actions by two different people, and even beyond that, "equate" doesn't have any logical meaning. I also addressed your comment, so it's not clear what you're griping about here.<br /><br />"WHERE have you posted an opinion "independent" of any of my posts?"<br /><br />That's irrelevant, because it doesn't magically affect the validity of any other posts. How are you not grasping this?<br /><br />"That's what you say. I didn't say that."<br /><br />It's a perfectly fair representation of what you said, which is why your attempt at a correction didn't work.<br /><br />"His meaning was "private charity" according to you. Now you say it is something else?"<br /><br />No, you applied your opinion to your interpretation of what he said.<br /><br />"No you didn't."<br /><br />Factually, I did hit "reply". Are you going to whine about something you can't prove?Brabantiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02183512606468901460noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7342454496014200176.post-91207873033997145852014-05-01T11:37:09.890-04:002014-05-01T11:37:09.890-04:00In other words, you're not challenging my poin...In other words, you're not challenging my point.<br /><br />In other words, your points are invalid and you are full of shit.<br /><br /><br />The word "equate" doesn't fit there.<br /><br />Yes, it fit perfectly. There was a space in front of it and a space behind it. It fit perfectly. Are you continuing your "petty tactic"? It seems you do that every time you are afraid to address the issue. Then you usually follow that up with ... are you crying. Then add in a couple (sic)'s to keep yourself humble.<br /><br /><br />Expressing an opinion independent of your posts has nothing to do with the validity of my criticisms of you.<br /><br />WHERE have you posted an opinion "independent" of any of my posts? You ONLY post in reply to ME. Have you ever posted without me being the target of your tangents? If so, please bring a link to that single post.<br /><br /><br />If she has "sexist bigotry", then she's "sexist".<br /><br />That's what you say. I didn't say that.<br /><br /><br />Your opinion doesn't affect his meaning.<br /><br />His meaning was "private charity" according to you. Now you say it is something else? You need to work on your corrections.<br /><br /><br />I hit the "reply" button.<br /><br />No you didn't. You hit the 'add a comment' button. Be honest for a change.williamhttp://www.autopsychic.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7342454496014200176.post-41541744040248363162014-05-01T11:10:50.941-04:002014-05-01T11:10:50.941-04:00"I think it is pretty clear that my response ..."I think it is pretty clear that my response is aimed at an ass who spews a lot of shit."<br /><br />In other words, you're not challenging my point.<br /><br />"Expressing an opinion usually doesn't equate to asking a question."<br /><br />The word "equate" doesn't fit there. Perhaps you meant "involve being asked a question". Since I'm addressing the flaws in your argument, it's not clear what opinion is relevant to that. If there's something that you feel you need to know, then you should ask. If you don't, it's obviously not that important. Either way, you're not showing how this is supposed to insulate your comments from criticism.<br /><br />"So, the only thing you've offered, so far, is unreasonable bigoted hatred of me."<br /><br />You haven't shown anything "unreasonable", never mind "bigoted hatred". Expressing an opinion independent of your posts has nothing to do with the validity of my criticisms of you. If there's nothing that I can take great issue with, then what would I be posting about? I'm supposed to just say "ditto", or what?<br /><br />"First, I didn't say she was "sexist", I said "IMHO, the kid is showing his/her sexist bigotry."."<br /><br />If she has "sexist bigotry", then she's "sexist".<br /><br />"Second, he didn't say "private charity" or specify that private charity was "inefficient", he asked; "When the best thing you can say about organized religion is that it is a highly inefficient way to deal with poverty?"."<br /><br />The word "inefficient" is in your quote. And "private charity" is in the title of the article. You need to work on your corrections.<br /><br />"Because, obviously, organized religion is doing a much better job at helping the poor than the government."<br /><br />Your opinion doesn't affect his meaning.<br /><br />"Because if you don't know what is being said, then your complaints are invalid."<br /><br />Apparently, you didn't realize that I was talking about how you react to Eddie's posts, and then you blather on about your reactions to Eddie's posts. Your complaints are invalid.<br /><br />"BTW, you still can't figure out how to work the "reply" button?"<br /><br />I hit the "reply" button. Besides, I've shown before that you've added a comment instead of replying yourself, so this petty tactic of yours has already been shot down.Brabantiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02183512606468901460noreply@blogger.com