WI Governor Walker top aid under FBI investigation

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

LOL - what an absurd statement. No, I don't care to "take it" any more, thanks. So I'll dish whatever the hell I feel like.

What is laughable is when someone posts something that discredits what you have posted, you take that as a personal insult and feel free to use one of three standard Riot responses

1. "Strawman"
2. "Stop twisting what I said"
3. "Stop attacking me/you are a jackass/random personal attack"

[Clip-Clop]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

What is laughable is when someone posts something that discredits what you have posted, you take that as a personal insult and feel free to use one of three standard Riot responses

1. "Strawman"
2. "Stop twisting what I said"
3. "Stop attacking me/you are a jackass/random personal attack"

4. "Talking points"
It was this one that made me stop debating here altogether.

[wiphan]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

What is laughable is when someone posts something that discredits what you have posted, you take that as a personal insult and feel free to use one of three standard Riot responses

1. "Strawman"
2. "Stop twisting what I said"
3. "Stop attacking me/you are a jackass/random personal attack"

There NEVER is an admission of guilt or being wrong. This is the #1 cry of the democratic party. When you are wrong dig your heels in further and spin it however you like then blame someone else (i.e. Bush, congress, GOP, etc). Even when Riot was black and white wrong on an issue she could not admit it and tried to continue to spin it.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by wiphan

There NEVER is an admission of guilt or being wrong. This is the #1 cry of the democratic party. When you are wrong dig your heels in further and spin it however you like then blame someone else (i.e. Bush, congress, GOP, etc). Even when Riot was black and white wrong on an issue she could not admit it and tried to continue to spin it.

Really? Which issue was that? Disagreeing with your politics? That's sort of the #1 cry of conservatives: when the facts show your governor to be a liar, dig in your heels and accuse the other side of "being wrong" and "refusing to admit they are wrong" - LOL

I dare you to talk only about politics here, and stop being nasty, insulting, personal. You can't do it, either.

[wiphan]

Originally Posted by Riot

Really? Which issue was that? Disagreeing with your politics? That's sort of the #1 cry of conservatives: when the facts show your governor to be a liar, dig in your heels and accuse the other side of "being wrong" and "refusing to admit they are wrong" - LOL

I dare you to talk only about politics here, and stop being nasty, insulting, personal. You can't do it, either.

The fact that you could not admit that you were wrong about justice prosser. You could not just admit that you were wrong. You had to continually attack him and find excuses on why he was not charged. You just couldn't admit that you were wrong. Plain and simple. There was nothing to the charges from day 1. You still believe in your mind that he is evil and should have been charged with a crime; however you are probably the only one on the planet that actually believes this. You might earn a little more respect around here by just admitting when your wrong or when Obama or the democrats are wrong. It is kind of similar to Nancy Pelosi's arguement about how unemployment benefits create jobs.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by wiphan

The fact that you could not admit that you were wrong about justice prosser.

LOL - wrong. Excuse me, but I posted right up front in that thread, acknowledging that the Prosser result wasn't what I hoped for.

Nice try. But not true.

You still believe in your mind that he is evil and should have been charged with a crime; however you are probably the only one on the planet that actually believes this.

LOL - yes, I do, and no, I'm not the only one: the internal ethics charges with the law board are still pending. And it's pretty obvious the guy was involved in a physical altercation with another judge. And with a cameraman. And has a documented history of outbursts on the court.

If you think I'll ever post that Prosser is a man completely innocent of workplace violence, I'll never do that, because it would be an outright lie disproven by the facts.

You might earn more respect around here by not completely ignoring such things.

[wiphan]

Originally Posted by Riot

LOL - wrong. Excuse me, but I posted right up front in that thread, acknowledging that the Prosser result wasn't what I hoped for.

Nice try. But not true.



LOL - yes, I do, and no, I'm not the only one: the internal ethics charges with the law board are still pending. And it's pretty obvious the guy was involved in a physical altercation with another judge. And with a cameraman. And has a documented history of outbursts on the court.

If you think I'll ever post that Prosser is a man completely innocent of workplace violence, I'll never do that, because it would be an outright lie disproven by the facts.

You might earn more respect around here by not completely ignoring such things.

Again stating that the outcome wasn't what you hoped for and admitting you were wrong are 2 very different things. You just can't do it. If you had your way you would give the guy life in prison yet not only is he not guilty, but he was never even charged.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by wiphan

Again stating that the outcome wasn't what you hoped for and admitting you were wrong are 2 very different things.

You didn't read the entire thread, I must assume?

Go away until you at least have some of the intellectual honesty you want in others.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

What is laughable is when someone posts something that discredits what you have posted, you take that as a personal insult and feel free to use one of three standard Riot responses

LOL - oh, please. I wish you would post something about politics. You get the "three standard Riot responses" because that's exactly what you do: change the subject, start making personal comments, or outright lie about what was said.

Start with your post #22. You post one sentence about politics, then go right into personal crap. LOL - I dare you to post only about politics without snarky personal attacks. I doubt you can do it. You've never been able to do it to date.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

LOL - oh, please. I wish you would post something about politics. You get the "three standard Riot responses" because that's exactly what you do: change the subject, start making personal comments, or outright lie about what was said.

Start with your post #22. You post one sentence about politics, then go right into personal crap. LOL - I dare you to post only about politics without snarky personal attacks. I doubt you can do it. You've never been able to do it to date.

this would be #2

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

this would be #2

Seriously, what is wrong with people like you? You constantly try and weasel out and try and change the context or some other bs but seriously what is wrong with you?

Outside of radical political operatives with mental deficencies, who in the world takes the positions that you take EVERY time? It's crazy.

Not to mention you constantly do exactly what you incessently whine about, changing the subject. You can't stand it when I do nothing but poke holes in your arguments. Face it, Obama isn't a disaster, most people are aware of that but you can't even concede that point.

I suppose if it wasn't for your inane takes and laughable responses the political section would be alot duller. So go ahead and continue to conflate your inability to talk politics, other than quoting opinions you agree with from the WSJ, with your scant ability to insult people. It's the best you can do.

[geeker2]

Originally Posted by Riot

Seriously, what is wrong with people like you? You constantly try and weasel out and try and change the context or some other bs but seriously what is wrong with you?

Outside of radical political operatives with mental deficencies, who in the world takes the positions that you take EVERY time? It's crazy.

Not to mention you constantly do exactly what you incessently whine about, changing the subject. You can't stand it when I do nothing but poke holes in your arguments. Face it, Obama isn't a disaster, most people are aware of that but you can't even concede that point.

I suppose if it wasn't for your inane takes and laughable responses the political section would be alot duller. So go ahead and continue to conflate your inability to talk politics, other than quoting opinions you agree with from the WSJ, with your scant ability to insult people. It's the best you can do.

It's official..you jumped the shark !

[Riot]

Originally Posted by geeker2

It's official..you jumped the shark !

Glad you made the list rules clear: It's okay if it's anti-Obama

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

Glad you made the list rules clear: It's okay if it's anti-Obama

So if I point out that the Indianapolis Colts suck does that mean I am anti-Colts? Or just stating the obvious?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

Seriously, what is wrong with people like you? You constantly try and weasel out and try and change the context or some other bs but seriously what is wrong with you?

Outside of radical political operatives with mental deficencies, who in the world takes the positions that you take EVERY time? It's crazy.

Not to mention you constantly do exactly what you incessently whine about, changing the subject. You can't stand it when I do nothing but poke holes in your arguments. Face it, Obama isn't a disaster, most people are aware of that but you can't even concede that point.

I suppose if it wasn't for your inane takes and laughable responses the political section would be alot duller. So go ahead and continue to conflate your inability to talk politics, other than quoting opinions you agree with from the WSJ, with your scant ability to insult people. It's the best you can do.

This one is harder to quantify. Elements of #2 and #3 with some plagiarism.

Though the "Obama isn't a disaster" comment brings questions of lucidity into the equation