Oakland Bridge Collapse by terrorists.....

Mikayla · Post by **Mikayla** » Fri May 04, 2007 7:30 pm

The reason we "win" these debates Helios, has nothing to do with our relative education levels, who is "whinny", or anything like that - we win these arguments because at the core, what we are arguing for are equality and justice, and those are good things. On the other hand, what you appear to be arguing for, the perpetuation of discrimination, is not a good thing. In short, the positions you take are often indefensible. And so you get frustrated and we "win" if you want to phrase it that way.

mxlm · Post by **mxlm** » Fri May 04, 2007 7:34 pm

You all are Æ¤øØ§ assholes and there is too many to debate against. You pick appart everything that I say in order to prove a point. The point being you guys are absolute Pricks with a capital P.

You're the one who started the trolling. You're the one who, after laying out the ground-rules 'okay, let's not insult each other and let's all provide links in our posts' was the first to violate those ground rules. You don't get to be the victim here. Unless you want to play the victim of your own errors.

Can we be pricks? Yeah--at least I can. See my exchange with Rick on the subject of Vietnam a little while back for an example of me being a 'prick with a capital P'. 'course, I apologized to Rick, because he'd done nothing to warrant such behavior.

Now, if you're going to argue that responding to flames in kind--as I have with you--is being a prick, well, I think that rather proves the point that you're not worth debating.

Oh, also Mxlm, read some books and grow some independent thought there buddy. Stop regurgitating liberalism from college professors. Are you still in college? It's my assumption that you are.

It's my assumption everything you know about colleges, you learned from David Horowitz and his ilk.

HATEFACE · Post by **HATEFACE** » Fri May 04, 2007 7:48 pm

mxlm wrote:Well, this is the guy who just wrote that 'there is no good and evil' and then proceeded to castigate liberals because they 'cast down what is morally good and uplift which is morally wrong...in order to creat a gray matted area in which there can be no right or wrong rather than akcnowleding the possibility of there being both as well as gray areas' (sic)

Probably not worth debating, truth be told. A shame we don't have more intelligent and articulate conservative types here. Cipher counts, but he's pretty much it.

No, see your logic there? I said I view both. there is good and evil. There is gray areas in life. Not all gray as you see it. This makes me talk out of the both sides of of my mouth, see? It's seen as contridictory. So again we go back to saying I'm unintelligent and not articulate. You're fucking stupid. Fair? I think it is, after all my frustration arises when you guys say this shit over and over again with out acknowledging any points that I have proven. These debates. . . are pointless.

You haven't "won" anything instead you act like assholes when the time suits you. You claim to be arguing for equality and justice but those are absolute lies because to be absolutely equal you need to say discrimination is bad.

Well I'm here to say some types of discirmination isn't bad. We don't need to be blindly stupid and neither do you. Recognize the difference between muslims on a plane and orthadox jews, whites, blacks, etc. Is that discrimination? Yes it is, is it profiling, yes it is. Is it logical in this day and age to be wary, yes it is. It's pefectly logical. Don't tell me I need to turn a blind eye to some people spouting judeo-christian prayers and muslims doing the same thing before boarding a plane because that would be "wrong" and "discirminatory."

- But you said the perpetuation of discrimination isn't a good thing. You're right it's not. But eliminating it shouldn't be your motive except at the government level. There is nothing "good" about you Mikayla or your liberalism views.

You're a skillful debater Mikayla, but your an asshole because I've stated several times, my view points but you choose to ignore them and cherry pick them because you like to argue about the same exact thing. It's stupid and getting very redundant.

HATEFACE · Post by **HATEFACE** » Fri May 04, 2007 7:51 pm

mxlm wrote:
You all are Æ¤øØ§ assholes and there is too many to debate against. You pick appart everything that I say in order to prove a point. The point being you guys are absolute Pricks with a capital P.
You're the one who started the trolling. You're the one who, after laying out the ground-rules 'okay, let's not insult each other and let's all provide links in our posts' was the first to violate those ground rules. You don't get to be the victim here. Unless you want to play the victim of your own errors.

Mulu started violating those ground rules. You know it.

Can we be pricks? Yeah--at least I can. See my exchange with Rick on the subject of Vietnam a little while back for an example of me being a 'prick with a capital P'. 'course, I apologized to Rick, because he'd done nothing to warrant such behavior.

Now, if you're going to argue that responding to flames in kind--as I have with you--is being a prick, well, I think that rather proves the point that you're not worth debating.

Oh, also Mxlm, read some books and grow some independent thought there buddy. Stop regurgitating liberalism from college professors. Are you still in college? It's my assumption that you are.
It's my assumption everything you know about colleges, you learned from David Horowitz and his ilk.

lol, nah.

How about I apologize for starting my flames, would that settle everything for you?

mxlm · Post by **mxlm** » Fri May 04, 2007 7:54 pm

No, see your logic there? I said I view both. there is good and evil. There is gray areas in life. Not all gray as you see it. This makes me talk out of the both sides of of my mouth, see? It's seen as contridictory.

Yes, you said that. After you said there is no good or evil. If you don't see the contradiction there...well, nevermind.

How about I apologize for starting my flames, would that settle everything for you?

Not necessary. Flame away. But don't try to claim the moral high ground while doing so.

Mikayla · Post by **Mikayla** » Fri May 04, 2007 7:55 pm

I knew he would not be able to stay away.

Anyway Helios, your argument appears to have degenerated to calling me names, and that of course is not an argument at all, its just a sign that you've run out of ideas, grown frustrated, and are intellectually conceding the debate.

HATEFACE · Post by **HATEFACE** » Fri May 04, 2007 7:57 pm

Mikayla wrote:I knew he would not be able to stay away.

Anyway Helios, your argument appears to have degenerated to calling me names, and that of course is not an argument at all, its just a sign that you've run out of ideas, grown frustrated, and are intellectually conceding the debate.

No I'm not. My arguement still stands. Not acknowledging it doesn't make it go away. Yes, I'll degenerate to calling you names when mxlm, posts stupid shit like he did. I accept your defeat. Well played Mikyala, it just wasn't good enough.

HATEFACE · Post by **HATEFACE** » Fri May 04, 2007 7:59 pm

mxlm wrote:
No, see your logic there? I said I view both. there is good and evil. There is gray areas in life. Not all gray as you see it. This makes me talk out of the both sides of of my mouth, see? It's seen as contridictory.
Yes, you said that. After you said there is no good or evil. If you don't see the contradiction there...well, nevermind.

How about I apologize for starting my flames, would that settle everything for you?
Not necessary. Flame away. But don't try to claim the moral high ground while doing so.

I do have the high moral ground in thise case. Unless you would like to mention why Mikayala shouldn't have equal rights under the law. Or maybe you would like to speak about how you want to eliminate descrimination without actually wanting to change other people's minds. Don't you think that's condridictory? I do. . .

My view is that you can change people's minds. . . but it takes time an effort. Those that don't want to change, shouldn't.

mxlm · Post by **mxlm** » Fri May 04, 2007 8:00 pm

Mulu started violating those ground rules. You know it.

I just double checked; you violated 'em first. By a day.

HATEFACE · Post by **HATEFACE** » Fri May 04, 2007 8:01 pm

mxlm wrote:
Mulu started violating those ground rules. You know it.
I just double checked; you violated 'em first. By a day.

No I didn't. Check again.

mxlm · Post by **mxlm** » Fri May 04, 2007 8:05 pm

Helios, Apr 25 9:13 wrote:Mulu, man, dawg! I feel like Randy Jackson trying to tell some shitty singer what I think of them. I just don't know where to begin with you, man. You're a little pitchy. . .

Mulu started talking about your masturbatory habits 21 hours later, in a separate thread.

Incidentally, do you consider liberals to be a race or something? Why on earth would 'mxlm said something stupid' make flaming Mik okay? Why would 'Mulu flamed me after I flamed him' make flaming mxlm okay?

HATEFACE · Post by **HATEFACE** » Fri May 04, 2007 8:07 pm

Mikayla wrote:I knew he would not be able to stay away.

Anyway Helios, your argument appears to have degenerated to calling me names, and that of course is not an argument at all, its just a sign that you've run out of ideas, grown frustrated, and are intellectually conceding the debate.

Yes, you could say I've was backed into a corner surrounded by liberals.
After all, I'm only just one man, and it gets tiring defending myself against people who don't want to accept fundamental freedoms.

HATEFACE · Post by **HATEFACE** » Fri May 04, 2007 8:09 pm

mxlm wrote:
Helios, Apr 25 9:13 wrote:Mulu, man, dawg! I feel like Randy Jackson trying to tell some shitty singer what I think of them. I just don't know where to begin with you, man. You're a little pitchy. . .
Mulu started talking about your masturbatory habits 21 hours later, in a separate thread.

Incidentally, do you consider liberals to be a race or something? Why on earth would 'mxlm said something stupid' make flaming Mik okay? Why would 'Mulu flamed me after I flamed him' make flaming mxlm okay?

Is it fair to call liberals a group of people who believe in similiar ideologies? I don't think race is an appropriate term.

mxlm · Post by **mxlm** » Fri May 04, 2007 8:12 pm

You can call liberals whatever you like, so long as you explain why misbehavior by one makes all fair game.

Mikayla · Post by **Mikayla** » Fri May 04, 2007 8:13 pm

Helios:

Yes, you could say I've was backed into a corner surrounded by liberals.
After all, I'm only just one man, and it gets tiring defending myself against people who don't want to accept fundamental freedoms.

You have not argued for fundamental freedoms, I have. You've argued, sort of, that I should be happy with my second class citizen status. You've argued that because I have some rights, even if not all, I should be glad and not try to go any further.

And you've called me a lot of names.

Thats about the sum total of your arguments. As for "winning" - you, not I, are the one who started talking about who "won" the debate - first you said you totally owned me, then later in that same post you concede defeat. If I used language about who wins or loses, it because you cast the discussion in that light.

As for you saying my arguments were good but not good enough - good enough for what? I am not here to "win" Helios, and I am not here to change your mind, as I've stated.