CE Volume 4

[pissin2]

Proud, I miss when you use to go crazy and sing disturbed songs. What are you singing nowadays?

[Proud]

oh man, that seems like an eternity ago. back during the days of WB (i think it was you who said that he watches the WB... i was laughing so hard, as cheap of a joke as that was) and the funky floridians. i haven't gone crazy lately, that i can think of... i posted some limp bizkit lyrics in the coffeeshop forum, though!

GET PROUD WITH THE ILLNESS! AWCK! AWCK!

[stratman19]

RockySigman said:

I don't know if I really want to delve back into this topic at this point, but Stratman, I did have a rather lengthy post where I asked you some (what I thought to be) interesting questions on the gay marriage issue that you probably missed in the ensuing argument.

Rocky, I'd be happy to go back and try to find your post. I'll answer your questions the best that I can. It may have to wait til this afternoon however, as I've got to go for now.

(I'm assuming your post could be found in volume 3, since I found that volume 4 had started when I got home this morning?)

[Galactus]

Let me see ifI can clear up a few of my personal hypocrisies...
I think if you'll look back outside of our orginal dicussion about them my comments on the 527's is that they need to ignorea them and move on to more important issues...If I'm not mistaken it is much the same as your opinion. 527's are not illegal, they are all misleading such is the nature of the beast. However when one can be proven to be lies, as I and the President now agree that the swift boat ads can, it should be taken issue with and removed. I have no doubt that the bill was written only to appear to be taking action which sort of begs the question - If Bush signed it and is now claiming again that he wants to get rid of them isn't he the one being hypocrical? Isn't he likely only taking issue with them again only for appearences?
I have not aplied different standards to the issues any more then you have. As I said we all do it to a certain extent but to demonise others becuase you don't recognise it yourself is the true hypocrisy.

[pissin2]

I can picture in my mind a world without war, a world without hate. And I can picture us attacking that world, because they'd never expect it.

[Proud]

there's only one thing i can say about that.

[chrisfan]

DED said:

Let me see ifI can clear up a few of my personal hypocrisies...
I think if you'll look back outside of our orginal dicussion about them my comments on the 527's is that they need to ignorea them and move on to more important issues...If I'm not mistaken it is much the same as your opinion. 527's are not illegal, they are all misleading such is the nature of the beast. However when one can be proven to be lies, as I and the President now agree that the swift boat ads can, it should be taken issue with and removed. I have no doubt that the bill was written only to appear to be taking action which sort of begs the question - If Bush signed it and is now claiming again that he wants to get rid of them isn't he the one being hypocrical? Isn't he likely only taking issue with them again only for appearences?
I have not aplied different standards to the issues any more then you have. As I said we all do it to a certain extent but to demonise others becuase you don't recognise it yourself is the true hypocrisy.

Several questions and comments ...

First, where exactly has Bush said that he believes the swift boat ads are lies? I could be wrong, and if I am wrong, I trust you will post the link, but I have not heard him say that he thinks the ads are lies. I would guess that you are referring to his saying that Kerry's service was honorable? Isn't that a subjective thing? That Bush could say it was honorable, and someone involved with the swift boat dudes could say it was not honorable, and they are both right, since both are opinions? Can service be declared factually honorable? Beyond it being a fact that someone was discharged honorably or not?

Second, I think that there is a very important difference that must be acknowledged between something that is a lie and something that is misleading. The two terms are not interchangable, especially in politics. A few aspects of the swift boat vets claims have been proven to be false, and could be called lies. Many more have been proven to be misleading ... NOT lies. Quite honestly, most ALL political advertising, whether it's coming from the 527s or the candidates is misleading .. on both sides. And that is not anything that has just come about as a result of McCain Feingold. And while we're talking about things that have been proven to be lies, rather than just misleading, I think it must be acknowledged that John Kerry's Cambodia stories that he's told for years have now been proven to be without factual basis ... making them lies, not just misleading. So let's be fair -- if you're going to dismiss the Sift Boat guys for being misleading, and possibly liars because of some of the information they've put forth, don't you have to dismiss John Kerry's claims about his Vietnam service as well, because he's told lies about it?

For the record ... I will say that most of the 527s are misleading (as are most of the candidates ads). I will NOT go so far as to say they are ALL misleading, as you have.

Also for the record ... to the best of my knowledge, nothing about the second swift boat ad has been proven to be false.

As far as Bush's stand on the 527s ... I think he was grandstanding when he signed the bill, and I think he's grandstanding now. How many times do I have to state that I stronly disagree with him on the issue of campaign finance before you'll trust that I actually do disagree with him on it, and have no desire to defend him on it? If you recognize that now, then isn't it a rather weak argument to bring up?

DED, you are more than welcome to point out the hypocrisies you think I'm demonstrating here. As I've said before, I think that in the topics of religion and politics, it's impossible to not be hypocritical at some level. However, I disagree with you that on this particular issue, I'm demostrating the level of hypocrisy that you are. I've pointed out the examples of where I think you are guilty -- primarily that you keep on focusing on the Bush "connections" to the swift boat guys, without applying the same focus to Kerry connections to 527s, and that you keep focusing on lies or misleading factors in the swift boat ads, wihout acknowledging the same sort of flaws in the anti-Bush 527s. If you;re going to continue to use the "I know I am, but so are yoU" defense, then I have to ask for some examples.

[pissin2]

well if it's going to be like that, then..

[Proud]

not if chan ho park can help it!!!

[pissin2]

silly asian, tricks are for kids!

[Galactus]

Please show me one time where I have focus on connections between the Bush campaign and the swift boat ads. I dare you . I have said he knows what he is doing by not denoucing them but never one have I said he was connected to them.

The new swift boat have repeated been shown where Kerry's words are taken out of context and grossly distorted.

Bush did not say directly the swift boat ads were lying, however when he says he doesn't beleive Kerry lied about his record and that is the central issue of the swift boat ads, one can put two and two together.

Now, when your sainthood comes through we'll all throw you a party but untill then you'll just have to deal with it. You're faults have been pointed out endlessly by many differnt posters in many different ways. Repeating them again would do no good. If you can't see how simply having different opinons is in it self aplying different standards, if you honestly don't see that you're just trying to hold everyone else to the standards that make sense to you then there's no amount of reposting or examples that will show you.

[chrisfan]

DED said:

Please show me one time where I have focus on connections between the Bush campaign and the swift boat ads. I dare you . I have said he knows what he is doing by not denoucing them but never one have I said he was connected to them.

If you say you've never made the connection, or accusation of the connection, then I'll take you at your word and stand corrected. But that's not the only example I gave.

DED said:

The new swift boat have repeated been shown where Kerry's words are taken out of context and grossly distorted.

And this makes them different from your average political ad how? You have said that you think the swift boat ads should be denounced specifically, and taken off the air, have you not? Then you went on to say that when an ad can be proven to be a lie, it should be taken off the air. But as you're acknowledging, the most recent ad has not been proven to be lies. Misleading perhaps. Out of context. But not lies. So, does that mean you're reversing course on saying that hte ad should be denounced and taken off the air?

DED said:

Now, when your sainthood comes through we'll all throw you a party but untill then you'll just have to deal with it. You're faults have been pointed out endlessly by many differnt posters in many different ways. Repeating them again would do no good. If you can't see how simply having different opinons is in it self aplying different standards, if you honestly don't see that you're just trying to hold everyone else to the standards that make sense to you then there's no amount of reposting or examples that will show you.

You're making statements you're not willing to back up. And you denounce the swift boat guys?

[Proud]

these boys don't seem to like what sammy's cookin' up.



p.s. DED stop being a facist

[pissin2]

well this guy'll take care of them boys

[pissin2]

while sammy knocks that shit outta here, and even has time to change before rounding the bases