Searching "comments":
| # | Comment | Survey |
|---|---|---|
| 51 | > I didn't even read your last paragraph. As soon
> as I saw names of people WHO ARE IN NO WAY INVOLVED > I decided to not read that. Stop playing the poor > helpless baby card, you aren't. It's a shame you didn't read it. Then you'd realize that the "poor baby card" made no appearance whatsoever. > The reason you're > attacked for "asking a simple question" is because > you always attack. So in other words, even though I wasn't being an ass, you decided to act as though I was anyway? Does this technique work for you in debate club? > You say you do that because > you're defending yourself; well that's why everyone > comes off so strongly towards you; we're defending > ourselves (well..except for those who really try > to mess with you). > > You and I both have opinions..differing opinions...opinions > that differ in intensity...but opinions nonetheless. Again, you are acting as though opinions and facts are interchangeable things. They are not. Trying to argue from your stance is like trying to play American Football with a Soccer ball, and arguing that "They are both balls. The differences between the two balls is just opinion." Not to self: Don't use sports metaphors anymore. > In most instances resonable ADULTS would discuss > their different views. If they argued, they would > decide not to talk about it anymore. But you > cannot do that. You just keep going. > I'm not really sure what you're trying to do. > If you want me to feel dumb..you're failing. If > you want me to agree with you, you're failing. I want you to answer my question, which was asked using factual information obtainable from multiple sources. If that is "failing," than if you ever cite a study in debate, that means you are failing as well based upon your apparent logic. > In both instances you would need to be so convincing > and not mean...or charismatic...But since this > is the Internet, your charisma will be wasted. > I'm not saying you are never wrongly attacked, > nor am I saying that you "started it"..but if > you didn't jump the gun so often and assume we're > all so handicapped we can barely wipe our butts, > then people would listen to you. And those that > would keep arguing aren't worth your time anyway. > > So, if you'd like, you can "try again". OK, I'll try again. On what exactly do you base your premise that the previous President did "well enough" in combating terrorism, given that facts on the ground suggest otherwise? In other words, the question I asked originally, merely rephrased. | Do you think the war on terrorism was being handled better by the Bush Administration? |
| 52 | > I'm not really sure why I need proof.
> > Let's go back to first grade, Frosty. I know > it was a long time ago..but let's go back there. > > This is an opinion question. "Do you think" > So if I want to think something that's just fantastic. > I'm not the only one who thought Bush did "well > enough". It's an opinion question. Opinion doesn't > need to be based on fact AT ALL it's based on > how I feel. > Opinions don't trump facts though. You can have the "opinion" that the Earth is being carried through the universe by two emerald green lobsters named Desdemona and Keith, but that wouldn't make it true unless you had something to back it up. And yes I know I've used that joke before, but I like it. P.S. How awesome would it be if the lobster thing were true?  > Now if the question was worded differently to > actually involve fact, then that would just be > fantastic...and I would try to scrounge up facts..But > not really because I just kind of don't care. > > But the question was an opinion question. In > an opinion question I don't have to cite my sources > and I'm allowed to say "I". > So, I'm not allowed to suggest that you're assessment is off because of the way the question was worded? Plus, I still don't understand how you can say Bush did "well enough" unless there was an unspoken "...for a moron" behind it, because history is replete with examples of people who handled terrorism much better. If that's the case than our opinions don't differ that much since I did say about him "It could've been a lot worse." > And I was never in debate club..let's just get > that out there. We did one debate in my english > class (well, two..but half of the class did one..the > other half did the other). I helped gather information, > sure..but I didn't do a whole lot of talking. > The kids on my side and kids on the other side > were much more vocal than I was. However, we > did have facts to back everything up because a > debate requires that. We right now are not having > a debate. We're having an argument. It would be so tempting to launch into the Monty Python bit right about here... | Do you think the war on terrorism was being handled better by the Bush Administration? |
| 53 | > The Lobster thing would be cool.
> > But, what you said wasn't an opinion either. > An opnion would be, "Do you think it would be > awesome if the lobster thing were true?" > Is voting fact or opinion? It's opinion. I feel > that the person I'm voting for will do a good > job. Likewise, I feel Bush did well enough. > Again, well enough compared to what exactly? > Our opinions do differ..and they probably always > will. > You're allowed to suggest anything you want..But > suggestions, like opinions don't really need to > be listed to. And I completely understand how > you don't get how I can comment on his abilities > without insulting him...You hate him and his politics..I > got that...you and 80% of the nation. > I just don't tend to hate people. > Has it never occurred that he deserves the level of criticism he gets? It's not like I just woke up thinking "You know what? I feel like hating the (former) President today." > > And I'm glad you didn't launch into a Monty Python > bit because it would have been wasted on me. > I've never seen any of the movies..nor do I desire > to. That's a damn shame, it really is. | Do you think the war on terrorism was being handled better by the Bush Administration? |
| 54 | > I don't think there's really a correct way. I
> didn't like how Bush handled it. Obama hasn't > had to handle it much yet, although I wasn't pleased > with anyone's reaction to the attempted bombing > on Christmas. The problem with the "war on terrorism" > is that it's not a real war against a real, concrete > enemy. It's mostly a stupid concept involving > a lot of fear-mongering. Absolutely. I mean, how can you declare war on a tactic? A war on terrorism makes about as much sense as a war on the Clausewitzian center of gravity (look it up. | Do you think the war on terrorism was being handled better by the Bush Administration? |
| 55 | > Well he is the typical brainwashed LWL (Left Wing
> Loon). I think these guys get handouts with talking > points. Coming from a guy whose rants sound like they were written by the squeaky-voiced Right Wing neo-fascist Mark Levin, that's very ironic. | Do you think the war on terrorism was being handled better by the Bush Administration? |
| 56 | > Yeah, I try not to let him get to me. It's just
> so irritating sometimes. I wouldn't look to FordGuy for inspiration. I've busted the guy lying so many times, he's like the boy who cried wolf who never learns because there isn't a convenient wolf to eat him and end the Aesop already. | Do you think the war on terrorism was being handled better by the Bush Administration? |
| 57 | > That was a nice metaphor. I don't dislike you
> or anything, I just don't like the fact that very > often it seems as if you are attacking whomever > you are talking to. It certainly doesn't help that certain people always respond to me as if being attacked, even if I'm not even directly addressing them. Of course I have those people (well, most of them) filtered now so it should get a bit quieter around here. | Do you think the war on terrorism was being handled better by the Bush Administration? |
| 58 | > I think Barack Obama getting rid of terrorist
> prisons is a very bad thing. They should be tortured...my > only complaint if that Bush Admin was treating > them too soft and humane. He's not getting rid of them, he's actually bringing them to trial so we can get justice. You don't want justice. You just want petty revenge, like an ignorant child. Torture doesn't work, period. Let's compare; World War II: Nazis who knew they were beaten would look for Americans to surrender to. War on Terror: Terrorists use our actions as recruiting tools. I'm glad we didn't have people who think like you in charge during WWII. We'd have still been fighting the Nazis well into the 1950s. | Do you think the war on terrorism was being handled better by the Bush Administration? |
| 59 | > Once they go to trial they can make every excuse
> in the world: poor upbringing, bad influences, > mental illness, etc. And? If the evidence against them is solid they'd still lose and go to a U.S. SuperMax facility, the kind from which a grand total of ZERO prisoners have escaped. > They will be back out of > jail in no time and free to do it again. Your lack of faith in the American justice system saddens me. > You'll > have Jihadist gangs within the prisons as well. Not in a SuperMax. The only people they will be interacting with are the guards. > If you want to beat a ruthless enemy you need > to be just as ruthless! And apparently brainless as well judging from how you want us to do things. The Icarus Plan for Combating Terrorist Groups: Find out what terrorist recruiters tell people about us, then do those things on a large scale thus making criminals look like Prophets. Great plan Icarus; let's prove Osama Bin Laden. That'll surely stop further attempts to attack us.  | Do you think the war on terrorism was being handled better by the Bush Administration? |
| 60 | > Yeah, I can't imagine filtering anyone. So I
> don't. I used to have a ton of people filtered. Then, I went several years without filtering anyone. I think I've settled into a nice middle here. I only have 4 people filtered. There are a couple of people here who are on the cusp of being there too, but even then that's only 6 out of, what, more than 3 dozen active users? | Do you think the war on terrorism was being handled better by the Bush Administration? |
