Well, maybe he’s just bored with you cramming words down his throat.
Post #131:
post #132
Miller said no such thing. He said he suspected they existed, but he wanted to know which posts you referred to. You referred to mine. And considering the fact that I gave a very lucid explanation as to my calling Dick Cheney evil, I can only assume you were mistaken when you used it as an example. You’ve been very entertaining, but why not just come up with a cite that actually defends your position? Then we’ll stop trying to “outlast” you and pointing out the dreadfully boring fact that you’re a liar.
Now, I’m sure you’ve got a bucket of weasel words to explain why the plain meaning of what you said in the above paragraph is not the plain meaning of what you said in the above paragraph. I anticpate your dissembling with great interest.
Nope. See, what I did up there was accurately reflect exactly what you’ve said in this thread. What you did back when this whole thing got started was deliberately lie about the contents of other people’s posts.
Again?
Right. Like you’re not playing exactly the same endurance game. You keep bitching about how disinterested you are in this argument, and how it’s a waste of time, but you keep posting to it none the less. What’s up with that?
Well, we know this isn’t true, because if it were, you’d have conceded this whole argument back on page one.
You’re right, you said acknowledgement, not apology. My bad.
It was still a piss-poor acknowledgement, though. “Finer details?” Which “finer details” were you admitting you were wrong about? All of them?
You’re right, how silly of me. All things being equal, “abdominal cavity” is probably an optimistic estimate. Perineum would probably be more accurate. I don’t blame you for preferring to talk about your penile shortcomings (heh, a pun) rather than your blatant lies.
Okay, bucko! How’s this for dissembling?: I see nowhere in the paragraph you posted the following statement that you attributed to me through the use of quote marks:
“The fact that no one answered me proves there was no answer!”
Further, allow me to introduce you to the difference between ‘proof’ and ‘consensus’, courtesy of Merriam-Webster:
Proof: 1 a : the cogency of evidence that compels acceptance by the mind of a truth or a fact
Consensus: 1 a : general agreement
Note that nowhere did I allege that the ‘fact’ that no one answered me ‘proves’ there was no answer! Nope. You ‘paraphrased’ what you took to be my position; a paraphrase that is factually inaccurate both as a quote and as a statement of my opinion. The exact same things that you’ve been accusing me of.
I’m quite sorry, but you did nothing of the kind.
Factual cite for my ‘lying’?
(I will give you that had I lied in point of fact, it would of necessity have to have been deliberate.) :rolleyes:
Sorry, but to quote Ronald Reagan: “There you go again!”…putting words in my mouth, that is. I never said I was disinterested in the argument; I said I didn’t want to waste my time drudging up so-called ‘cites’ that prove nothing and only lead to further obfuscation. The thread itself I find to be entertaining, and it gives my mind something to chew on; slogging through endless posts containing the search terms ‘Cheney’ and ‘mean’ would be boring, tedious and futile.
Very gracious of you. Now, how about acknowledging the many misstatements of what I said the and the malicious and erroneous accusations of my lying that have peppered your posts to this thread?
Pretty much. It’s the big-picture content of the thread that I ‘accurately reflected’ you see, both in the POV I attributed to it and the challenge regarding Cheney’s meanness.
You know, a big-picture statement for which there is no specific quote…just like yours above?
Okay, that’s not what you said. My paraphrase was inaccurate. I should have included the whole text of your staggeringly dumb argument instead of trying to distill it. Because what you actually said is so much stupider than what I paraphrased, it makes my original point that much stronger.
Please redact that post so that, instead of reading,
it reads:
This alteration does not materially effect the substance of my accusation.
Your post is my cite.
Sorry, you’re right again: what you are not interested in is arguing fairly. You want to be able to make baseless assertations and get away with it. Your distinction has been noted.
In that spirit, I submit that all conservatives are inherently dishonest, racist, and enthusiasts of the sport of kitten-stomping. No, I don’t have any cites to prove it. It’s obvious, and everyone already knows it anyway, so I’m not going to bother.
Nope, not going to happen. You have been shown, repeatedly, to be lying through your teeth in this thread. I’m not going to back down from that for anything short of a full apology for your dishonesty.
No, you did not. The “big picture” you tried to paint using that thread was contradicted on every single point by the actual contents of that thread, and your insistence otherwise constitutes a continued dishonesty on your behalf. Or, in fairness, you could simply be really, really dumb, but that level of stupidity seems incompatible with the ability to read and write, so I’m going to stick with “liar” until it’s shown that you’ve got somebody reading this thread to you and transcribing your replies.
But, in your case, not only could you not track down relevant quotations, but your summary of the thread was actually a complete misrepresentation of what the thread actually contained.
I have nothing against summaries or abstracts or big-picture statements that give an accurate reflection of what they purport to describe. But such statements must bear some resemblance to reality, they must give an honest account of the subject they claim to address, or else the person making them loses all credibility. And that is exactly why you fail so miserably.
As was the quote in which it was couched…an even more deliberate and egregious error than that of which I’ve been accused.
I see. So now in your attempt to dance about and avoid culpability for the fact that you’ve been totally tripped up by engaging in the very same type of behavior that you’ve been criticizing me for, you now set the bar so that what you regard as ‘stupid’ behavior on the part of another poster is sufficient to make your inaccurate ‘paraphrase’ stronger and more permissable? In that case, Maureen’s overwhelming stupidity…both in the thread I linked to and in her posts here…makes my paraphrase that much stronger and more permissable.
Only in the sense that I never said “The fact that no one answered me proves there was no answer!” which you attributed to me with quote marks, no less.
How so? Just what is there in my post to provide conclusive and incontrovertible evidence as to my deliberate intent to deceive as opposed to, let’s say…hasty and inaccurate recollection? Come on, now…play by your own rules. (And you don’t even have to go digging for cites; everything you should need is right here in this thread.)
Aren’t you beginning to feel the least little bit embarrassed at having to keep repeating this admission? Time and again you misstate what I’ve said; time and again you acknowledge that you’ve done so; and time and again you turn right around and do it again.
Well, despite the Maureenness of this assertion, I’m nowhere near as quick as you are to demand cites to prove what I already know to begin with. Thus, given the fact that I know better, I would be content to let it drop.
Another blatantly dishonest and unsubstantiated accusation. If I’ve shown it, and you’re such a paragon of intellectually and moral honesty as you’ve intimated by your assertions as to how I should honestly debate around here, cough up proof!
It is my contention that you have shown dishonesty in this thread several orders of magnitude beyond anything you could show on my part. In fact, I’m content that you cannot show any type of lie (or am I gonna have to go to Merriam-Webster to let you know what this means, too?) whatsoever on my part.
You’re going to be waiting a long time for that, bub!
As was your quote of my alleged comments in regard to that thread.
I see you’ve elected the “it’s OK when I do it - but not for you” defense elucidated previously and with prescience by Shodan.
And now we come to the point we arrive at in some of these threads where even I begin to think I may be overdoing it, so I’m gonna bail. You can have the last word if it’s that important to you, Miller.
I sat down and logged on with a tremendous feeling of trepidation tonight. I felt something wrong was in the air. I almost had myself convinced the feeling was due to a bad day at work. Then I read your post.
Goddamn post that you submitted.
You just couldn’t give me 24 hours of the glorious fantasy of being a part of an SDMB List[sup]TM[/sup]. You had to just come in here and shit all over my little dream, didn’t you? Do you have any idea how much of my spirit, my soul you have dismantled and crushed? No, of course you don’t. Because you don’t care. I hate you and hope you burn in Hell.
I’m going to kick a puppy now. Or water the garden. Or something.
Awww, now I know that’s not true. But if it makes it any better, you’re on a short list of “Conservative posters I find charming and witty, even if their politics do make me want to occasionally throttle them til they admit Clinton wasn’t really that bad.” along with Silenus and Sam Stone and John Carter of Mars.
What happened in the thread of contention is what should have happened in this thread - most everyone ignored Starving Artist. I strongly recommend such a course in the future. The guy is just a huge fucking moron. I mean an absolute tool. He has never once demonstrated an ounce of either intellect or integrity.
So he made a claim and most people treated it like a fart at the ladies club luncheon. He doesn’t think this proves his claim - he already believed that his claim was proven. It doesn’t matter what anyone might have said otherwise.
If it makes you feel any better, you’re still on the list of people who use the word “irregardless.” It’s a much, much worse list to be on, believe me.
Aw, I can’t stay mad at you. With my job there really isn’t much left of either spirit or soul. They’ve drained that shit of those. (But I gotta warn you, thre’s a pissed off puppy looking for your ass.)
If I can be serious for a moment, I don’t think Clinton was anywhere near a disaster as President. I’ll bring him up now and again when I let the training the Dems taught me during his terms to kick in, but it’s mostly tongue-in-cheek. He seems a decent guy, if you’re not hardcore into morality in all aspects, and I’ve never really felt any animosity towards him. Despite what obscure quote will inevitably be brought up. I’d love to party with him for a week.
Yeah, but me being on a list makes the list both better and worse. Wrap your head around that one.
