Nope. Try again. I didn’t say he wasn’t talking about George III there.
Again context matters.
**mswas **you keep squeaking in the face of evidence but all you can show in support is your say-so, your persecution complex, and copious hand-waving.
Elucidator didn’t write “Bush”, he wrote “George III”.
His comment “yet here is America” is clearly a reference to the establishment of the USA as a sovereign nation. Not Iraq or anywhere else.
Bush’s “prescient blundering and visionary stupidity” had nothing to do with enabling the American colonies. Bush isn’t the person named, George III is and this comment thus directly refers to the British monarch.
No one has criticized Bush for his “policy for the Colonies” because - guess what - the USA has no colonies that Bush could be criticized for (unless you posit that Elucidator was referring to unincorporated territories like American Samoa and Guam, which makes no sense). Once again, the comment only works if we are talking George III rather than George W Bush.
**You **were talking about Bush and how people assume that everything about Iraq is a failure. **Elucidator **posted an apropos example about King George III showing how it is possible for utter and ultimate stupidity at the executive level to result in something positive.
As pointed out by another poster, you have a vested interest in maintaining your point of view so as not to look silly (bit late for that!), but after all your input on this subject you are still the one lone person who believes your claims on this subject.
There is an important difference between momentarily inserting your foot in your mouth - something everyone does on occasion - and attempting to force said appendage through your digestive system.
Although I agree this is *highly *suspect and convenient, what the Islamic Republic News Agency announced relatively quickly is that the incumbent candidate supposedly won (roughly) a two-thirds share of two thirds of all votes, which is a clear victory even if the remaining third of votes were not yet received/counted.
If it was a fraudulent election, what need was there to rush the results? The IRNA could have made the victory announcement a day or two later.
Regarding opinion polls, there is a chart at Wikipedia showing that Ahmadinejad polled first in 8 out of 14 national or nationwide polls, and was the leader among the candidates for all polls.
However, only 3 polls or so out of 30 give Ahmadinejad similar results to those he supposedly achieved on election day (~60% of the vote).
There are some irregularities in this election, but there are also consistencies. For example, provincial results show that in Tehran total votes for Ahmadinejad and Mousavi were fairly close (3,819,945 versus 3,371,523) suggesting a split between the poor and uneducated and conservative (Ahamadinejad), and the cosmopolitan and educated and more progressive (Mousavi).
You would expect well-informed overseas voters to avoid Ahmadinejad like the plague, and this does seem to have happened: the incumbent was trounced by Mousavi there (78,300 versus 111,792), unfortunately there are only a couple hundred thousand overseas Iranian voters, not enough to make a difference.
Uh, no, it isn’t. 2/3 of 2/3 is 4/9, which is less than a majority.
A good half of those polls are worthless, because in Iran campaign season is for two weeks before the election.
Mousavi losing in his home city is utterly ridiculous. Iran has strongly regional politics, and the notion of an Azer losing an Azeri city in an Azeri province is outrageous.
I never said he wrote Bush. Please show me where I wrote this.
Otherwise you continue to argue against a false straw man.
I’m sorry your reading comprehension is so poor but you’re calling me stupid for something you made up in your mind that I never said.
I don’t know why it’s so important for you to get a rise out of me with your straw man either. It’s kind of pathological.
I’m not the one who doesn’t understand what he’s reading, you are.
Nope. No need to try again. You are the one making a fool of himself. But hey, keep on digging. Don’t stop now. Maybe you will reach China.
It’s a conspiracy! The entire SDMB (plus some Iranian agents for good measure) have set up a conspiracy against you! That must be it. Because there is no other explanation. That or you are industrial-strength idiot.
No, it’s just two people saying I said something I didn’t say.
Why are you so obsessed that you must continually argue with something I never said?
I didn’t misinterpret what he said not for a single moment. I knew he was comparing George III’s incompetence and saying America succeeded DESPITE it, in direct response to a comment I made about George W. Bush. If you and Abe cannot read, that is not my problem.
So you can continue to call me an idiot all you like, in Great Debates of course. But it doesn’t change the fact that you are saying something that is not true. So either you don’t know it’s not true and that makes you one thing, or you know it’s not true and it makes you another.
So please keep obsessing. You’re doing a great job of proving my point that there are some people on this board that will throw all rationality out the window to get a dig at me time and again. The two of you just happen to be part of the group that does it. Like I said it’s only about half a dozen people. It’s not the whole SDMB though it’s cute when you try to elevate your own little muddle-headed vendetta as being about the entire message board. You think very highly of yourself when you’re making shit up and trying to argue it.
Bottom line, I NEVER SAID THE THING YOU ARE CALLING ME AN IDIOT FOR. But since you won’t let up I am going to simply report your post for harassment.
Again, Context matters.
Yup. When you say Bush I assume you mean Bush.
Oh, in that case, since it was you, by “Bush” I might assume you meant “parbroiled potatoes with a touch of garlic”.
Reported again.
Quoted for hilarity.
Disagreeing with you and not conceding when you’re wrong is not harassment.
Your argument is based off of arguing with something I didn’t say.
Your post is being reported as well.
Knock off the personal insults in Great Debates.
[ /Moderating ]
mswas, Captain Carrot, Abe and everyone else in this silly exchange, you may all knock it off as well. That topic is closed.
I would suggest to mswas, however, that you read the following quote over and over until you understand that point your opposition is making, (regardless whether you finally decide to acknowledge it).
tomndebb I understood what **Abe **wrote before he ever wrote it. I understood it when elucidator posted it the first time.
But thanks for coming in declaring the conversation over and getting another snipe in on it. The report function is useless when it comes to me when you are the moderator, you’ve shown that time and time again.
So if you want me to stop now, you’re going to have to ban me, because these lying trolls have no leg to stand on. They are arguing that I said something I never said.
If you want to end a discussion, then don’t come in and validate dishonest argument.
I NEVER FUCKING SAID WHAT HE’S CLAIMING I SAID!
That’s the FUCKING POINT!
Pointing out that he’s right is all well and good except that I NEVER FUCKING DISAGREED WITH IT.
So show me where I disagreed with that. Show me where I said he was talking about someone other than George III. Please. No one has been able to do it.
See tomndebb you came in and joined in the trolling for no apparent fucking reason. As can clearly be seen from this exchange I knew all along that he was talking about George III. HE WAS FUCKING COMPARING HIM TO GEORGE W BUSH.
So if you want this line of discussion to end. Please show me EXACTLY how you think I didn’t know from the start the content of **Abe’**s trolling?
So to recap as I have said OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER
I knew he was talking about George III, but he replied directly to a comment about George W BUSH as a comparison regarding how a country can be successful despite the ineptitude of the foreign colonial head of state.
The size 7 is for the incredibly fucking stupid.
That’s the last time I am going to try the report this post function.
And I will NEVER again pay any attention to your moderation tomndebb. I will ignore it in 100% of cases. You’re welcome to ban me, I don’t give a fuck.
I’m going to call people idiots, trolls and liars to my heart’s content now since the report this post function is clearly useless when it comes to me.
Whatever, I’ve calmed down now. This pissed me off but whatever.
My final word:
I never misread what elucidator wrote. I was never in disagreement with anyone about it.
Well, now that everybody’s calmed down…
mswas, you sort of took my point, and sort of didn’t. What I’m on about there is a variety of post hoc ergo propter hoc: the notion that “after” is the same as “because of”, which is a perfectly ordinary and entirely human error. To be intelligently considered, causation must have a reasonable time limit.
One might say that America saved England’s bacon in WWII because George III fucked up (which is an oversimplification by several degrees of magnitude, Ms. Tuchman would scold me right round for that…). And even though that is a rational inference, it isn’t a *reasonable *one.
Even if and when, insallah, Iraq shall stumble from the wreckage visited upon her, it will be no credit to GeeDub, nor, I daresay, for any of us who will always wonder if we might have done more.