Aren’t troll accusations against the rules here?
I’ve got kidney stones.
It’s funny how cricetus, our intelligent vigilant crusader, resorts to tantrums filled with personal insults and illogical claims when confronted. Is that you, Sean Hannity?
What illogical claims have I made? You own posts have been riddled with profanity and insults, and show no evidence that you read or comprehend those posts not in agreement with your own pathetic OP. Your belief that anyone not agreeing with you doesn’t UNDERSTAND your OP, and your laughable beleif that you’ve somehow argued a point and have me “squirming,” show you to be as delusional and incapable of rational judgment as any follower of Fox News, even if you don’t really like it, only dislike people complaining about it, for whatever reason. Your crowing of victory isn’t trolling then, I withdraw the complaint. You are simply delusional. You haven’t got me squirming on any level. You’ve made no argument. You’ve refuted no argument. You’ve thrown no poo that sticks. You’ve simply made some noise.
I stand by my asshole comment.
You sound like a swell guy, cricetus. Thanks for the wonderful contribution to the thread.
I just find it funny that you claim to read/view only X and Y because Fox “insults your intelligence,” then you turn into a screaming chimp that flings crude insults and troll accusations when your posts aren’t completely accepted by the entire SDMB. I may be delusional, but at least I’m not a hypocrite. I guess it doesn’t matter what level you sink to, as long as you get your point across? You can stand by your asshole comment, and I’ll stand by my assumption that you’re Sean Hannity in disguise.
Happy Easter.
Calling you an asshole once or twice is a few poos short of a screaming chimp fit, especially given that it’s the pit and your OP begins with an F bomb and name-calling. The train was already well on its way to wreck city, and you didn’t make things better with your continued insults to people who attempted to engage with you on the actual issue, your declarations that people (me) who had post unrefuted arguments were “squirming” because of empty rhetorical jabs, and repeated ad hominem attacks. I say this not presuming that my own name-calling proves anything – I argued my point on page 1, and this was echoed my others, and you haven’t refuted them, so I think the conversation is over with you as a clear loser. I mention that you’re an asshole (in this thread, at least) as a complete non-squiturial observation. It was my opinion at the time, born of frustration, and if you can read back and reflect on your behavior, you might see why someone would come to such a decision.
So let’s start over. Let’s say, for example, that you raise an OP by saying that even though Fox is a less-than-reputable source, that it’s a fallacy to presume anything on Fox news is absolutely false, that such items should be considered neither proven nor disproven because of their source, and that we should seek independent means of verification. Admit that you can see why, with their reputation, cites to Fox news would be met with skepticism. You may say that you find remarks on Fox News tiresome, but just as you tell us to accept their presence in the world, you should accept that criticism of their coverage is a side-effect of their existence and is not likely to go away. Moreover, if you post a thread about how you want people to behave on these boards, then read and respond respectfully to their posts. Do not presume they don’t understand your suggestions just because they reject them. Hold back a bit on calling them “chuckleheads.”
In turn, we will attempt to let mild citations fly by and not post content-free rejections of those cites. I won’t, anyway. Nor will I call you an asshole.
If Fox News is as bad as everyone says it is, wouldn’t it make more sense to point out the bias and lies in each site instead of dismissing them out right because they’re from Fox News?
This, I agree with. Each reference should stand up to its own scrutiny. I mean, the occasional fact might slip past their editors.
What’s your point, rjung?
Now that I think about it, I get your point. “Fox News lies all the time! Just look! Look at all the lies!”
I still stick by what I said. The fight against ignorance will go better if you attack each cite individually instead of just dismissing it out of hand.
I agree; I’m just pointing out a reference for you to use when you want to refute Fox’s Lie Of The Day.