Now he gets the point. If he had realised it earlier none of this would have necessary.
Oh well, we can only hope he gets other points as quick.
Nope. But this is:
New Iskander blathers and yawps,
Like a bibulant soused in his hops,
With incomprehensible
Dreck, indefensible
Maunderings, hogwash, cow flops.
**EddyTeddyFreddy and New Iskander. **
Actually those both were funny.
I don’t know you Isky, may I call you Isky?
But you have a sense of humor and don’t appear to be mean hearted. I still have to give this contest to Uppy.
FinnAgain, I don’t want to be a wet blanket, but **Isky ** definitely shows signs of intelligence. You got to give him his due. That was a pretty good post, in a thread devoted to bashing him.
Jim a fairly neutral observer who is also spelling challenged and uses the heck out of MS-Word.
>Can’t we all just get along<
From time to time, perhaps.
Which makes it… intersting… that he often posts things that are blatantly stupid.
His arguments in the Cheney thread are simply absurd, bothersome, and rather incomprehensible. They’re the literary equivelant of stale fast food.
Ehhhh, I’d take points off for the gratuitous and incorrect use of alliteration.
One can be in a snit, but cannot be a snit, for example.
I’ll give it a C- for content but a B+ for effort.
But it’d be even nicer if Isky started making posts that didn’t look like they were typed out by an angry drunken monkey.
You know Angry Drunken Monkey is an excellent band name.
Jim
But not so much an excellent poster
Yes, I know, it’s an ape not a monkey, but just go with me on this one.
Reminds me very much of Jerry
Jim
Sure it wasn’t the Primate of Athens?
See now, that’s part of your problem. Your experiment is flawed. Even if every Doper, including the hamsters, thinks you’re right about a particular subject, (Let’s pick “BUSH SUCKS”), it doesn’t follow that you are.
So much for your alleged intellectual honesty.
You also suffer from the delusion that opinions on the SDMB, or possibly on the internet in general, accurately represent what people think in real life. They don’t. IRL, about 1/2 of the voters think that Bush doesn’t suck–see the 2004 election results.
As an aside, folks like you have been calling Bush, Republicans, Christians, and others stupid and evil for five years now. To maximize results, I heartily recommend you continue to do so, and even ratchet up your rhetoric several notches between now and 2008. And then we’ll see what happens.
Have a nice day. 
Well, if Bush wins the election again, you’ll have certainly shown all of us.
You did see where I just put the word prove in soft quotes, yes? If you didn’t, it would point to you being a lazy asshole who won’t read a thread before responding. If you did, it would point to you being an intellectually dishonest shitlicker. It’s hard to tell with you.
I’m well aware of the bandwagon fallacy, schmuck.
My point was that over a long posting history, even those I’ve disagreed with vehemently would most likely not view me as intellectually dishonest. That you cannot wrap your mind around the concept that earning the respect of your peers is important or that those who I’ve argued with wouldn’t be able to cite instances of ‘intellectual dishonesty’ on my part? that aint my affair Uppy.
You’ve also done nothing to show my alleged ‘intellectual dishonesty’. Not one cite. Not one factual claim.
You started your posts in this thread by making a Strawman Fallacy (coupled with some whinging wannabe martyr bullshit), followed up by a Red Herring Fallacy, and then a Tu Quoque fallacy.
When challenged for a cite as to my views and methods or argumentation regarding Bush and Iraq, you remain mute. You have, repeatedly, attempted to assign beliefs and actions to me which exist nowhere outside of your fevered little brain. This, again, shows your rampant intellectual dishonesty.
Cite, you crackwhore of the intellect?
You’re making this too easy for me, this is yet another instance of your intellectual dishonesty.
People like me? You poor, ignorant, loud mouthed fucking moron.
Seeing as how you’re an ignorant cumstain who can’t even be bothered to find out what I actually believe before spouting off with your intellectual whoring, I fail to be impressed.
Be fair, Finn. He might just be too stupid to understand the subtleties of the written word.
Point.
The Fallacy of the Excluded Middle is always a bugger.
I retract my statement as factually incorrect, and amend it to include the possible influence of Uppy’s intense and blinding stupidity.
Let it never be said you aren’t a fair man, Finn.
So you’re still on that “Ya’ll hate me cause I like Bush” thing. No thoughts on anything else that you’ve been accused of?
Um, you’re the one who called President Carter insane because he’s a Christian.
Sorry, that’s the only accusation that he actually understands…
For the record, here is the same cite I used for people dying of “excess light” as in the original thread.
We intened to , and by the way have you heard about Bush yet?
I am remiss! As others have pointed out (tacitly), I took the bait of your red herring, Uppy, instead of sticking to the issues.
To put a finer point on what everybody has been telling you:
As I’d think my OP makes quite clear Uppy, you weren’t pitted for anything directly related to Bush or Iraq. I Pitted you for three specific arguments, and two specific character flaws.
The specific arguments were:
-Your differing standards for Christian fundamentalist terrorists and Muslim fundamentalist terrorists.
-Former President Carter’s statements and your interpretation thereof.
-Your claims that Louisiana’s financial problems are due to incompetence.
And we could add a fourth, I suppose, as your reaction to the whole excessive-light-and-torture was mentioned by another poster and cited by me.
The specific character flaws were:
-Stupidity.
-Intellectual dishonesty.
You will notice that nowhere in that list are your views on Iraq or President Bush mentioned. You will further note that your conduct in this thread consists mainly of whinging, attempted martyrdom, and red herrings of various forms. Moreover, you will note that you have not addressed a single point I raised in the OP.