Prince Harry

[cybercoma]

The most epic meltdowns always happen when people refuse to re-evaluate their arguments and are lacking reflexivity.

[GostHacked]

Villagers demand more posts of American Woman telling us she won't be repeating herself.

[Wilber]

I swore I wouldn't be posting on this thread again but seeing the way it is going, I decided to make a few comments on the way it went for me.

Being a political forum, politicians and their policies are fair game for everyone but when the basic institutions our systems are based on come under attack from the outside, for me at least, a line is crossed.

If I went on an American political forum and tried to educate them about their errors (according to me) in the way they built those institutions, I would expect no mercy.

Just sayin. I'll shut up now.

[bleeding heart]

I swore I wouldn't be posting on this thread again but seeing the way it is going, I decided to make a few comments on the way it went for me.

Being a political forum, politicians and their policies are fair game for everyone but when the basic institutions our systems are based on come under attack from the outside, for me at least, a line is crossed.

I wholeheartedly disagree.

If I went on an American political forum and tried to educate them about their errors (according to me) in the way they built those institutions, I would expect no mercy.

And maybe you'd get none. But that doesn't mean you'd have done anything wrong.

[eyeball]

I swore I wouldn't be posting on this thread again but seeing the way it is going, I decided to make a few comments on the way it went for me.

I don't know what you're complaining about. I mean, the sense of who the monarch is, still remains far far more important to the masses than what it does in the scheming of things.

[Wilber]

I don't know what you're complaining about. I mean, the sense of who the monarch is, still remains far far more important to the masses than what it does in the scheming of things.

I'm not complaining. I just separate the institution from the individual. Royals are fair game understanding that the individuals are not the same as the Monarchy. Just as calling one particular president a turd is not the same as calling the whole institution of presidency a pile of dung.

[Wilber]

And maybe you'd get none. But that doesn't mean you'd have done anything wrong.

Who said anything about right or wrong. I'm saying just don't bitch if it blows up in your face.

[eyeball]

I'm not complaining. I just separate the institution from the individual. Royals are fair game understanding that the individuals are not the same as the Monarchy. Just as calling one particular president a turd is not the same as calling the whole institution of presidency a pile of dung.

My point exactly, the institution is so sacrosanct it's never ever fair game.

[Wilber]

My point exactly, the institution is so sacrosanct it's never ever fair game.

It's fair game if it's your institution. Outsiders venture there at their own peril.

[g_bambino]

My point exactly, the institution is so sacrosanct it's never ever fair game.

As well evidenced by the many discussions about it on these forums and the editorials about it and the letters to the editors about it and the politicians' comments about it and all the other like that's been seen but apparently never actually happened.

[g_bambino]

It's fair game if it's your institution. Outsiders venture there at their own peril.

Outside opinion can sometimes be more valuable than that from the inside, so long as it's well informed.

AW is right that the anti-Catholic laws in our constitution are discriminatory. It's just that her outrage over them is hypocritical and she refuses to admit it.

[Guest American Woman]

Ironic.

I'm sorry you've publicly embarrassed yourself by being unable to give me an explanation of your own statement.

[ed.: sp]

I'm sorry you've publicly embarrassed yourself by demanding - over and over - that I repeat myself or go through the thread for you.

I can keep this up as long as you can keep making ignorant posts.

[Guest American Woman]

Outside opinion can sometimes be more valuable than that from the inside, so long as it's well informed.

AW is right that the anti-Catholic laws in our constitution are discriminatory. It's just that her outrage over them is hypocritical and she refuses to admit it.

"Outrage?" Could you be more dramatic? One can be critical without being outraged. Why in God's name would I be "outraged" over how you choose your head of state in Canada? Furthermore, there's nothing hypocritical about it - but of course you all hypocritically go on and on about what a secular state you have and how religion plays into our POTUS elections - as Catholics are excluded from being your head of state.

[Wilber]

Outside opinion can sometimes be more valuable than that from the inside, so long as it's well informed.

AW is right that the anti-Catholic laws in our constitution are discriminatory. It's just that her outrage over them is hypocritical and she refuses to admit it.

As none of us have denied they are discriminatory except as a sarcastic response to another form of discrimination, why has a thread about a 23 year old playing strip pool run 18 pages and counting?

[g_bambino]

I'm sorry you've publicly embarrassed yourself by demanding - over and over - that I repeat myself or go through the thread for you.

You've just highlighted your own failure to answer my question and, ergo, to defend your own position. That's embarrassing. In fact, I'm almost starting to feel embarrassed for you.

[cybercoma]

I'm sorry you've publicly embarrassed yourself by demanding - over and over - that I repeat myself or go through the thread for you.

I can keep this up as long as you can keep making ignorant posts.

And you still look like a child for spending more time telling him why you're not going to restate your argument, instead of just taking 30 seconds to restate it.

[g_bambino]

As none of us have denied they are discriminatory except as a sarcastic response to another form of discrimination, why has a thread about a 23 year old playing strip pool run 18 pages and counting?

Threads do have a tendency to deviate and evolve. However, I believe what's pushing it along right now has a lot to do with the aforementioned hypocricy and refusals (as well as a continued refusal to live up to huffy promises to disengage).

[Guest American Woman]

I swore I wouldn't be posting on this thread again but seeing the way it is going, I decided to make a few comments on the way it went for me.

Being a political forum, politicians and their policies are fair game for everyone but when the basic institutions our systems are based on come under attack from the outside, for me at least, a line is crossed.

They key words being "for [you]." I can criticize any aspect of your country/government if I so please, and I will. The fact that you don't like it is your problem to deal with.

If I went on an American political forum and tried to educate them

Maybe that's your problem; you can't seem to accept "criticism" for what it is. What in the name of God makes you think I'm trying to educate you?? I'm assuming you know how your system works. I'm not "educating" anyone. I'm stating my opinion.

....about their errors (according to me) in the way they built those institutions, I would expect no mercy.

While you're there expecting no mercy, I would suggest you look and see just how many Americans are posting on and on and on about Canada; criticizing Canada. I would suggest you look and see if there's even a "Canadian politics" forum.

Ironically, so many Canadians are critical of Americans not caring about Canada or not knowing anything about Canada - but then jump all over them when they dare to criticize. But of course the U.S. and Americans are always fair game.

Just sayin. I'll shut up now.

Hallelujah. There is a God.

[Guest American Woman]

You've just highlighted your own failure to answer my question and, ergo, to defend your own position. That's embarrassing. In fact, I'm almost starting to feel embarrassed for you.

As promised, I can repeat myself as often as you can:

I'm sorry you've publicly embarrassed yourself by demanding - over and over - that I repeat myself or go through the thread for you.

I can keep this up as long as you can keep making ignorant posts.

[Wilber]

At this point it has degenerated into a did so, did not fest. Not very stimulating.

[Guest American Woman]

I wholeheartedly disagree.

And maybe you'd get none. But that doesn't mean you'd have done anything wrong.

This is a refreshing response; thank you.

[g_bambino]

As promised, I can repeat myself...

And can't answer my question.

[Guest American Woman]

And can't answer my question.

As promised, I can keep this up as long as you keep making false allegations:

I'm sorry you've publicly embarrassed yourself by demanding - over and over - that I repeat myself or go through the thread for you.

I can keep this up as long as you can keep making ignorant posts.

[g_bambino]

At this point it has degenerated into a did so, did not fest. Not very stimulating.

Indeed, it's not. An explanation from AW of how being born in the US is a necessary qualification for being president is needed for (hopefully stimulating) discussion to proceed. But, she's seemingly failed to do so and appears unable to prove otherwise.

[ed.: c/e]

Edited September 10, 2012 by g_bambino

[g_bambino]

I can keep this up as long as you keep making false allegations:

Prove them to be false.