User Posted January 14 Report Posted January 14 12 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: So... if we don't have zero rapes at the end of this term... the President is at fault ? Do we really really need to parrot the stupid politics that is everywhere on here ? All politicians switch the parameters once they're in power, we don't need to. Who are you talking to here, the void? 1 Quote
WestCanMan Posted January 14 Report Posted January 14 48 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: Yet, someone has pointed out that if the numbers go DOWN it's not good enough... Why is your side against making the number of child-sodomy incidents and rapes go down? 1 Quote If the Cultist Narrative Network/Cultist Broadcasting Corporation gave an infinite number of monkeys an infinite number of typewriters, leftists would believe everything they typed. "I don't hate American's, I pointed out the literacy rate to Uncle Sam." - LinkSoul "It's just a parable about rocks and trees talking to muslims to help them kill Jews who are trying to hide. It's open to interpretation." - robobigot
Michael Hardner Posted January 14 Report Posted January 14 22 minutes ago, WestCanMan said: Why is your side against making the number of child-sodomy incidents and rapes go down? What "side" ? How about this: to what extent do you plan these fabrications about me ? There's a ship somewhere that needs to be bottled - go to it, instead. Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
WestCanMan Posted January 14 Report Posted January 14 11 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: What "side" ? How about this: to what extent do you plan these fabrications about me ? There's a ship somewhere that needs to be bottled - go to it, instead. The side that you're always on. The left. I can guarantee that you can't find it in your heart to be critical of the people who are protesting against ICE, nor can you speak to their litany of false narratives. You'll support them to the greatest extent possible and then stay mum about their lies. FYI that's support. Either stay out of the debate or weigh in in a forthright manner. Quote If the Cultist Narrative Network/Cultist Broadcasting Corporation gave an infinite number of monkeys an infinite number of typewriters, leftists would believe everything they typed. "I don't hate American's, I pointed out the literacy rate to Uncle Sam." - LinkSoul "It's just a parable about rocks and trees talking to muslims to help them kill Jews who are trying to hide. It's open to interpretation." - robobigot
User Posted January 14 Report Posted January 14 34 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: What "side" ? How about this: to what extent do you plan these fabrications about me ? There's a ship somewhere that needs to be bottled - go to it, instead. Your side. You keep making comments like these: ”Yet, someone has pointed out that if the numbers go DOWN it's not good enough...” The implication here is that you are content with whatever the current down to amount is. Like, hey, we made it, this amount of rape is cool, no need to improve any more! Quote
Michael Hardner Posted January 14 Report Posted January 14 1 hour ago, WestCanMan said: 1. The side that you're always on. The left. 2. I can guarantee that you can't find it in your heart to be critical of the people who are protesting against ICE, 3. ... nor can you speak to their litany of false narratives. 4. You'll support them to the greatest extent possible and then stay mum about their lies. 5. FYI that's support. Either stay out of the debate or weigh in in a forthright manner. 1. HAHAHA. I'll stop you right there. I'm a conservative. NOT the conspiracy theory kind. I believe in the courts, academia, science, and a role for religion too. I believe that public discussion is critical to a healthy democracy. 2. I'm not critical of protesters, pretty much ever. That would be something that people who don't believe in our freedoms would do. 3. I don't support false narratives. 4. I doubt I have even posted on this foreign controversy to be honest. I would ask you to go and find evidence of your claim but we both know that is beneath you. 5. What 'debate' ? You just made the debate about ICE not me... Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
Michael Hardner Posted January 14 Report Posted January 14 1 hour ago, User said: Your side. You keep making comments like these: ”Yet, someone has pointed out that if the numbers go DOWN it's not good enough...” The implication here is that you are content with whatever the current down to amount is. Like, hey, we made it, this amount of rape is cool, no need to improve any more! There's no 'side' when it comes to data, goal setting etc. It should be independent of politics. Anyway, my question was from WestCan - he is capable of continuing the discussion. Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
User Posted January 14 Report Posted January 14 43 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: There's no 'side' when it comes to data, goal setting etc. It should be independent of politics. Anyway, my question was from WestCan - he is capable of continuing the discussion. There is a side when it comes to ignoring, downplaying, disregarding or whatever you want to call it in regards to the still ongoing issues with crime. You completely ignored my point about the implication of your comment. Quote
User Posted January 14 Report Posted January 14 1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said: 1. HAHAHA. I'll stop you right there. I'm a conservative. NOT the conspiracy theory kind. I believe in the courts, academia, science, and a role for religion too. I believe that public discussion is critical to a healthy democracy. To this day, I have no clue as to why you think you are a Conservative. You routinely like leftists comments on this forum, and take up leftist positions on various issues like the trans ideology and policy… I can’t recall any position you have on this forum that puts you in the Conservative category. 1 Quote
Michael Hardner Posted January 14 Report Posted January 14 54 minutes ago, User said: You completely ignored my point about the implication of your comment. I don't imply, you infer. It's a matter of systems management... you keep sticking your shoe in the door to make it political. How about this - we all should articulate a set of principles, and apply them to leadership whether we voted for them or not. Politicization of numbers is a futile folly engaged in by both sides, and thinking people should discourage that. 37 minutes ago, User said: To this day, I have no clue as to why you think you are a Conservative. You routinely like leftists comments on this forum, and take up leftist positions on various issues like the trans ideology and policy… I can’t recall any position you have on this forum that puts you in the Conservative category. If I see something I like in a comment I hit LIKE. I have done it to pretty much everyone here, including you, I'm sure, CDNFOX, etc. I don't have a leftist position on transgender issues. I articulated my conservative credentials above. I believe in the system. Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
User Posted January 14 Report Posted January 14 13 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: I don't imply, you infer. It's a matter of systems management... you keep sticking your shoe in the door to make it political. And you still didn’t actually respond to the point. You instead argue semantics about my inferring… without actually addressing the point of what I said I inferred. It is political because we are talking about policy and politics around the issue and you dismiss it, ignore it, and obfuscate it so as to oppose doing anything about it. 16 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: How about this - we all should articulate a set of principles, and apply them to leadership whether we voted for them or not. Politicization of numbers is a futile folly engaged in by both sides, and thinking people should discourage that. This is absurd. You are the one playing with the numbers. not just here, but in other threads talking about awful events from illegal immigrants raping and murdering people. YOU make it about the numbers so you can do what you are doing here, ignore the point, obfuscate, and act like we don’t need to care or do anything. 18 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: If I see something I like in a comment I hit LIKE. I have done it to pretty much everyone here, including you, I'm sure, CDNFOX, etc. I don't have a leftist position on transgender issues. It wasn’t an absolute statement, it’s a matter of you far more often liking leftist posts. The fact that you on rare occasion like one of mine or another’s doesn’t somehow outweigh the clear leaning you have here. You do in fact have a leftist position on transgender issues rights and ideology/ policy. 21 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: I articulated my conservative credentials above. I believe in the system. This is a joke. The system can be anything at any given time… support of the system isn’t Conservative. Support of the system enacting and upholding Conservative positions would be. Quote
Michael Hardner Posted January 14 Report Posted January 14 1 hour ago, User said: 1. It is political because we are talking about policy and politics around the issue and you dismiss it, ignore it, and obfuscate it so as to oppose doing anything about it. 2. This is absurd. You are the one playing with the numbers. not just here, but in other threads talking about awful events from illegal immigrants raping and murdering people. 3. YOU make it about the numbers so you can do what you are doing here, ignore the point, obfuscate, and act like we don’t need to care or do anything. 1. Far from it, I'm suggesting a way forward. If we agree on cold metrics then one can compare administrations objectively. 2. I think playing is a pejorative word in its use here. Again, metrics and cites are a good basis for discussion 3. No you're so convinced that I'm dishonest that you're going to make this about that. Just don't talk to me then. Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
User Posted January 14 Report Posted January 14 32 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: No you're so convinced that I'm dishonest that you're going to make this about that. Just don't talk to me then Yes, you would like that, me not pointing out your behavior here and your tactics… 30 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: 1 hour ago, User said: 1. Far from it, I'm suggesting a way forward. If we agree on cold metrics then one can compare administrations objectively. Compare cold metrics to what end? Your position seems to be little more than numbers are trending down so all is good! And we don’t need to discuss why this particular woman was murdered, or what went wrong, because the numbers are down! I’ve already played this dumb game with you before and you never responded. If there is a death at a construction site, where a dump truck backed over someone, because the backup alarm was broken, because when it was checked leadership said screw that, we don’t have time to fix it, that would be investigated and we would point out that hey, they should have fixed that backup alarm. Then you come along and say, the numbers of deaths at construction sites is down this year, we need to look at the cold hard data here and not worry about that death. 30 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: 2. I think playing is a pejorative word in its use here. Again, metrics and cites are a good basis for discussion You were the one who brought up politicization of numbers, I point out that you brought up the numbers, now you claim numbers are good! Again, you completely dodged the point. Quote
eyeball Posted January 14 Report Posted January 14 5 hours ago, WestCanMan said: I can guarantee that you can't find it in your heart to be critical of the people who are protesting against ICE, I can. They're not doing enough. They should also be organizing multiple convoys to Washington. Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
Michael Hardner Posted January 15 Report Posted January 15 4 hours ago, User said: 1. Compare cold metrics to what end? 2. Your position seems to be little more than numbers are trending down so all is good! 3. If there is a death at a construction site, where a dump truck backed over someone, because the backup alarm was broken, because when it was checked leadership said screw that, we don’t have time to fix it, that would be investigated and we would point out that hey, they should have fixed that backup alarm. 4. Then you come along and say, the numbers of deaths at construction sites is down this year, we need to look at the cold hard data here and not worry about that death. 1. To foster a discussion based on facts instead of just making a political campaign between two people. 2. I didn't mean to imply that. 3. Yes, every such incident is a concern, I don't mean to imply otherwise. 4. A politician, who plays in the ignorance emotion of an uninformed voter is part of the game, of course, but I see conservatives on here complain when Democrats do it so maybe it's not always great for anyone... Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
User Posted January 15 Report Posted January 15 3 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: 1. To foster a discussion based on facts instead of just making a political campaign between two people. This is not an answer; it is just vague generalities. What specifically is it you want? There are more facts than statistics to discuss. Which continues to be my point. You cna have a discussion on a million things without having to be obtuse by insisting to only want to discuss statistics. 5 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: 2. I didn't mean to imply that. Fair enough, so let's see if you keep insisting on this tactic to avoid discussing specific cases when they are brought up. 6 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: 3. Yes, every such incident is a concern, I don't mean to imply otherwise. Fair enough, so let's see if you keep insisting on this tactic to avoid discussing specific cases when they are brought up. 7 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: 4. A politician, who plays in the ignorance emotion of an uninformed voter is part of the game, of course, but I see conservatives on here complain when Democrats do it so maybe it's not always great for anyone... You think it is an ignorance emotion of someone uninformed to want to discuss the specifics of a particular egregious wrong that happened? Quote
Michael Hardner Posted January 15 Report Posted January 15 7 hours ago, User said: 1. This is not an answer; it is just vague generalities. What specifically is it you want? There are more facts than statistics to discuss. 2. Fair enough, so let's see if you keep insisting on this tactic to avoid discussing specific cases when they are brought up. 3. You think it is an ignorance emotion of someone uninformed to want to discuss the specifics of a particular egregious wrong that happened? 1. I don't want a fight, but discussion based on facts. That's not vague. 2. It's not a tactic. You doubt my intentions anyway, so anytime you want... you call my discussion approach a tactic as though I'm trying to deceive. 3. Maybe if we used Biden as an example, you would see my problem with the political approach I'm describing. They would scapegoat a particular example of something, implying that it's a wide problem. Again this is something both sides do.... But I will use Biden because I suspect that will work better. This article acknowledges that the inflation in his term was due to a lot of factors. What he chose to do at one point is blame the oil companies for his poor economy. Indeed that might have been part of the problem, but the idea was that he could scapegoat that industry and get some traction. I contend that this board should be better than a political advertisement for the parties you tend to support or I tend to support Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
User Posted January 15 Report Posted January 15 4 hours ago, Michael Hardner said: 1. I don't want a fight, but discussion based on facts. That's not vague. Yes, that is even more vague. LOL You keep going farther and farther from discussing the specifics of any particular issue. Which is exactly the point being made here, that rather than engage on the facts of an issue, you push having to look at the cold hard metrics so as to avoid and dismiss the facts of the issue. Back to the point... again, it is where we might say hey, this rape was awful and we can do better, and you say, nah, rapes are down! 4 hours ago, Michael Hardner said: 2. It's not a tactic. You doubt my intentions anyway, so anytime you want... you call my discussion approach a tactic as though I'm trying to deceive. Like I said, we will see the next time. 4 hours ago, Michael Hardner said: 3. Maybe if we used Biden as an example, you would see my problem with the political approach I'm describing. Not really... as when I have brought up specific issues, it was just that, not any effort to scapegoat and you play the silly we need to discuss the statistics game. I have given you examples repeatedly, and you ignore them. Quote
Michael Hardner Posted January 15 Report Posted January 15 7 minutes ago, User said: I have given you examples repeatedly, and you ignore them. Just as you completely ignored my Biden example below the excerpted part you commented on. I won't, however, accuse you of 'strategy and tactics'... Honestly who has the time ? Have a day, brother, have a day... Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
User Posted January 15 Report Posted January 15 1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said: Just as you completely ignored my Biden example below the excerpted part you commented on. I won't, however, accuse you of 'strategy and tactics'... Honestly who has the time ? Have a day, brother, have a day... How did I ignore it? I explained how it had nothing to do with anything. See you in the next thread you play these games in. Quote
Michael Hardner Posted January 15 Report Posted January 15 29 minutes ago, User said: See you in the next thread you play these games in. Running away, obfuscating, strategizing, .... (check notes) ...sorry, no, I was reading from your notes there on what you say to me when this happens Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
User Posted January 15 Report Posted January 15 35 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: Running away, obfuscating, strategizing, .... (check notes) ...sorry, no, I was reading from your notes there on what you say to me when this happens Just more of your usual obfuscation. See you next time. 1 Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.