It’s now official,,,,,,,,

[telling tiger 156]

Several people left the forum by choice long before you started participating on the regular basis you do now.

No reason to respond rationally to mostly irrational people..

ICHY holds up a mirror perfectly and the fact that it peeves the tards is mostly just additional humor.

[AUFAN78 4,130]

Golly Gee Whiz Homey. You seem to have trouble understanding the basic FACTS in this forum no matter how times, how many different ways they are presented

barry sux

hillary is brain damaged

Kerry is a horse faced jackass

Pelosi is crazy

libtards have a mental disorder

they aint no global warmin

These is FACTS buddy. and their OFFICIAL If you can learn these here FACTS maybe you can type somthin that dont sound dum.

There you go again. Nice meaningful discussion itch. Says a lot right there buddy.

Actually, it is meaningful if you understand it. It is also representative of the theme of this type of thread as well as many others. All of this has been posted in this forum by people other than myself.

I get your attempt, but it is only meaningful to a handful of your buddies. It's impact on others is zilch. Why don't you try diplomatic conversation? I realize doing so takes a mature person, but I will hold out hope.

To the theme of the thread. There are truly many individuals totally disgusted by this administration and the fact that they choose this forum as a vent is understandable and to be expected. When someone talks about "my guy" I don't get my panties in a wad. You? BTW, Do you remember the threads during the final years of W? Itch i know you are a smart guy. I only wish you'd act like it more often.

What would you care to discuss. Anything you wish. You are like far too many here. You come here to argue and insult. I think if you pay close attention, you'll see my MO is to intervene when others are arguing and particularly insulting. I tried to engage you in conversation yesterday. After breaking through your wall of preconceived notions and insults, you had no opinion? You have to admit that you are being the consummate hypocrite. You should go back and re-read the thread. You dodged the only question repeatedly and spewed meaningless rhetoric. It wasn't an opinion piece, it was a single question. You dish it but, you don't take it very well. You are speaking on emotion and not fact. Look at your posts. Most are, rhetoric, insults, meaningless, one or two-word comments. As stated previously, my posts are typically in response to insults. Quite frankly, they may be insulting as they probably should be given they are in response to insulting posts. I think a more accurate statement would be, all of the posters in this forum need to post more intelligently. It is time for ALL of us to remember that we are on the same side. This forum holds the power to educate all of us. Remember this quote of yours and live by it. If you do, my "insulting" responses with you will diminish. Or, it is simply a tool for those who are entertained by being mean-spirited. I include myself in the latter. However, I much prefer the former. I truly want to believe you itch, but history is not on your side.

No offense but, this is pure BS. You should go back and re-read the thread. I answered your question immediately and, again later in the conversation. You have to admit, you did not enter the conversation with an open mind. You had an agenda. You were looking for an argument.

I don't think you have participated in the forum long enough to make a statement about it's history. If you had, I think you would recognize that several very, very good and thoughtful posters have been run out of the forum and, it was not by, or because of, me.

I am not responsible, nor to blame, for the decorum of the forum. I am sorry if I have hurt some people's feelings. However, I would suggest that we all have moments when we take ourselves too seriously.

Whatever.

[AUFAN78 4,130]

Several people left the forum by choice long before you started participating on the regular basis you do now.

No reason to respond rationally to mostly irrational people..

ICHY holds up a mirror perfectly and the fact that it peeves the tards is mostly just additional humor.

I get why some people post rhetoric regarding the current administration. Unless you have blinders on you have to see the continuous blunders. I get that and I get why it frustrates folks both for and against the admin. What I don't get is the "panties in a wad" bunch that feels the need for retribution via personal insult. With regards to peeving of folks, I see it having the exact opposite effect. It fuels them and it is very apparent.

[telling tiger 156]

You are entitled to your perspective on who or what fuels the irrational.....it is not the only perspective nor is it everyone's perspective......

What you don't also get is, that some of those you defend while claiming to "intervene", are the panty wadded ones. Quite funny....

You're entitled also to your perspective of your participation, not everyone shares it.

[AUFAN78 4,130]

You are entitled to your perspective on who or what fuels the irrational.....it is not the only perspective nor is it everyone's perspective......

What you don't also get is, that some of those you defend while claiming to "intervene", are the panty wadded ones. Quite funny....

You're entitled also to your perspective of your participation, not everyone shares it.

I think it is clear, partisanship fogs the mind. :-\

[telling tiger 156]

See, trying to have a conversation and you do what you claim everyone else is doing...

It is clear partisan nonsense clouds your existence.

Your response is the exact reason the tards are on ignore. Save it for someone else.

Two people tell you roughly the same thing , but the fault is all theirs and you are just perfect? LOL

Uh huh.

[AUFAN78 4,130]

See, trying to have a conversation and you do what you claim everyone else is doing...

It is clear partisan nonsense clouds your existence.

Your response is the exact reason the tards are on ignore. Save it for someone else.

Two people tell you roughly the same thing , but the fault is all theirs and you are just perfect? LOL

Uh huh.

Placing blame is not trying to have a conversation.

Do you think the two people who tried to tell me the same thing had something in common?

BTW, I am human. Far from perfect.

[telling tiger 156]

Do you think the two people who you say have something in common are what you tards claim them to be? lol...

Clueless, simply not worth the effort to me.....I find it funny at best and don't care otherwise....Argue away.

Not accepting responsibility is far more the issue than placing blame.....tell it to someone else. Cease uppercase, involve someone else.

[Strychnine 1,808]

See, trying to have a conversation and you do what you claim everyone else is doing...

It is clear partisan nonsense clouds your existence.

Your response is the exact reason the tards are on ignore. Save it for someone else.

Two people tell you roughly the same thing , but the fault is all theirs and you are just perfect? LOL

Uh huh.

Placing blame is not trying to have a conversation.

Do you think the two people who tried to tell me the same thing had something in common?

BTW, I am human. Far from perfect.

The OP comes from a position of placing blame.

If you are talking about homer and ICHY, they do have something in common. They both tend to make rational arguments, and define the logic behind them. ICHY has adopted a mocking alter-ego, as his own response to certain posters and perspectives that have established themselves as instruments of rhetoric. Diplomatic conversation is not possible under those circumstances, so why should he be compelled to bash his head against the wall crafting rational arguments in response to the irrational? If you attempt to sincerely engage him in conversation, whether he agrees with you or not, the mockery does at least stop. You have seen it illustrated in this thread.

[AUFAN78 4,130]

I'll end on this....

Go back and look at the OP. Why did that offend you?

Then look at the string of childish responses left purely for the purpose of argument. Were the negative childish responses necessary? Please tell me that is not your idea of discussion.

Next, look at the impact this childish string produces. Are you proud of or remotely happy with the result?

This is a constant response from a few butthurt, panties in a wad bunch that love to admonish with personal insult. Every time it leads to argument and fizzles to nilch! So freaking worthwhile right? How about a legitimate discussion? Feelings aside. Seriously!

[AUFAN78 4,130]

See, trying to have a conversation and you do what you claim everyone else is doing...

It is clear partisan nonsense clouds your existence.

Your response is the exact reason the tards are on ignore. Save it for someone else.

Two people tell you roughly the same thing , but the fault is all theirs and you are just perfect? LOL

Uh huh.

Placing blame is not trying to have a conversation.

Do you think the two people who tried to tell me the same thing had something in common?

BTW, I am human. Far from perfect.

The OP comes from a position of placing blame.

If you are talking about homer and ICHY, they do have something in common. They both tend to make rational arguments, and define the logic behind them. ICHY has adopted a mocking alter-ego, as his own response to certain posters and perspectives that have established themselves as instruments of rhetoric. Diplomatic conversation is not possible under those circumstances, so why should he be compelled to bash his head against the wall crafting rational arguments in response to the irrational? If you attempt to sincerely engage him in conversation, whether he agrees with you or not, the mockery does at least stop. You have seen it illustrated in this thread.

Look at the first three responses to the OP and tell me you see them as rational arguments.

[Strychnine 1,808]

See, trying to have a conversation and you do what you claim everyone else is doing...

It is clear partisan nonsense clouds your existence.

Your response is the exact reason the tards are on ignore. Save it for someone else.

Two people tell you roughly the same thing , but the fault is all theirs and you are just perfect? LOL

Uh huh.

Placing blame is not trying to have a conversation.

Do you think the two people who tried to tell me the same thing had something in common?

BTW, I am human. Far from perfect.

The OP comes from a position of placing blame.

If you are talking about homer and ICHY, they do have something in common. They both tend to make rational arguments, and define the logic behind them. ICHY has adopted a mocking alter-ego, as his own response to certain posters and perspectives that have established themselves as instruments of rhetoric. Diplomatic conversation is not possible under those circumstances, so why should he be compelled to bash his head against the wall crafting rational arguments in response to the irrational? If you attempt to sincerely engage him in conversation, whether he agrees with you or not, the mockery does at least stop. You have seen it illustrated in this thread.

Look at the first three responses to the OP and tell me you see them as rational arguments.

Since the fourth response was from me, it should be obvious that I read them when they were posted originally or shortly thereafter. The first one was pointing out the irony, which is perfectly rational. I was specifically explaining the reason for the second response. The very nature of an alter-ego suggests that there is an original persona to ICHY, and you have indeed seen them both in this thread. If it bothers you, engage him with an actual point aside from attacking the existence of said alter-ego.

[homersapien 12,172]

The OP comes from a position of placing blame.

If you are talking about homer and ICHY, they do have something in common. They both tend to make rational arguments, and define the logic behind them. ICHY has adopted a mocking alter-ego, as his own response to certain posters and perspectives that have established themselves as instruments of rhetoric. Diplomatic conversation is not possible under those circumstances, so why should he be compelled to bash his head against the wall crafting rational arguments in response to the irrational? If you attempt to sincerely engage him in conversation, whether he agrees with you or not, the mockery does at least stop. You have seen it illustrated in this thread.

Yeah, that's Big Ben's job.

[homersapien 12,172]

Pointing out the irony (humor) of an opinion piece declaring their view as "official" is irrational?

Is humor irrational?

[telling tiger 156]

Tards are best ignored.....why bother. As several have stated...irrational people do not deserve a rational response..Well, except for the straight jacket.

[AUFAN78 4,130]

Why respond at all? Simply to argue?

[Strychnine 1,808]

Why respond at all? Simply to argue?

What is the nature of an internet message board? It would get pretty damn boring and quiet if we all agreed.

[AUFAN78 4,130]

Why respond at all? Simply to argue?

What is the nature of an internet message board? It would get pretty damn boring and quiet if we all agreed.

Indeed. A diplomatic response would be interesting.

[Strychnine 1,808]

Why respond at all? Simply to argue?

What is the nature of an internet message board? It would get pretty damn boring and quiet if we all agreed.

Indeed. A diplomatic response would be interesting.

Have I failed to provide one?

[AUFAN78 4,130]

Why respond at all? Simply to argue?

What is the nature of an internet message board? It would get pretty damn boring and quiet if we all agreed.

Indeed. A diplomatic response would be interesting.

Have I failed to provide one?

Not as I recall. Thank you for that!

[Tigermike 3,657]

Pointing out the irony (humor) of an opinion piece declaring their view as "official" is irrational?

Is humor irrational?

Who declared their opinion "official"?

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

Hang in there 78 but if tards are best ignored I guess the same should apply to turds.

[TheBlueVue 177]

Pointing out the irony (humor) of an opinion piece declaring their view as "official" is irrational?

Is humor irrational?

Who declared their opinion "official"?

homer did in his derisive way of trying to ridicule the opinion. Funny thing is, homer's opinion is becoming the significant minority. The majority of Americans no longer trust Obama to be honest and that is terribly problematic for the WH.

[homersapien 12,172]

Pointing out the irony (humor) of an opinion piece declaring their view as "official" is irrational?

Is humor irrational?

Who declared their opinion "official"?

homer did in his derisive way of trying to ridicule the opinion. Funny thing is, homer's opinion is becoming the significant minority. The majority of Americans no longer trust Obama to be honest and that is terribly problematic for the WH.

Wrong again. I was pointing out the irony of the title in the linked article:

OPINION: It’s now official:

You can actually go back and find the post (#2) to confirm. (Do you ever do that?)

[TheBlueVue 177]

Pointing out the irony (humor) of an opinion piece declaring their view as "official" is irrational?

Is humor irrational?

Who declared their opinion "official"?

homer did in his derisive way of trying to ridicule the opinion. Funny thing is, homer's opinion is becoming the significant minority. The majority of Americans no longer trust Obama to be honest and that is terribly problematic for the WH.

Wrong again. I was pointing out the irony of the title in the linked article:

OPINION: It’s now official:

You can actually go back and find the post (#2) to confirm. (Do you ever do that?)

Pointing out the irony (humor) of an opinion piece declaring their view as "official" is irrational?

Is humor irrational?

Who declared their opinion "official"?

homer did in his derisive way of trying to ridicule the opinion. Funny thing is, homer's opinion is becoming the significant minority. The majority of Americans no longer trust Obama to be honest and that is terribly problematic for the WH.

Wrong again. I was pointing out the irony of the title in the linked article:

OPINION: It’s now official:

You can actually go back and find the post (#2) to confirm. (Do you ever do that?)

Of course I do but I didn't on this thread. You reputation precedes you. At least you didn't deny your MO. The writer gave pretty good basis for his opinion. You, like most of your ilk, prefer to discredit with no real basis. That article had a solid basis for his "opinion" and many more share it than disagree with it. There's not much irony in that