nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
13,254
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 218:
Line 218: + + + + + +
Conservapedia talk:Obama straw poll (view source)
Revision as of 14:12, December 3, 2008
, 14:12, December 3, 2008→"You Say Tomato, I Say Tomatoe; Let's Call The Whole Thing Off!": Funny how in trying to criticise me you're actually showing up the people you are supposedly supporting!
Wikipedia has countless thousands of pages of just such arguments stored away, and if this is someone's idea of being productive -- engaging in circular, repetitive and seemingly endless talk -- enjoy yourselves! My suggestion is that we now call the game, and ignore the people with closed minds, who are more interested in liberal political correctness, demanding to be made "right", demanding to be King of the Hill. --<font color="#1E90FF" face="Comic Sans MS">[[User:TK|₮K]]</font><sup><font color="DC143C">[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]]</font></sup> 05:24, 3 December 2008 (EST)
Wikipedia has countless thousands of pages of just such arguments stored away, and if this is someone's idea of being productive -- engaging in circular, repetitive and seemingly endless talk -- enjoy yourselves! My suggestion is that we now call the game, and ignore the people with closed minds, who are more interested in liberal political correctness, demanding to be made "right", demanding to be King of the Hill. --<font color="#1E90FF" face="Comic Sans MS">[[User:TK|₮K]]</font><sup><font color="DC143C">[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]]</font></sup> 05:24, 3 December 2008 (EST)
:Since when is the issue "bogus"? Since you decreed it to be so? I also note that this particular page, which I've said did not have much merit, was started by a senior administrator, and one you consider a friend. So you're rejecting ''his'' attempts now?
:"''Andy has stated his reasoning, and as the 'Editor in Chief' of Conservapedia, that's it.''": So you concur that Andy simply decides encyclopaedia article content by decree, regardless of the evidence and logic (Andy's own requirements for determining truth) and the views of senior administrators? Andy himself has never claimed that, but I think that it's very telling that his supporters in this, such as you and Bugler, can see his actions for what they are, deciding truth by his opinion.
:"''...vain tyranny of someone who constantly demands to be right, never accepts any logical thought he doesn't agree with...''": I know who that description fits, and it ain't me.
:"''My suggestion is that we now call the game, and ignore the people with closed minds, who are more interested in liberal political correctness, demanding to be made "right", demanding to be King of the Hill.''": So now you're suggesting that we just ''ignore'' Andy? Or, if you'd prefer a serious comment, that's the fallacious argument of begging the question.
: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 09:12, 3 December 2008 (EST)