Changes

::I'm going to increase Edmund's block duration because he offended those having disabilities.  Obama did the same thing.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 00:02, 14 December 2009 (EST)

::I'm going to increase Edmund's block duration because he offended those having disabilities.  Obama did the same thing.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 00:02, 14 December 2009 (EST)

This is sort of in response to the frustration insufficient and edmundG have been experiencing. Firstly, for full disclosure, I vote republican - always.  I believe in conservative policies in general.  This site doesn't actually have a lot to do with conservatism though.  What I have gathered from reading some of the rather heinous articles and following what might only loosely be described as argumentation on this Colbert discussion page, is that it must be true that ASchlafly and his cronies are just con men.  Some of the things said here are so incredulous as to defy disbelief.  I watched to interview and I don't think he's insane or stupid, so I can only conclude that the act that is put on here is a complete sham.  The argumentation you're proceeding with is only dragging people here to watch the train wreck.  They will never agree with you, they CAN'T.  It's part of the rules.  They aren't allowed to be open minded.   

This is sort of in response to the frustration insufficient and edmundG have been experiencing. Firstly, for full disclosure, I vote republican - always.  I believe in conservative policies in general.  This site doesn't actually have a lot to do with conservatism though.  What I have gathered from reading some of the rather heinous articles and following what might only loosely be described as argumentation on this Colbert discussion page, is that it must be true that ASchlafly and his cronies are just con men.  Some of the things said here are so incredulous as to defy disbelief.  I watched the interview and I don't think he's insane or stupid, so I can only conclude that the act that is put on here is a complete sham.  The argumentation you're proceeding with is only dragging people here to watch the train wreck.  They will never agree with you, they CAN'T.  It's part of the rules.  They aren't allowed to be open minded.   

That being said, I understand the attempt.  There are one or two things that I found particularly off the mark that for no practical reason I will try to answer - even though I know no matter what the answer is, they can't allow it.  I will do myself the service of allowing them the last word so as not to drag myself into a slime pit of argumentation.

That being said, I understand the attempt.  There are one or two things that I found particularly off the mark that for no practical reason I will try to answer - even though I know no matter what the answer is, they can't allow it.  I will do myself the service of allowing them the last word so as not to drag myself into a slime pit of argumentation.