Layla 27 wrote:

paleocon wrote:
You keep missing the point.  I can disagree with “CHOSEN” and I can disagree with you.  It is not an either/or proposition.  You continue to establish a false dichotomy.  And I grow weary of demonstrating how wrong you are to do so.  I wrote a post commenting on how poorly written “CHOSEN's essay" was.  You lacked the fundamental comprehension to discern that a relatively simple post was aimed at him rather than you.  I noted that “CHOSEN's essay” was tripe.  And I noted that your logic and comprehension are virtually non-existent.  I can disagree with both of you.  The problem is you don't seem to know who is disagreeing with whom.  And it doesn’t seem to bother you.

You cant. If you are BACKING A REVOLUTION, then YOU HATE OUR CONSTITUTION. If NOT, then you are not. What exactly is your position? You suppport our constitution 50%?

You are starting to sound like CAPTAIN JOHN MCCAMNESTY: Im a conservative, i just disagree with everything they say!

Can you really be this obtuse?  Are you GOPER?  Do you have any understanding of LOGIC?  Have you ever studied a logical argument more complicated than your weekly grocery list?  

I have made my position clear enough that my 5 year-old would understand it yet you can’t.  That you don’t get it is your problem and not mine.  

Again, you don’t seem to know who is disagreeing with whom and on what points.  Frankly, it isn’t worth attempting to explain it to you.  I doubt you can be made to understand.

paleocon wrote:

Layla 27 wrote:

paleocon wrote:
You keep missing the point.  I can disagree with “CHOSEN” and I can disagree with you.  It is not an either/or proposition.  You continue to establish a false dichotomy.  And I grow weary of demonstrating how wrong you are to do so.  I wrote a post commenting on how poorly written “CHOSEN's essay" was.  You lacked the fundamental comprehension to discern that a relatively simple post was aimed at him rather than you.  I noted that “CHOSEN's essay” was tripe.  And I noted that your logic and comprehension are virtually non-existent.  I can disagree with both of you.  The problem is you don't seem to know who is disagreeing with whom.  And it doesn’t seem to bother you.

You cant. If you are BACKING A REVOLUTION, then YOU HATE OUR CONSTITUTION. If NOT, then you are not. What exactly is your position? You suppport our constitution 50%?

You are starting to sound like CAPTAIN JOHN MCCAMNESTY: Im a conservative, i just disagree with everything they say!

Can you really be this obtuse?  Are you GOPER?  Do you have any understanding of LOGIC?  Have you ever studied a logical argument more complicated than your weekly grocery list?  

I have made my position clear enough that my 5 year-old would understand it yet you can’t.  That you don’t get it is your problem and not mine.  

Again, you don’t seem to know who is disagreeing with whom and on what points.  Frankly, it isn’t worth attempting to explain it to you.  I doubt you can be made to understand.

All I am asking you is what EXACTLY IS YOUR POSITION ON OUR CONSITIUTION? What is so COMPLEX? HOW do you GO AGAINST and FOR OUR CONSTITUTION at the SAME TIME.

What I have done is CAUGHT YOU trying TO WAFFLE. I cought SOldiersMum earlier today in "LIBERAL MEDIA TRASHES our BRAVE TROOPS" as well.

And I dont waste my time with GOPER. When I see him on "who is online", i just ignore him and leave. He is either an idiot McCain/RNC schill or troll. and as you say "it doesnt reaally bother me which".

Layla 27 wrote:

PaleoCon wrote:Can you really be this obtuse?  Are you GOPER?  Do you have any understanding of LOGIC?  Have you ever studied a logical argument more complicated than your weekly grocery list?  

I have made my position clear enough that my 5 year-old would understand it yet you can’t.  That you don’t get it is your problem and not mine.  

Again, you don’t seem to know who is disagreeing with whom and on what points.  Frankly, it isn’t worth attempting to explain it to you.  I doubt you can be made to understand.

All I am asking you is what EXACTLY IS YOUR POSITION ON OUR CONSITIUTION? What is so COMPLEX? HOW do you GO AGAINST and FOR OUR CONSTITUTION at the SAME TIME.

What I have done is CAUGHT YOU trying TO WAFFLE. I cought SOldiersMum earlier today in "LIBERAL MEDIA TRASHES our BRAVE TROOPS" as well.

And I dont waste my time with GOPER. When I see him on "who is online", i just ignore him and leave. He is either an idiot McCain/RNC schill or troll. and as you say "it doesnt reaally bother me which".

Okay.  Obviously you are that obtuse.  You have caught neither me nor SoldiersMom in anything.  You simply lack the intellectual acumen to comprehend the posts on this forum.  That is now patently obvious.  

My point about GOPER is that you make the same remarkably ignorant and illogical posts as he does.  And you seem to be incapable of understanding how remarkably ignorant and illogical your posts are.

paleocon wrote:

Layla 27 wrote:

PaleoCon wrote:Can you really be this obtuse?  Are you GOPER?  Do you have any understanding of LOGIC?  Have you ever studied a logical argument more complicated than your weekly grocery list?  

I have made my position clear enough that my 5 year-old would understand it yet you can’t.  That you don’t get it is your problem and not mine.  

Again, you don’t seem to know who is disagreeing with whom and on what points.  Frankly, it isn’t worth attempting to explain it to you.  I doubt you can be made to understand.

All I am asking you is what EXACTLY IS YOUR POSITION ON OUR CONSITIUTION? What is so COMPLEX? HOW do you GO AGAINST and FOR OUR CONSTITUTION at the SAME TIME.

What I have done is CAUGHT YOU trying TO WAFFLE. I cought SOldiersMum earlier today in "LIBERAL MEDIA TRASHES our BRAVE TROOPS" as well.

And I dont waste my time with GOPER. When I see him on "who is online", i just ignore him and leave. He is either an idiot McCain/RNC schill or troll. and as you say "it doesnt reaally bother me which".

Okay.  Obviously you are that obtuse.  You have caught neither me nor SoldiersMom in anything.  You simply lack the intellectual acumen to comprehend the posts on this forum.  That is now patently obvious.  

My point about GOPER is that you make the same remarkably ignorant and illogical posts as he does.  And you seem to be incapable of understanding how remarkably ignorant and illogical your posts are.

It is very interesting how everyone who debates you is "remarkably ignorant and Illogical". I caught you trying to waffle and you are trying to run form it. Maybe they will make me a Moderator of a local City Council Election Debate someday.

You implied you suppported CHOSEN, who hate our constitution. Its that simple.

Layla 27 wrote:
It is very interesting how everyone who debates you is "remarkably ignorant and Illogical". I caught you trying to waffle and you are trying to run form it. Maybe they will make me a Moderator of a local City Council Election Debate someday.

You implied you suppported CHOSEN, who hate our constitution. Its that simple.

No, once again you demonstrate your ignorance and lack of comprehension of simple, plain English and logic.  I implied nothing.  I explicitly stated CHOSEN's post was tripe.  You are so obtuse that you take an explicit rejection of a post and announce it to be an implicit support of the very same post.  

I reject CHOSEN's post because it was tripe.  I reject your logic because it is tripe.  I can reject CHOSEN's post and reject your ignorance and illogic.  I can reject both of you without rejecting the US Constitution.  You attempted create a false dichotomy and I doubt you even understand what you tried to do.  I do not have to make the choice you established.  There are other options.  I have stated this numerous times but you lack sufficient comprehension skills to discern this obvious point.

My logic is very clear. IF, as Chosen did, you are saying you want to overthrow our government, then you are against our constitution.

I said I believe the PEOPLE will make that decision, and not one individual who arrogantly believes his harvard education gives him that right.

You say that that logic is tripe.

And you reject Chosen.

So you are implying that you WOULD , in FACT support a REVOLUTION, if not the ONE CHOSEN PROPORSED.

Supporting revolutions AGAINST OUR CONSTITUTION is NOT CONSERVATIVE.

YOU ARE CAUGHT, just like Soldiers Mum. I am on a roll today.

Layla 27 wrote:My logic is very clear. IF, as Chosen did, you are saying you want to overthrow our government, then you are against our constitution.

I said I believe the PEOPLE will make that decision, and not one individual who arrogantly believes his harvard education gives him that right.

You say that that logic is tripe.

And you reject Chosen.

So you are implying that you WOULD , in FACT support a REVOLUTION, if not the ONE CHOSEN PROPORSED.

Supporting revolutions AGAINST OUR CONSTITUTION is NOT CONSERVATIVE.

YOU ARE CAUGHT, just like Soldiers Mum. I am on a roll today.

There is nothing clear about your logic.  And the fact that your fevered brain can concoct some convoluted sequence of words does not in any way mean that I implied the fevered invention of your brain.  The only thing you are on today is some ill-suited pharmaceuticals.  

You seem to be “stuck on stupid” and unable to comprehend the meaning a false dichotomy.  There are almost always more than two options.  That your fevered brain insists on reducing all situations to an “either/or” proposition is your problem and not mine.

paleocon wrote:

Layla 27 wrote:My logic is very clear. IF, as Chosen did, you are saying you want to overthrow our government, then you are against our constitution.

I said I believe the PEOPLE will make that decision, and not one individual who arrogantly believes his harvard education gives him that right.

You say that that logic is tripe.

And you reject Chosen.

So you are implying that you WOULD , in FACT support a REVOLUTION, if not the ONE CHOSEN PROPORSED.

Supporting revolutions AGAINST OUR CONSTITUTION is NOT CONSERVATIVE.

YOU ARE CAUGHT, just like Soldiers Mum. I am on a roll today.

There is nothing clear about your logic.  And the fact that your fevered brain can concoct some convoluted sequence of words does not in any way mean that I implied the fevered invention of your brain.  The only thing you are on today is some ill-suited pharmaceuticals.  

You seem to be “stuck on stupid” and unable to comprehend the meaning a false dichotomy.  There are almost always more than two options.  That your fevered brain insists on reducing all situations to an “either/or” proposition is your problem and not mine.

I will respond to that nonsense after I get some sleep.