Two and one half hours ago, I stated, as a plain matter of fact, that Gerald R. Ford was never a United States Senator. There has been much dissembling since then, none of it by me. For you, at this late moment, to talk of a "genuine mistake" is simply dishonest. I have no obligation to pretend that I am not being lied to when it is clear that I am. Not least by you.KeyboardJockey said:
Pakistan hit by US Air Strike
- Thread starter TAE
- Start date
KeyboardJockey
Clowns to the Left of me
nino_savatte said:
That is something that I have noticed a lot - if it is not something that they are ordered to read then it is 'lies'.
KeyboardJockey
Clowns to the Left of me
rogue yam said:
Fuck off RY. Someone made a genuine mistake. It has been corrected. The only mindless gobbing off round here has come from you. As I have said before you behaviour on similar threads round here has not given you carte blanche to call people liars.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
spring-peeper said:
C'mon, get it right, it's "what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander".
spring-peeper
Well-Known Member
ViolentPanda said:C'mon, get it right, it's "what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander".
Really? Never heard that before. That's the second idiom that is difference on your side of the Atlantic.
spring-peeper
Well-Known Member
KeyboardJockey said:
Out of curiousity - what is the difference between a lie and an honest mistake?
I really hope this is not based on join-date.
KeyboardJockey
Clowns to the Left of me
spring-peeper said:
A poster put up a link to UCLA which said that Ford was a senator. It turns out that this wasn't correct. Rather than questioning politiely the source RY comes on here shouting the odds and calling people liars and leftist cretins etc etc.
Nothing at all to do with join date much more to do with behaviour on the board.
Don't forget this freeper troll is very very fond of calling people liars when called to prove something that he has asserted but runs away when people try to pin him down to anything.
Here is my complete post (#443), posted six minutes after the initial claim (at 4:37 am PST):KeyboardJockey said:
"Gerald Ford was never a Senator, and therefore could never have been Senate majority leader."
That's it. I'm simply not seeing the "shouting" of which you speak.
KeyboardJockey
Clowns to the Left of me
rogue yam said:
Be one of the few times when you haven't shouted your gob off on here.
Remember when I politely asked you a question and you screamed abuse, called me a retard and ran away. Took me four days to pin you down it did.
Yes, one of your many assertians which at the time may or may not have been true. So I had a look. If the results I found had said: "G.F. became president without ever having been a senator", I probably would have posted that. Instead I found the link to the ucla.edu webpage, which seemed authoratitive, and I posted that. At the time I had no reason to believe that page to be wrong.rogue yam said:
In the very next reply to me you accuse me of dishonesty. Not of being factually wrong, but dishonesty. What is that all about? Why do you so often accuse people of lying?
So I said something like: "If you want to show that someone is wrong then post a link, but don't accuse me of lying". I know very little about that aspect of american history and am happy to be proven wrong. Infact I did not even try to defend the contents of the UCLA link, I just explained why I had thought it was a reasonable source. I really just wanted to know why you accused me of dishonesty.
I would still like to know, but I've kind of given up on that.
Because I Googled "Senator Gerald Ford" to see what was there (knowing full well that the former President was never a Senator, but rather had represented Grand Rapids, MI in the House of Representives) and the links were so few, and so lame, that I assumed you simply had to be intelligent enough to recognize the truth, but chose not to do so for your own reasons. There was sufficient dissembling subsequently on the thread to support this thesis that truth was not the first priority all round.TAE said:
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
spring-peeper said:Really? Never heard that before. That's the second idiom that is difference on your side of the Atlantic.
My father was an American from Brooklyn and he always used that expression. it's used on both sides of the Atlantic. Now where's dwyer to tell me that I'm 'wrong'?
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
nino_savatte said:
I think he's busy at the moment devising another "grand theory of total bollocks" to bore us all sterile with.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Exactly, much more fitting to the sinister aura Marxism surrounds itself with.oi2002 said:
But hey, perhaps it's cruel of us to crush Rogue Yam's strange (and very obviously pharmaceutically-derived) delusions. Perhaps we shouldn't mock his paranoid take on "unpacking"?
Nah, fuck him!
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
oi2002 said:
My MA supervisor was very fond of the word "unpack".
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
ViolentPanda said:
Oh goody! I'm beside myself with anticipation.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
nino_savatte said:My MA supervisor was very fond of the word "unpack".
Did he recite this word as he "unpacked" a cooler full of beer, explained that you needed to analysise the components of a piece of information, or while he was disseminating sinister Marxist propaganda to you?
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
ViolentPanda said:Did he recite this word as he "unpacked" a cooler full of beer, explained that you needed to analysise the components of a piece of information, or while he was disseminating sinister Marxist propaganda to you?
Oh yeah.
Similar threads
