Three Phrases Seldom Seen on this Board

[Jackson]

• "I apologize"
• "I see your point"
• "Thank you for challenging me. It made a difference"

Most people with sense will agree that being objective is a higher level than be one who just relays on "talking points" without putting much thought into them. It's called comprehending and anyalyzing information to decide whether to agree with a post, and if disagreeing, point out what data you use to disagree with the poster.

But, alas, it's so much easier just to call someone and "idiot, moron" or some other derogatory term rather than involve yourself into a debate with supporting facts.

Can we all evolve a little bit and create a dialogue instead of a name calling contest?

It would create a interesting experiment. I'll try if you try.

 

[TNHarley]

I apologize and such. But i will not stop name calling. No fucking way. Most of the goobers deserve nothing less.

 

[Jackson]

I apologize and such. But i will not stop name calling. No fucking way. Most of the goobers deserve nothing less.

Well, that's one way to look at it, loser. (kidding!)

 

[TNHarley]

Honestly, i think you are asking too much.
There are quit a few on here that will actually discuss things. There are a few that have opinions that make sense and didnt come from a political party email. However, how many of them is the problem.
hacks cant even be honest with themselves. They wont be honest with you.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

• "I apologize"
• "I see your point"
• "Thank you for challenging me. It made a difference"

Most people with sense will agree that being objective is a higher level than be one who just relays on "talking points" without putting much thought into them. It's called comprehending and anyalyzing information to decide whether to agree with a post, and if disagreeing, point out what data you use to disagree with the poster.

But, alas, it's so much easier just to call someone and "idiot, moron" or some other derogatory term rather than involve yourself into a debate with supporting facts.

Can we all evolve a little bit and create a dialogue instead of a name calling contest?

It would create a interesting experiment. I'll try if you try.

Oh whatever, retard.

 

[g5000]

• "I apologize"
• "I see your point"
• "Thank you for challenging me. It made a difference"

Most people with sense will agree that being objective is a higher level than be one who just relays on "talking points" without putting much thought into them. It's called comprehending and anyalyzing information to decide whether to agree with a post, and if disagreeing, point out what data you use to disagree with the poster.

But, alas, it's so much easier just to call someone and "idiot, moron" or some other derogatory term rather than involve yourself into a debate with supporting facts.

Can we all evolve a little bit and create a dialogue instead of a name calling contest?

It would create a interesting experiment. I'll try if you try.

See post 59

Hope that cheers you up.

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

I have apologized and change my opinion with some but that is very few on here.

 

[Jackson]

Honestly, i think you are asking too much.
There are quit a few on here that will actually discuss things. There are a few that have opinions that make sense and didnt come from a political party email. However, how many of them is the problem.
hacks cant even be honest with themselves. They wont be honest with you.

Good point, about being honest with themselves. That is on both sides. Wish there was a test we could post to determine if you are honest with yourself.

Perhaps a clue would be, "Can you support your position with facts?" What do you think?

 

[Eaglewings]

However, how many of them is the problem.
hacks cant even be honest with themselves. They wont be honest with you.

Yes the republicans have a major problem with that don't they?

 

[Jackson]

• "I apologize"
• "I see your point"
• "Thank you for challenging me. It made a difference"

Most people with sense will agree that being objective is a higher level than be one who just relays on "talking points" without putting much thought into them. It's called comprehending and anyalyzing information to decide whether to agree with a post, and if disagreeing, point out what data you use to disagree with the poster.

But, alas, it's so much easier just to call someone and "idiot, moron" or some other derogatory term rather than involve yourself into a debate with supporting facts.

Can we all evolve a little bit and create a dialogue instead of a name calling contest?

It would create a interesting experiment. I'll try if you try.

Oh whatever, retard.

You made me smile and chuckle!

 

[Jackson]

I have apologized and change my opinion with some but that is very few on here.

Same here. It's such a shame it is so rare.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

• "I apologize"
• "I see your point"
• "Thank you for challenging me. It made a difference"

Most people with sense will agree that being objective is a higher level than be one who just relays on "talking points" without putting much thought into them. It's called comprehending and anyalyzing information to decide whether to agree with a post, and if disagreeing, point out what data you use to disagree with the poster.

But, alas, it's so much easier just to call someone and "idiot, moron" or some other derogatory term rather than involve yourself into a debate with supporting facts.

Can we all evolve a little bit and create a dialogue instead of a name calling contest?

It would create a interesting experiment. I'll try if you try.

I understand your sentiment, however -

1) "Never complain, never explain."

2) After debating a point fifty times with supporting facts, "idiot, moron" often become the only further responses available.

3) I don't see a reason to thank someone for challenging my patience, which is in short supply. I am no priest.

 

[Jackson]

• "I apologize"
• "I see your point"
• "Thank you for challenging me. It made a difference"

Most people with sense will agree that being objective is a higher level than be one who just relays on "talking points" without putting much thought into them. It's called comprehending and anyalyzing information to decide whether to agree with a post, and if disagreeing, point out what data you use to disagree with the poster.

But, alas, it's so much easier just to call someone and "idiot, moron" or some other derogatory term rather than involve yourself into a debate with supporting facts.

Can we all evolve a little bit and create a dialogue instead of a name calling contest?

It would create a interesting experiment. I'll try if you try.

See post 59

Hope that cheers you up.

• "I apologize"
• "I see your point"
• "Thank you for challenging me. It made a difference"

Most people with sense will agree that being objective is a higher level than be one who just relays on "talking points" without putting much thought into them. It's called comprehending and anyalyzing information to decide whether to agree with a post, and if disagreeing, point out what data you use to disagree with the poster.

But, alas, it's so much easier just to call someone and "idiot, moron" or some other derogatory term rather than involve yourself into a debate with supporting facts.

Can we all evolve a little bit and create a dialogue instead of a name calling contest?

It would create a interesting experiment. I'll try if you try.

See post 59

Hope that cheers you up.

Bravo!!!! That was stellar and you have more credibility than most of the posters here!!! That makes me want to engage you in debate for you are an honest poster, not just spouting the party's narrative. That did cheer me up!

Hope I didn't break any rules, but this is part of your post:

miketx

Ladies and gentlemen, I owe miketx an apology.

I documented where the federal debt stood on the day of Trumps inauguration. It was, in fact, higher then than it is at this moment.

We still have a $20 trillion debt.

We still have rising healthcare costs.

I'll be impressed when I see both go down.

U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time

miketx, you have bragging rights now. Swing away!

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

• "I apologize"
• "I see your point"
• "Thank you for challenging me. It made a difference"

Most people with sense will agree that being objective is a higher level than be one who just relays on "talking points" without putting much thought into them. It's called comprehending and anyalyzing information to decide whether to agree with a post, and if disagreeing, point out what data you use to disagree with the poster.

But, alas, it's so much easier just to call someone and "idiot, moron" or some other derogatory term rather than involve yourself into a debate with supporting facts.

Can we all evolve a little bit and create a dialogue instead of a name calling contest?

It would create a interesting experiment. I'll try if you try.

I see your point!

 

[Jackson]

• "I apologize"
• "I see your point"
• "Thank you for challenging me. It made a difference"

Most people with sense will agree that being objective is a higher level than be one who just relays on "talking points" without putting much thought into them. It's called comprehending and anyalyzing information to decide whether to agree with a post, and if disagreeing, point out what data you use to disagree with the poster.

But, alas, it's so much easier just to call someone and "idiot, moron" or some other derogatory term rather than involve yourself into a debate with supporting facts.

Can we all evolve a little bit and create a dialogue instead of a name calling contest?

It would create a interesting experiment. I'll try if you try.

I understand your sentiment, however -

1) "Never complain, never explain."

2) After debating a point fifty times with supporting facts, "idiot, moron" often become the only further responses available.

3) I don't see a reason to thank someone for challenging my patience, which is in short supply. I am no priest.

Actually, I disagree with #1 and #3. #1: Never explain? Isn't that what we do when debating?
#3: It doesn't take a priest to find that an argument on your former opinion made sense and could challenge your existing stance. Often when discussing points, we may find we have some agreements with the other side while not agreeing with the entire philosophy. Seldom are people ALL right or ALL wrong. Unless of course your name is Jillian. (That was bad! Appologies to Jillian )
#2: I think I have to agree with you there. When there's nothing else to be said...let 'em have it!)

 

[tinydancer]

Well I did my good deed for the day . I shouldn't have insulted this poster. So I apologized.

"I didn't want to call you an asshole but that was my gut reaction and I will apologize for that. But TransCanada does everything absolutely by the book and have spent millions of dollars on legal fees.

Unless you can back up forged deeds what you are telling me is a lie. And collect money off of what Federal programs."

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

Honestly, i think you are asking too much.
There are quit a few on here that will actually discuss things. There are a few that have opinions that make sense and didnt come from a political party email. However, how many of them is the problem.
hacks cant even be honest with themselves. They wont be honest with you.

There is an answer. Discuss with those who have manners and do not discuss with those who don't.

 

[Jackson]

Well I did my good deed for the day . I shouldn't have insulted this poster. So I apologized.

"I didn't want to call you an asshole but that was my gut reaction and I will apologize for that. But TransCanada does everything absolutely by the book and have spent millions of dollars on legal fees.

Unless you can back up forged deeds what you are telling me is a lie. And collect money off of what Federal programs."

That was great, and interesting. what thread is that on? I'd like to read it. TIA.

 

[tinydancer]

• "I apologize"
• "I see your point"
• "Thank you for challenging me. It made a difference"

Most people with sense will agree that being objective is a higher level than be one who just relays on "talking points" without putting much thought into them. It's called comprehending and anyalyzing information to decide whether to agree with a post, and if disagreeing, point out what data you use to disagree with the poster.

But, alas, it's so much easier just to call someone and "idiot, moron" or some other derogatory term rather than involve yourself into a debate with supporting facts.

Can we all evolve a little bit and create a dialogue instead of a name calling contest?

It would create a interesting experiment. I'll try if you try.

I understand your sentiment, however -

1) "Never complain, never explain."

2) After debating a point fifty times with supporting facts, "idiot, moron" often become the only further responses available.

3) I don't see a reason to thank someone for challenging my patience, which is in short supply. I am no priest.

Oh #2 is spot on. How many threads have we been in with supporting links to back up our arguments but all we get in return is name calling. How many "republicans have poopy pants" threads have we endured?

 

[Jackson]

Honestly, i think you are asking too much.
There are quit a few on here that will actually discuss things. There are a few that have opinions that make sense and didnt come from a political party email. However, how many of them is the problem.
hacks cant even be honest with themselves. They wont be honest with you.

There is an answer. Discuss with those who have manners and do not discuss with those who don't.

Boy, we would be really limiting ourselves to certain (four) posters? lol