Someone has anger and control issues
This isn't a case where I "don't" get it. Because I do.
What you're really saying is that you're getting frustrated with my refusal to let your posts stand unchallenged. I see right through your laughable attempts to get me to NOT reply to you. Where's "out looking on" when you need him/her?
Oh, wait, I've got the next best thing, funny how what (out looking on) said actually applies this time:
"Because the person or people they are trying to communicate with did not agree then they somehow have come to the conclusion that the person or people being spoken or written to, were not listening, when in fact, the opposite is true. Not only did we hear or read it, but we understood what you were saying, but actually DISAGREE with what was said. You must accept that as a fact of life or you will be constantly plagued by the feeling of being misunderstood." - (out looking on)
I could tell by reading your posts that you simply don't get it.
You obviously want me to stop, but you're not doing what's required for me to stop. I've been doing this for about two weeks. By now, you should see a cause and effect. I've even told you what I intend to do.
Cause, people reply to me, people attack me, and people remove my posts. Effect, I reply back, I counter attack them, and I repost the removed post.
Like everybody else, you're trying to deal with the effect, while ignoring the cause. I've posted here enough for you to realize that the cause ALWAYS leads to the effect. The fact that you're addressing the effect, and not the cause, shows that you don't get it. Not me.
Or, should I say you're simply ignoring where I tell you my intentions? You have an agenda by constantly giving me those messages. I know, you were addressing a wider crowd, but you're specifically directing that to me.
I've stated my intentions, and what it takes for me to stop. The onus is on those that don't want me to do this to deal with the CAUSE and not the effect.
I know my history. I know enough about that period to know that it isn't applicable to what I'm doing. As I've previously stated, I'm not here to change my opponent's mind. I'm not here to change my mind. What I previously said:
1. "Changing people's minds isn't my intent. But there are people who are sitting on the fence who could go either way. So, when I rebut a political post that I disagree with, I'm not aiming to change that person's mind. I'm balancing what I see is a media fueled statement on certain issues. I've talked to a lot of people who were willing to change their positions--once they saw the facts behind certain topics. I've done that on other message boards, I'm doing that here." - Not Fooled.
2. "The people I rebut aren't going to change their minds. The people that come on here pretending to be Republicans, pretending to be in the middle, complaining about my posts, etc, aren't going to change their minds. Most, probably all, of these people lean left. But there are people that are willing to change their position once they see things in proper perspective." - Not Fooled
3. "I've never changed my mind because of what my opponent said. And changing my opponent's mind isn't my intention." - Not Fooled
But, I'm glad that you brought that analogy up, because it's very applicable to people like you, and others, who have issues with me making my posts. Commenting about my posts, rebutting my posts, and flagging my posts, while bitching about me constantly replying?
Now that's what you call bully tactics. Especially after I've told these posters what they could do that'd make me leave.
IF these people truly wanted me to stop, they'd do the common sense thing to do and not reply to me.
They'd do the common sense thing to do and refrain from removing my posts. If these guys truly wanted to be a part of the "solution," they wouldn't give me the incentive to keep coming back.
It's simple.
Ignore my posts, and I stop arguing. They could do that easily. But they don't. They'd rather attack me or remove my posts. That's precisely what any sane person would label as bullying tactics. They're all designed to try to drive me away from Hampton Roads Rants and Raves. But, like you said:
"Bullying tactics seldom work" - You. They never work with me.
"Having the last word does not always mean you have won." - You
I don't measure victory by who has the last word. I base that on how well the combatants use the facts, logics, and reason to back their arguments. As other posters have indicated, nobody has been able to do that against me here.
I'm winning these debates.
However, it's needed if I'm to accomplish my objectives. You people have tried to destroy my credibility, and paint me as a person that I'm not. My having the last word on that is important as it sets the record straight. This contributes to people looking at my posts objectively.
"Usually it means the other party is just tired of arguing and chooses to tune out the constant buzzing in their ears of redundant thoughts." - You
I have no idea of what being tired or arguing is like. :-)
But, thought I'd bring up my prior statements to prove that you got it wrong:
1. "My continuing to argue until I fire the last shot has more to do with principle, and objective, than it does what you assumed. For instance, what right would I have to argue that the United States should continue fighting in Iraq until we accomplish our objectives... if I can't even do that on an online debate?" - Not Fooled
Notice how I stop addressing their particular argument when they tune out the "constant buzzing" in their ears?
You complain about me doing what I'm doing here. Yet, you do the very thing that causes me to come back and generate a reply. You're part of the "problem" that you're complaining about.
As for your statements about the internet being the "focal point" in my life. It isn't.
Any critical thinking person would look at my posting times before making that comment. I come on here one part of the day, then post my replies in batches. Then I come back the next day. Reposting doesn't take long.
Debating is one of my past times. But I don't spend all day on the internet doing it. Anybody with a lick of common sense would see that just by looking at all the posts here.
Facts and opinions aren't just mere semantics.
The statement, 1 +1 = 2, is a factual statement. It's not an opinion. Any attempt to describe a reasoned argument as, "just an opinion," is an attempt to trivialize that strong argument.
And speaking of trivializing, you seem to have issues with my trivializing your attacks against me. Not only do I trivialize them, I discredit them. I have a right to do that in a post where I'm defending myself.
Please see my above statement.
If someone claims that I'm referencing a book that I "never" read, I'm going to set the record straight. I'm going to tell them I read that book, understood the concepts, and applied them in my argument.
If you feel that I'm trivializing what you said, then it's because your intellect is telling you that you don't have an argument, and that you're just pulling $#!t out of your @$$.
Adhering to beliefs alone doesn't give person character and integrity. A crook will adhere to his zero scruples beliefs. By your definition, his doing so gives him character and integrity. But it doesn't.
Practicing what you demand of others? Now THAT'S what gives people character and integrity.
You don't do what you demand from others. So guess what that makes you?
Those people that want me to stop debating here for example.
If they wanted me to stop, then they'd stop debating me. But, if they continue to debate with me, demanding that I stop debating, then they're showing that they don't have integrity. If these same people demand that we pull out of Iraq, but refuse to cede an argument, then they don't have integrity. It's THAT simple.
Don't mistake my countering their rebuttals as "belittling" the other person's beliefs. I'm just showing that poster, and the readers, that the person I'm arguing doesn't know what he or she is talking about. That they're simply talking out of their hind ends.
Again, I also do that to discredit attempts to diminish my credibility, and prove them wrong.
If you don't want to be belittled, then don't post lies about me. If you don't want to be discredited, then actually know what you're talking about when you're arguing with me. A prerequisite for me to jump into an argument is that I know more about the argument topic than the person that I'm arguing with.
I'm just showing the fence sitters that the other side of the argument doesn't have a real argument.
No, my debating ad infinitum doesn't "prove" that this is "all" I have. Far from it. This is one of my pastimes. I have others.
I spend only a fraction of a day on this board making my posts. THAT should've been obvious. By logical extension, I don't spend all my time on this board. However, the fact that you take issues with my doing this proves that going after me is all that you have.
Otherwise, you'd quit trying to solve the "problem" by addressing the effect but not dealing with the cause.
Orgasmic pleasure? No. Sadistic pleasure? Yes.
Know your facts about me before you label the fence sitters as "ignorant." In the mean time, I'm going to continue to hammer the opposition.
You spewed:
I can only compare these debate posts from a certain person to revisiting Spain in 1492. You remember your history. All people not Catholic were to be expelled from the country immediately.
What the majority did was pretend to be Catholic in public and continued to practice their own religion in the privacy of their homes and in their hearts. Bullying tactics seldom work, as a core belief (be it politics, childrearing or even what brand of toilet paper you buy) is exactly that and no amount of discussion will change anyone's mind.
Having the last word does not always mean you have won. Usually it means the other party is just tired of arguing and chooses to tune out the constant buzzing in their ears of redundant thoughts.
I can't help but feel pity for anyone who has chosen to make the internet the focal point in their lives and puts so much time and effort into debating with nameless faceless strangers.
Facts or opinions....they're just semantics. A person will believe what they choose to believe. And adhereing to those beliefs gives a person character and integrity. Trivializing the beliefs of others only highlights the immaturity and intolerance if the person doing the belittling.
In closing, personally these numerous posts don't bother me. They are entitled to their opinion as much as the next person, but it's obvious that this is all they have. I can almost feel their orgasmic pleasure as they "hammer" the opponent and continue the battle to "educate" the ignorant.
To each his own I guess.
