Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No, she did not post it to "shut you up", she posted it because you chose to pick and choose the portions that you probably pulled from a website somewhere, rather than providing the entire document for review.
Please note if I had provided the entire document one of you surely would have reported me for plagiarism. Also, please step aside and let the lady speak for herself. Although chauvinism certainly has its place in the Democratic Party, bravado does not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by newtoli
He switched in 2006. If you had simply googled his name before making this post, you might have at least known his political party. No one is "taking jabs", you were the author of this thread regarding Mr. Lieberman, yet did not know the fact that he is no longer a Democrat. Simply informing the misinformed.
I didn't feel the need to google his name, I figured someone on here would be knowledgeable enough to answer it quickly. Boy was I wrong. And here we go *again* with the air of superiority.
Ok, so he switched 2 years ago from being a lifelong Democrat?
Many of you seem to feel the need to attack me personally instead of intelligently discussing what he said. Please grow up. I didn't write it, Lieberman did.
Please note if I had provided the entire document one of you surely would have reported me for plagiarism. Also, please step aside and let the lady speak for herself. Although chauvinism certainly has its place in the Democratic Party, bravado does not.
I didn't feel the need to google his name, I figured someone on here would be knowledgeable enough to answer it quickly. Boy was I wrong. And here we go *again* with the air of superiority.
Ok, so he switched 2 years ago from being a lifelong Democrat?
Many of you seem to feel the need to attack me personally instead of intelligently discussing what he said. Please grow up. I didn't write it, Lieberman did.
I suggest you learn about debate instead of taking it personally. When a person refutes your point, they are not attacking you personally.
I am a lady as well, and you are the one that resorted to personal attacks, unless I am reading it incorrectly.
Correcting the incorrect information you posted is not an "air of superiority". Know your facts before you open a dialog, or get corrected.
Thank you for informing me. Yes, I apparently missed the whole "Ned Lamont thing". Age does have its advantages. I do appreciate liberals trying to take jabs at conservatives whenever they can, though. The schoolyard mentality can can be quite amusing, and it does wonders for our side.
The title of the post has already been addressed. Go back and re-read.
So, I'll ask the question *again*. When did he switch?
Combative, eh? I was trying to inject a little levity, but that's clearly no good for you. So once more, for the serious guy, he switched in 2006 when Ned Lamont defeated him in the Democratic primary. He won in the general as an independent, and remains an independent democrat.
This was huge news, by the way. That's why everyone's taken aback that you didn't seem to know about it.
There actually is a cadre of Dems in Congress who are more in line with Joe Lieberman, who have not yet had the courage to do what he has done. A stronger I "party" would be a welcome change to the NONchange seen with the demlibs and GOP.
Before McCain made his big comeback to take the GOP nomination I was really hoping there was a chance that McCain and Lieberman would lead a third party. More free thinkers that aren't beholden to tow the party lines would be welcome.
Please note if I had provided the entire document one of you surely would have reported me for plagiarism. Also, please step aside and let the lady speak for herself.
You talkin' about me, Riz? I did answer you, before newtoli did.
Plagiarism, you dont need to provide an entire document, just an intriguing para and a link. ("Intriguing" = guaranteed to infuriate
I cant imagine people here report others for plagiarism or actually for much at all - look at this insane place for heaven's sake. Although Im sure the moderators patrol and remind behind the scenes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaybone666
Many of you seem to feel the need to attack me personally instead of intelligently discussing what he said. Please grow up. I didn't write it, Lieberman did.
You're the only one who tried to attack personally.
I suggest you learn about debate instead of taking it personally. When a person refutes your point, they are not attacking you personally.
You're giving yourself too much credit by thinking I'm being sensitive. There are very few things I take personally. But, because you know me so well, you certainly can speak of what I know on the subject of debates. Again, the air of superiority - "I suggest you learn about debate..." inferring you know more than I.
Quote:
Originally Posted by newtoli
I am a lady as well, and you are the one that resorted to personal attacks, unless I am reading it incorrectly.
Indeed you are. Mine were responses.
Quote:
Originally Posted by newtoli
Correcting the incorrect information you posted is not an "air of superiority". Know your facts before you open a dialog, or get corrected.
I still don't see where I was corrected. Please enlighten me. Has Lieberman refuted those remarks? Then I haven't been "corrected". The thread is about Lieberman's remarks.
And again, the air of superiority - "Know your facts...or get corrected" once again inferring you know more than I.
Way to make a mountain out of a molehill, another seemingly inherent liberal trait. You guys really are, once again, missing the point.
You're giving yourself too much credit by thinking I'm being sensitive. There are very few things I take personally. But, because you know me so well, you certainly can speak of what I know on the subject of debates. Again, the air of superiority - "I suggest you learn about debate..." inferring you know more than I.
Indeed you are. Mine were responses.
I still don't see where I was corrected. Please enlighten me. Has Lieberman refuted those remarks? Then I haven't been "corrected". The thread is about Lieberman's remarks.
And again, the air of superiority - "Know your facts...or get corrected" once again inferring you know more than I.
Way to make a mountain out of a molehill, another seemingly inherent liberal trait. You guys really are, once again, missing the point.
Would it not be common sense to know your facts before posting an article? Inferring that I know more than you on this subject? I have already proven that I do. Call it liberal arrogance if you want, at least I know that the authors political party. I call it "Right Wing Blindness" to simply regurgitate articles and links from websites without even understanding them.
Lieberman and Bush, "The Kiss"
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/30/Liebermanbushkiss.gif (broken link)
Would it not be common sense to know your facts before posting an article? Inferring that I know more than you on this subject? I have already proven that I do. Call it liberal arrogance if you want, at least I know that the authors political party. I call it "Right Wing Blindness" to simply regurgitate articles and links from websites without even understanding them.
You've added more to your air of superiority by your responses than I ever could have. What exactly have you proven, besides the fact that you have bad grammar? "Call it liberal arrogance if you want, at least I know that the authors political party" What the hell does that even mean? I assume it's another futile attempt of yours to make me look less intelligent than you. Good job.
So if I link to or paste in anything detrimental to Obambi, even if they are facts and have not been refuted, it is "blindness". Got it.
What is it called when Obamkins refuse to accept any negative FACTS about him? "Hope"? "Change"? I just want to get the rules straight, since you clearly are in charge here.
Blindness is posting something that you have no understanding of, just to babble predetermined talking points.
You just don't understand, at all. I give up.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
