Letter to obama on Constitutional rights

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Quote Originally Posted by Tyr-Ziu Saxnot View Post

You mean evidence like this --- Where I say IN MY OPENING POST that obama has done a lousy job and you post this reply QUOTED BELOW to that accusation! You will of course notice how I enlarged and bolded your verdict of --No truth -- being found within my opening post of this thread. Now the wording of "no truth" implies either total lying or total ignorance but now you say you have never stated Obama has done a good job! So what is it, if he hasn't done a good job and hasn't done a lousy job then what? By your statements you appear to have claimed both for him! So are you declaring his job performance to be Mediocre? To make it easy for you to clarify and actually take a stand I'll list them and if you care to choose do so in your reply to this post. That way nobody will be confused as to where you truly stand on this. A. Obama HAS DONE A VERY POOR JOB AS OUR PRESIDENT B. Obama HAS DONE A TRULY WONDERFUL JOB AS OUR PRESIDENT C. Obama HAS DONE A MEDIOCRE JOB AS OUR PRESIDENT. Here is your chance to rectify this great misunderstanding of your confusing posts here. And just to sweeten the deal I'm going to give you two gold stars if you actually reply choosing A,B OR C. THAT IS JUST THE KIND OF GENEROUS GUY I AM. --Tyr

Yes, your opening post, no truth, opinion. I happen to agree with your opinion that he has done a lousy job. Now if you could find any instance where I've suggested that he has done an acceptable job then I might begin to understand where your confusion lies because I don't recall stating otherwise. Further your estimation of what I "implied" is completely incorrect; your inference is on you because my post doesn't mean "total lying" or "total ignorance," it merely means that your verdict is opinion, not truth.
Oh yeah, it appears I get my gold stars. Hopefully that clears up any confusion on your part... of course I've probably had to clear that up a hundred times or so.

Man is this rich!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yes, your opening post, no truth, opinion.

1. So by that statement and how just played it opinion can not be truth too. You said --no truth in my opening post now you say you were right because it was opinion as if opinion expressed can not be truth too. Then you go on to agree with "my opinion" that he did a "lousy job" which also is an opinion, so by your thinking isn't truth either! Sorry Hoss , but I do not play such word games myself. That meaning of -is- type of crap bores me far too much. Please explain how my post being an opinion negates it containing TRUTH! That would only be accurate if everything I ever say or post is a lie! So not only no but hell no you did not win any gold stars with that convoluted logic, even if it could accurately be called any measure of logic at all. 2. Now onto the next way your words quoted above my be interpreted, which by the way would just be silly if presented to prove you were right about my post containing = no truth. . Are you declaring that as a statement which reads, A. Yes, your opening post =no truth, that's my opinion , or even, B. Yes, your opening post = was opinion, so therefore can be judged to be not true based upon no other linked sources having been presented by you? Care to explain how you think you won on presenting the argument that opinion can not be truth? And post as you wish but if your reply is a single sentence of diversionary , evasive and /or more convoluted chatter I'm done with discussing this with you. -Tyr

[fj1200]

Man is this rich!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

1. So by that statement and how just played it opinion can not be truth too. You said --no truth in my opening post now you say you were right because it was opinion as if opinion expressed can not be truth too. Then you go on to agree with "my opinion" that he did a "lousy job" which also is an opinion, so by your thinking isn't truth either! Sorry Hoss , but I do not play such word games myself. That meaning of -is- type of crap bores me far too much. Please explain how my post being an opinion negates it containing TRUTH! That would only be accurate if everything I ever say or post is a lie! So not only no but hell no you did not win any gold stars with that convoluted logic, even if it could accurately be called any measure of logic at all. 2. Now onto the next way your words quoted above my be interpreted, which by the way would just be silly if presented to prove you were right about my post containing = no truth. . Are you declaring that as a statement which reads, A. Yes, your opening post =no truth, that's my opinion , or even, B. Yes, your opening post = was opinion, so therefore can be judged to be not true based upon no other linked sources having been presented by you? Care to explain how you think you won on presenting the argument that opinion can not be truth? And post as you wish but if your reply is a single sentence of diversionary , evasive and /or more convoluted chatter I'm done with discussing this with you. -Tyr

Bloody hell, you're already done discussing as now you're just into rehashing. Outside of the insults your "truth" does boil down to opinion. As I said, I happen to agree that he has done a lousy job but some leftie out there has the opinion that BO has done a fine job. If one were to happen to get lost and find his way to DP it would be fun to take his arguments apart but I'm not holding my breath. I suppose you can express an opinion as truth but it is at its core opinion.

But I think I see part of the problem in #2. If you would stop trying so hard to interpret my words as something they are not then we might actually get somewhere. Also where does the requirement that I have to provide "linked sources" to prove your opinion as opinion when you've offered no "linked sources" to prove your opinion as truth? Not that I want to prove it wrong because again, I agree with it.

And since you declined to take up the challenge of my copious, in your opinion, posts that you somehow construe to be supportive of BO I'm guessing that this will be the end of our current tête-à-tête.





And in summary. BO sucks as POTUS. My opinion backed by truth and logic.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Bloody hell, you're already done discussing as now you're just into rehashing. Outside of the insults your "truth" does boil down to opinion. As I said, I happen to agree that he has done a lousy job but some leftie out there has the opinion that BO has done a fine job. If one were to happen to get lost and find his way to DP it would be fun to take his arguments apart but I'm not holding my breath. I suppose you can express an opinion as truth but it is at its core opinion.

But I think I see part of the problem in #2. If you would stop trying so hard to interpret my words as something they are not then we might actually get somewhere. Also where does the requirement that I have to provide "linked sources" to prove your opinion as opinion when you've offered no "linked sources" to prove your opinion as truth? Not that I want to prove it wrong because again, I agree with it.

And since you declined to take up the challenge of my copious, in your opinion, posts that you somehow construe to be supportive of BO I'm guessing that this will be the end of our current tête-à-tête.





And in summary. BO sucks as POTUS. My opinion backed by truth and logic.

And since you declined to take up the challenge of my copious, in your opinion, posts that you somehow construe to be supportive of BO I'm guessing that this will be the end of our current tête-à-tête. -- Your choice on that amigo. Do as you wish I made no such declaration. -Tyr

And in summary. BO sucks as POTUS. My opinion backed by truth and logic.

I agree that BO sucks, but do find it a bit funny that you so boldly cite how your opinion is both truthful and logical when you clearly denied my opinion as being that even on BO being a lousy president! [/QUOTE] The logic of this issue is you are convoluting the issue in order to back up your original accusation that my opening post contained --no truth- when you then agree he was a lousy president which in itself refutes your accusation made against my opening post. --Tyr

[fj1200]

-- Your choice on that amigo. Do as you wish I made no such declaration. -Tyr


I agree that BO sucks, but do find it a bit funny that you so boldly cite how your opinion is both truthful and logical when you clearly denied my opinion as being that even on BO being a lousy president! The logic of this issue is you are convoluting the issue in order to back up your original accusation that my opening post contained --no truth- when you then agree he was a lousy president which in itself refutes your accusation made against my opening post. --Tyr

Awesome quoting. I mean seriously good stuff. I'm glad you noticed because I did it just for you. The difference being that I fully acknowledge my opinion. That I can express it logically and rationally without calling the first lady a horse is just gravy I guess.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Awesome quoting. I mean seriously good stuff. I'm glad you noticed because I did it just for you. The difference being that I fully acknowledge my opinion. That I can express it logically and rationally without calling the first lady a horse is just gravy I guess.

That I can express it logically and rationally without calling the first lady a horse is just gravy I guess.

Yes that was a mistake on my part. I mean I readily acknowledge that I took in far too much territory with that remark. Let me rephrase it for you. The first lady is a first class horse's ass. Is that better amigo? --Tyr

[fj1200]

Yes that was a mistake on my part. I mean I readily acknowledge that I took in far too much territory with that remark. Let me rephrase it for you. The first lady is a first class horse's ass. Is that better amigo? --Tyr

You are more than welcome to your opinion. Whether I share it or not will remain a mystery.