junk

UDFA
Messages
2,719
Reaction score
0
OK Junk

Strong rebuttal.

When you say something really stupid and get called out on it, I'd think you'd either ignore it and hope it goes away or at least try to come up with something better than this
 

dbair1967

Administrator
Messages
59,017
Reaction score
9,355
Strong rebuttal.

When you say something really stupid and get called out on it, I'd think you'd either ignore it and hope it goes away or at least try to come up with something better than this

Its useless arguing with someone who cant see the forest for the trees junk. This is common sense shit that only an extreme leftist cant grasp.
 
Messages
8,660
Reaction score
0
Typical dbair posting style:

1) When confronted on a topic, post a link/article.
2) If the link/article doesn't convince the other side, call them lefties.
3) If that doesn't work, accuse the other side of spin.
4) If all else fails, throw in an ad hominem attack on your opponent.
 

NoMoRedJ

UDFA
Messages
2,477
Reaction score
56
Typical dbair posting style:

1) When confronted on a topic, post a link/article.
2) If the link/article doesn't convince the other side, call them lefties.
3) If that doesn't work, accuse the other side of spin.
4) If all else fails, throw in an ad hominem attack on your opponent.

And typical libtard tactics.

1) Ignore link/article if it refutes libtard position
2) Claim opponent just name calls while still ignoring link/article/facts
3) Deflect by claiming the other side claims spin
4) When libtard is called out for being what he/she is use the tired old ad hominem line as if that automatically invalidates everything said libtard doesnt like
 

dbair1967

Administrator
Messages
59,017
Reaction score
9,355
And typical libtard tactics.

1) Ignore link/article if it refutes libtard position
2) Claim opponent just name calls while still ignoring link/article/facts
3) Deflect by claiming the other side claims spin
4) When libtard is called out for being what he/she is use the tired old ad hominem line as if that automatically invalidates everything said libtard doesnt like

QFT
 
Messages
8,660
Reaction score
0
And typical libtard tactics.

1) Ignore link/article if it refutes libtard position
Links/articles will be ignored when they are not on topic or when they do not refute anything. And rightfully so.

2) Claim opponent just name calls while still ignoring link/article/facts
If the article is rightfully ignored, and you guys resort to name-calling, then such a claim would be valid, right?

3) Deflect by claiming the other side claims spin
So if your article is rightfully ignored, and and you claim the ignorer is just spinning, that's not a deflection to point that out. That would be calling out your disingenuous tactics.

4) When libtard is called out for being what he/she is use the tired old ad hominem line as if that automatically invalidates everything said libtard doesnt like
I never said an ad hominem invalidates a position. I've called out the use of ad hominems when they don't have anything to do with the discussion at hand. Sorry that bugs you. Have you learned what ad hominem means yet?
 

NoMoRedJ

UDFA
Messages
2,477
Reaction score
56
Might want to think twice before you "QFT" someone who's stated that we need to talk about bringing segregation back...

If people cant be assimilated into a civilized way of thinking and life and dont truly want to integrate, is it really that far out there?
 

junk

UDFA
Messages
2,719
Reaction score
0
Yeah, it had nothing to do with the 10's of thousands of "migrants" they freely admitted to their own country. Nothing whatsoever.

78% of the terror attacks in France in the 21st century happened after the French put troops on the ground in Mali in 2013. That is an overwhelming coincidence.

Are you referring to the Syrian migrants?
 

junk

UDFA
Messages
2,719
Reaction score
0
Its useless arguing with someone who cant see the forest for the trees junk. This is common sense shit that only an extreme leftist cant grasp.

You aren't even really arguing. You posted a link showing the countries with the most terrorism in the world.

So, what point are you trying to make?

You post things as fact, you're shown they are, in fact, incorrect. You then post a seemingly unrelated link.

No wonder you are so confused about all of this.
 
Top Bottom