That comment made no sense in this context. It was sort of random lol. I defended bush so I'm about to fall to the left. Good one.

teedubbya wrote:

The context is that you'll defend Bush while 10 minutes later you'll call him the worst president ever or in our lifetime. THAT is someone trying to appear neutral or whatever while actually residing on the left.

robertknyc wrote:

I do think bush is the worst in my lifetime. But he didn't do everything wrong. To say he did actually weakens one's argument.

teedubbya wrote:

But what is worse? Failure by ignorance or failure by false pretenses. Hope and change and transparancy.

gringococolo wrote:

I mean, maybe the Seals shot one or both arms off, but it sounds like it was a head shot.

cbc812 wrote:

You really beleive that? So bush is either wrong about everything or right about everything? That is just silly.

teedubbya wrote:

I never said anything even close to that, nor do I believe that so I'm not sure where you're coming from. MY point is that I find it sort of laughable your predeliction for pretending to be above all the partisan back and forth while I find you actually quite partisan in reality. Maybe not in political party terms but holding very strong opinions in this case on Bush.

robertknyc wrote:

The context is that you'll defend Bush while 10 minutes later you'll call him the worst president ever or in our lifetime. THAT is someone trying to appear neutral or whatever while actually residing on the left.

robertknyc wrote:

You just didn't like that I disagreed with your assessment on this particular fuzz instance and your reaction is amusing. You seem to have difficulty with how things coorelate (or don't).
[sarcasm]

teedubbya wrote:

I don't really know what you are referring to. I wasn't particularly upset about anything you said, just think it wasn't accurate.

robertknyc wrote:

There is nothing inconsistent about thinking Bush was terrible yet defending him on any specific subject.

teedubbya wrote:

I'm just noticing the pattern of pretending to be above it all by supposedly being this "fair arbiter" who can see good and bad in a particular individual, as if that by itself is virtuous. Just my perception, I'm sure yours is different.

robertknyc wrote:

I hold very strong opinions about a lot of things. Never said I didn't. I get called a lefty or fencepost in here and go along with it because I think its funny. I have been a very partisan republican for a long time. Bush struck a particularly opinionated bone in me because I voted for him and he was horrible. In here the easier path was to remain quiet or defend bush. I didn't. But then I get called fence post. I love the irony.


I'm not above the partisan back and forth. I can freely admit I get caught up in it and don't like it when I do. I make mistakes, I am at times inconsistent, have lost many arguments (and sometimes admitted so, other times did not). What amazes me is the people that will not admit it. If I call someone on it it does not mean I don't do it. Two different things. And if you call me on it I will admit it. Unless you are wrong LOL.

But none of that really has anything to do with anything. You just didn't like that I disagreed with your assessment on this particular fuzz instance and your reaction is amusing. You seem to have difficulty with how things coorelate (or don't).

If it makes you feel better, I am sorry I defended Fuzz and will now agree with you. Since he was inconsistent there really is no reason to ever put any merit or thought into anything he ever says. [sarcasm]

teedubbya wrote: