Shameful and Frightening: GOP takes measures to supress Black Vote...

[jgruber]

Forget it man.  I don't question other posters integrity and I won't accept others questioning mine.

I'm done here.

[Bman]

Right. And calling me a mouthpiece of the White House with no independent views isn't impugning my integrity?

[nathanielmark]

get lost!

Whatever. you can frame it that way if you want. A few days ago we had a debate on detainees' rights and you mocked me, characterizing me as a shill for the White House who simply accepted their arguments without any thought or critial analysis (despite the fact that I made clear that I did not accept the Bush Administration's arguments in their entirety). You regularly call people who disagree with you close-minded. My point was that in almost four thousand posts, I can't find a single one in which you took it upon yourself to point out, without prodding from someone else, that an allegation was unproven or had essentially no evidence to support it. You responded to Zap's first post by calling him predictable (as opposed to you, where we never know what side you're going to take). Sometimes the tone around here can be a little degrading, but you've engaged in the exact same behavior so this, 'holier than thou' how dare you call me a liar routine is a bit too much to take.

[Ginatio]

these are exactly the types of conversation i don't want to get into in law school... 

[Bisquick]

hmmm... this degraded into oblivion

[Bman]

Smart post. I suppose actually defending your original assertion  was a little too much of a challenge for you.

get lost!

Whatever. you can frame it that way if you want. A few days ago we had a debate on detainees' rights and you mocked me, characterizing me as a shill for the White House who simply accepted their arguments without any thought or critial analysis (despite the fact that I made clear that I did not accept the Bush Administration's arguments in their entirety). You regularly call people who disagree with you close-minded. My point was that in almost four thousand posts, I can't find a single one in which you took it upon yourself to point out, without prodding from someone else, that an allegation was unproven or had essentially no evidence to support it. You responded to Zap's first post by calling him predictable (as opposed to you, where we never know what side you're going to take). Sometimes the tone around here can be a little degrading, but you've engaged in the exact same behavior so this, 'holier than thou' how dare you call me a liar routine is a bit too much to take.

[nathanielmark]

tool.

Smart post. I suppose actually defending your original assertion that the GOP takes measures to supress the Black vote was a little too much of a challenge for you.

get lost!

Whatever. you can frame it that way if you want. A few days ago we had a debate on detainees' rights and you mocked me, characterizing me as a shill for the White House who simply accepted their arguments without any thought or critial analysis (despite the fact that I made clear that I did not accept the Bush Administration's arguments in their entirety). You regularly call people who disagree with you close-minded. My point was that in almost four thousand posts, I can't find a single one in which you took it upon yourself to point out, without prodding from someone else, that an allegation was unproven or had essentially no evidence to support it. You responded to Zap's first post by calling him predictable (as opposed to you, where we never know what side you're going to take). Sometimes the tone around here can be a little degrading, but you've engaged in the exact same behavior so this, 'holier than thou' how dare you call me a liar routine is a bit too much to take.

[jgruber]

Right. And calling me a mouthpiece of the White House with no independent views isn't impugning my integrity?

I'm sorry if I impugned your integrity.  I meant it to question your dilligence in seeking the truth, not your honesty.  I did not accuse you of lying.

[Bman]

Dude, what's your problem? You posted a Bob Herbert column that alleges widespread attempts by the GOP to suppress the black vote in Florida. I responded by noting that there's not a single piece of evidence in the article that the police have done anything improper or that the fraud allegation isn't real. I also asked a question (which no one has answered) of what the police should do in fraud cases involving black Floridians. not investigate them? Jeffjoe calls Zap and me not open-minded, we respond that he certainly isn't. Share with us what we did wrong exactly or defend your original insinuation in the title of this thread. I didn't make fun of you or insult you personally.

tool.

Smart post. I suppose actually defending your original assertion that the GOP takes measures to supress the Black vote was a little too much of a challenge for you.

get lost!

Whatever. you can frame it that way if you want. A few days ago we had a debate on detainees' rights and you mocked me, characterizing me as a shill for the White House who simply accepted their arguments without any thought or critial analysis (despite the fact that I made clear that I did not accept the Bush Administration's arguments in their entirety). You regularly call people who disagree with you close-minded. My point was that in almost four thousand posts, I can't find a single one in which you took it upon yourself to point out, without prodding from someone else, that an allegation was unproven or had essentially no evidence to support it. You responded to Zap's first post by calling him predictable (as opposed to you, where we never know what side you're going to take). Sometimes the tone around here can be a little degrading, but you've engaged in the exact same behavior so this, 'holier than thou' how dare you call me a liar routine is a bit too much to take.

[Bman]

 And for what it's worth, I don't think you were lying either. I honestly think that you truly believe that you're open-minded. My posts were just meant to question that as an objective matter. You might disagree but I don't think its improper or integrity-impugning to say someone isn't open-minded. You said that to Zap and to me.

Right. And calling me a mouthpiece of the White House with no independent views isn't impugning my integrity?

I'm sorry if I impugned your integrity.  I meant it to question your dilligence in seeking the truth, not your honesty.  I did not accuse you of lying.