On Dec 7, 8:07*pm, Hawke wrote:







So you can believe his description of Obama's speech or mine. My view is
that I will tell you the truth about it. Limbaugh will tell you what he
thinks you should hear so you will hate Obama. That's because he's
trying to convince people to follow the republicans and do what is most
beneficial to the rich and powerful, which happens to describe Limbaugh.
What benefit do I get for telling you what I think is the truth?
Nothing. But I still am of a mind that you would sooner believe Limbaugh
even though you know he has an agenda he's pushing.

Hawke

There are a couple of problems with your reasoning. One is that I do
not listen to Limbaugh. So obviously I do not sooner believe him.

But the main problem with your views is that they are so often
factually wrong. I have pointed this out with cites for my remarks,
but you keep on winging it.

Dan

On 12/7/2011 5:49 PM, wrote:
On Dec 7, 8:07 pm, wrote:







So you can believe his description of Obama's speech or mine. My view is
that I will tell you the truth about it. Limbaugh will tell you what he
thinks you should hear so you will hate Obama. That's because he's
trying to convince people to follow the republicans and do what is most
beneficial to the rich and powerful, which happens to describe Limbaugh.
What benefit do I get for telling you what I think is the truth?
Nothing. But I still am of a mind that you would sooner believe Limbaugh
even though you know he has an agenda he's pushing.

Hawke

There are a couple of problems with your reasoning. One is that I do
not listen to Limbaugh. So obviously I do not sooner believe him.

But the main problem with your views is that they are so often
factually wrong. I have pointed this out with cites for my remarks,
but you keep on winging it.

Dan





I think you don't want to find what I say is true. So what you do is nit
pick on a few facts here and there that might have a problem with them
but do not make my argument wrong. You discount the real gist of my
point because I forgot to cross a T or dot an I. The facts you say I get
wrong don't really disqualify what my main point is. But you don't want
to accept my argument because of your political views and you find minor
flaws so you can reject my whole case. Because you sure aren't showing
me clear cases where my facts are completely wrong and thus prove my
argument is also wrong.


Hawke

On Dec 8, 2:52*pm, Hawke wrote:

I think you don't want to find what I say is true. So what you do is nit
pick on a few facts here and there that might have a problem with them
but do not make my argument wrong. You discount the real gist of my
point because I forgot to cross a T or dot an I. The facts you say I get
wrong don't really disqualify what my main point is. But you don't want
to accept my argument because of your political views and you find minor
flaws so you can reject my whole case. Because you sure aren't showing
me clear cases where my facts are completely wrong and thus prove my
argument is also wrong.

Hawke

What I want is for you to look over what you wrote before you post it
and fix all those facts that are not really true, see that you have
dotted all the i's and crossed all the T's. I just find errors in
almost every thing you post , and that makes me think that maybe I am
only catching 10 % of the errors. I do not reject or accept your
arguments because of what I believe. I just have a problem with wishy
washy thinking. If you get the facts right, you will not hear
anything from me. But if it is obvious to the most casual observer
that you are not being critical in what you post, I will point it out.

Dan

On 12/8/2011 2:16 PM, wrote:
On Dec 8, 2:52 pm, wrote:

I think you don't want to find what I say is true. So what you do is nit
pick on a few facts here and there that might have a problem with them
but do not make my argument wrong. You discount the real gist of my
point because I forgot to cross a T or dot an I. The facts you say I get
wrong don't really disqualify what my main point is. But you don't want
to accept my argument because of your political views and you find minor
flaws so you can reject my whole case. Because you sure aren't showing
me clear cases where my facts are completely wrong and thus prove my
argument is also wrong.

Hawke

What I want is for you to look over what you wrote before you post it
and fix all those facts that are not really true, see that you have
dotted all the i's and crossed all the T's. I just find errors in
almost every thing you post , and that makes me think that maybe I am
only catching 10 % of the errors. I do not reject or accept your
arguments because of what I believe. I just have a problem with wishy
washy thinking. If you get the facts right, you will not hear
anything from me. But if it is obvious to the most casual observer
that you are not being critical in what you post, I will point it out.

Dan



If you ever post something where you make an argument of your own
instead of just critiquing someone else's, I will do the same for you.


Hawke

On Dec 8, 8:29*pm, Hawke wrote:

If you ever post something where you make an argument of your own
instead of just critiquing someone else's, I will do the same for you.

Hawke

I do not plan on posting anything where I make an argument of my own
unless it about metalworking.

Dan

On 12/8/2011 1:52 PM, Hawke wrote:

I think you don't want to find what I say is true. So what you do is nit
pick on a few facts here and there that might have a problem with them
but do not make my argument wrong. You discount the real gist of my
point because I forgot to cross a T or dot an I. The facts you say I get
wrong don't really disqualify what my main point is. But you don't want
to accept my argument because of your political views and you find minor
flaws so you can reject my whole case. Because you sure aren't showing
me clear cases where my facts are completely wrong and thus prove my
argument is also wrong.


Hawke

The problem is that you have displayed so little credibility, maturity
and accumulated wisdom in your typical posts that no one takes you
seriously. You come on like a little boy trying to join an adult
conversation, but you just don't have enough depth of insight to be able
to make a useful contribution, plus you're too petty and obnoxious to
even be amusing.

You make big noises about your alleged poli sci degree, but all that you
show us is that left = good, right(as in, anyone who points out your
errors)= bad. You can't even recognize that there are valid political
stances other than left/right or that there are people like me far to
the left of you who see you for the shallow poseur that you are.

Get lost.

David

On 12/8/2011 2:49 PM, David R. Birch wrote:
On 12/8/2011 1:52 PM, Hawke wrote:

I think you don't want to find what I say is true. So what you do is nit
pick on a few facts here and there that might have a problem with them
but do not make my argument wrong. You discount the real gist of my
point because I forgot to cross a T or dot an I. The facts you say I get
wrong don't really disqualify what my main point is. But you don't want
to accept my argument because of your political views and you find minor
flaws so you can reject my whole case. Because you sure aren't showing
me clear cases where my facts are completely wrong and thus prove my
argument is also wrong.


Hawke

The problem is that you have displayed so little credibility, maturity
and accumulated wisdom in your typical posts that no one takes you
seriously. You come on like a little boy trying to join an adult
conversation, but you just don't have enough depth of insight to be able
to make a useful contribution, plus you're too petty and obnoxious to
even be amusing.

You make big noises about your alleged poli sci degree, but all that you
show us is that left = good, right(as in, anyone who points out your
errors)= bad. You can't even recognize that there are valid political
stances other than left/right or that there are people like me far to
the left of you who see you for the shallow poseur that you are.

Get lost.

David


To that I say, not until you do. In addition, I will add that you're
trying to come across as a professional academic with such high self
esteem that you feel qualified to put yourself in a position to pass
judgment on others. You're not! That would be okay, but you are trying
to do that to someone who has already had numerous people with Ph.Ds
after their names who would not agree with you. So I've passed the
approval of people who really are professional academics. So why would
you mean anything?

To someone like you, who has demonstrated no particularly high level of
thinking or writing, I'd say you need a reassessment of your own
capabilities. Because it's apparent that your own view of your
capabilities far exceeds reality. In other words, you aren't that great
even if you tell us you are a hundred times. So run along and see if you
can find someone else you can pretend to be superior to. Because you've
still got a long way just to even get close to someone like me, let
alone pass judgment on me. And you probably are to the left of me, so
what does that prove? I'm closer to the middle than you are. So what? If
you ask me you're the one who doesn't make much sense.

Hawke

On Dec 8, 8:43*pm, Hawke wrote:

That would be okay, but you are trying
to do that to someone who has already had numerous people with Ph.Ds
after their names who would not agree with you.

Hawke

Now tell me, did you read what you wrote?

Dan

On 12/8/2011 6:29 PM, wrote:
On Dec 8, 8:43 pm, wrote:

That would be okay, but you are trying
to do that to someone who has already had numerous people with Ph.Ds
after their names who would not agree with you.

Hawke

Now tell me, did you read what you wrote?

Dan



Yeah, I did. You took it completely out of context though so it is
difficult to tell what it was supposed to mean. So I'll tell you. I've
had people with Ph.Ds that I've studied under who had no problem with
anything I wrote and actually thought my ability to communicate through
the written word is very good. Then I have someone who is just a member
of this group saying the opposite. So who should I believe? Him or the
people with doctorates?

Hawke

On 12/8/2011 7:43 PM, Hawwke-ptooey wrote:
On 12/8/2011 2:49 PM, David R. Birch wrote:

The problem is that you have displayed so little credibility, maturity
and accumulated wisdom in your typical posts that no one takes you
seriously. You come on like a little boy trying to join an adult
conversation, but you just don't have enough depth of insight to be able
to make a useful contribution, plus you're too petty and obnoxious to
even be amusing.

You make big noises about your alleged poli sci degree, but all that you
show us is that left = good, right(as in, anyone who points out your
errors)= bad. You can't even recognize that there are valid political
stances other than left/right or that there are people like me far to
the left of you who see you for the shallow poseur that you are.

Get lost.

David


To that I say, not until you do. In addition, I will add that you're
trying to come across as a professional academic with such high self
esteem that you feel qualified to put yourself in a position to pass
judgment on others. You're not! That would be okay, but you are trying
to do that to someone who has already had numerous people with Ph.Ds
after their names who would not agree with you. So I've passed the
approval of people who really are professional academics. So why would
you mean anything?

To someone like you, who has demonstrated no particularly high level of
thinking or writing, I'd say you need a reassessment of your own
capabilities. Because it's apparent that your own view of your
capabilities far exceeds reality. In other words, you aren't that great
even if you tell us you are a hundred times. So run along and see if you
can find someone else you can pretend to be superior to. Because you've
still got a long way just to even get close to someone like me, let
alone pass judgment on me. And you probably are to the left of me, so
what does that prove? I'm closer to the middle than you are. So what? If
you ask me you're the one who doesn't make much sense.

Hawwke-ptooey

All that you have written supports what I said about you. Perhaps the
best part of it is that you continue to demonstrate that you read and
understand neither what you reply to nor what you write.

Get lost, loser.

David

On 12/8/2011 8:27 PM, David R. Birch wrote:
On 12/8/2011 7:43 PM, Hawwke-ptooey wrote:
On 12/8/2011 2:49 PM, David R. Birch wrote:

The problem is that you have displayed so little credibility, maturity
and accumulated wisdom in your typical posts that no one takes you
seriously. You come on like a little boy trying to join an adult
conversation, but you just don't have enough depth of insight to be able
to make a useful contribution, plus you're too petty and obnoxious to
even be amusing.

You make big noises about your alleged poli sci degree, but all that you
show us is that left = good, right(as in, anyone who points out your
errors)= bad. You can't even recognize that there are valid political
stances other than left/right or that there are people like me far to
the left of you who see you for the shallow poseur that you are.

Get lost.

David


To that I say, not until you do. In addition, I will add that you're
trying to come across as a professional academic with such high self
esteem that you feel qualified to put yourself in a position to pass
judgment on others. You're not! That would be okay, but you are trying
to do that to someone who has already had numerous people with Ph.Ds
after their names who would not agree with you. So I've passed the
approval of people who really are professional academics. So why would
you mean anything?

To someone like you, who has demonstrated no particularly high level of
thinking or writing, I'd say you need a reassessment of your own
capabilities. Because it's apparent that your own view of your
capabilities far exceeds reality. In other words, you aren't that great
even if you tell us you are a hundred times. So run along and see if you
can find someone else you can pretend to be superior to. Because you've
still got a long way just to even get close to someone like me, let
alone pass judgment on me. And you probably are to the left of me, so
what does that prove? I'm closer to the middle than you are. So what? If
you ask me you're the one who doesn't make much sense.

Hawwke-ptooey

All that you have written supports what I said about you. Perhaps the
best part of it is that you continue to demonstrate that you read and
understand neither what you reply to nor what you write.

Get lost, loser.


Sometimes simple is all your type can understand so how's about this? Up
yours, junior!

Hawke