(03-16-2023 09:28 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote: I never attacked OO because of the article he posted - I criticized Fox News and even levied a similar criticism at the Times.
I criticized OO for saying that the opponents didn’t provide details on their opposition when it is pretty clear he hasn’t actually looked to see what opponents have said on the matter. You’ve lost the thread here, once again, and resort (once again) to personal attacks.
A) I meant the attacks toward Fox and me. You're quite literally attacking me in this post, repeatedly. Of course you will claim that you only did so in response, but the FACTS demonstrate that this is 100% untrue. Perhaps YOU should look in the mirror??
B) You're demonstrably lying that you complained about the TImes. My entire line of questioning revolved around you complaing about 'But, well, Fox News'. You then quoted the Times on the same subject... claiming you were giving me more information... i.e. that the Times provided more information. You DID say it wasn't a 'deep dive', but that isn't a criticism like you're now claiming.. It certainly wasn't a... 'well, NY Times'.
As I said up front... Most people don't know (or care about) what you know or care about, so while YOU might like a deeper dive... most people either wouldn't care or wouldn't understand it.... so it would be mostly a waste of ink... That's my opinion, supported clearly by the fact that such details certainly exist, but sources from both sides declined to provide them.
I asked you for the meaningful differences in the information provided... and you INITIALLY agreed that there wasn't much (not a deep dive)... but when I asked you to point out the differences explicitly... asking 'please' and saying 'you're right (this minor detail) SHOULD have been in the Fox story'.... and then explained (the 'knee jerk' from the right)
And you responded with a literal line by line restatement of my question... pointed out a few minute details... and a 'seriously, you don't understand the difference?'
And YOU complain about me attacking?
Part of the point I've repeatedly tried to make with you is your ridiculous sensitivity towards what others say to you... and then your complete lack of regard for you doing the same or worse.
Example #6,750, right here.... and precisely you being an entitled and arrogant prick.
Seriously, you really don't see that you do this? (see what I did there?)
(03-16-2023 09:35 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote: Ham, if you are convinced I’m an “entitled and arrogant prick,” why don’t you put me on ignore? Look in the mirror and ask yourself why you feel compelled to literally jump into the fray, especially in this instance where you didn’t add anything close to meaningful in your first post - you didn’t speak to any of the content or topics but rather what knee jerk reactions the left likes to have. I think you’re letting your time in the Spin Room spill over here, frankly.
Perfect example of what you do. I've repeatedly told you that I'd love to... but I can't. I'm a moderator.... so of course, you routinely act as if there must be 'some other' reason.
I've also repeatedly told you that there is no such thing as 'jumping into the fray' on a public forum. You have zero right or expectation of privacy. If you don't want people responding to things you type on here, don't type them on here. There is a PM function if you'd like to have private conversations with people. From your definition, if someone sends a group email or text and I am not the first person to respond, I'm 'jumping into the fray'.
Otherwise, physician, heal thyself. You have ZERO restrictions on your ability to put ME on ignore.