XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, can.politics, alt.politics.liberalism
XPost: alt.politics.democrats, alt.politics.usa.republican

Now I do it because I know how much it pisses you off.

LOL... it doesn't "piss me off" at all. I'm just trying to understand your psychosis. Psycho-logically-speaking, I'm just curious, as I'm sure others are too. LOL

I'm just pointing it out how much of a toddler you really are. I didn't notice you took "c.p" out, until I went to make sure I had even put ANY newsgroups in. (I sometimes forget)

You don't seem to read very well, so I'll tell you again... I post to the same groups no matter what YOU do. I HAVE to delete, out of my posts, what goes in the newsgroup's box, so I CAN'T care less whether you've replied with the same groups or not... I just notice what you do, and wonder why you don't just admit it that you're either Canadian, or you have some kind of hang up with can.politics. Are your "fellas" there, and you don't want them seeing you replying to a heterosexual? ;-)

I guess, dumb ass... that when YOU don't reply with can.politics in the newsgroups box, you're trying to hide something, from someone, or some "thing". Maybe a Drag Queen, perhaps?

I guess, dumb ass... that when YOU don't reply with can.politics in the newsgroups box, no one in can.politics sees your replies, and I have a feeling you don't WANT them too. Is it because I make you look like a child and stupid, and you don't want your "fellas" in can.politics to see us arguing, KNOWING you're the fool from afar?

can.politics reinstated

<laugh> "Off-topic" behavior!!! "Off-topic" behavior!!! "Off-topic" behavior!!!

LOL... I only wrote you were being off-topic, because you whined and cried like a baby about me writing what I did about Warren and then your stupid question about her being at the White House, which had NOTHING to do with the price of a Drag Queen hooker in your home town.

P.S. - What are these "Conditions Of The Discussion"

It's a figure of speech, trog. It's the same as moving the goalposts.

That's when you liberals change or move the goalposts so you THINK you have a valid argument, but makes YOU look like an idiot, because the discussion goes off in another direction completely.

That would also be described as "reductio ad absurdum".

Reductio ad absurdum is a Latin term that means "to reduce something to absurdity." It is a figure of speech that is defined as a manner of arguing something for ONE'S OWN POSITION by showing the absurdity of the position of his opponent.

Asking me if Warren was at the Trump/Native American meeting was stupid and a classic example OF reduction ad absurdum.

you referred to in
the subject header "no one is allowed to make AlleyPussy look like a
dullard

LOL... you can try, but to do so ALWAYS ends up in making YOU look stupid. HOW have you made me look like a dullard? By YOUR antics?

No.

even when he digs in like a jackass and repeats the same silly
shit over and over"?

You liberals have such a hard time understanding the written word, I DO repeat myself, but for YOUR and it ended up being at your expense, because, if you take a poll, I'm sure many would agree, that YOU'RE the one looking stupid, with your stupid off-topic spiel about Warren and your stupid question about her being with Trump at the White House.

Key words for you, stupid liberal, to remember and learn:

reduction ad absurdum
non-sequitur
logic
OPINION
obtuse
redundant
facetious
by proxy
Truinnerashuvaduprezure!
psychosis
Trump Derangement Syndrome

========================================================================

The Liberal Argument Outline

1. Use spun facts:

These can be found on Huffington Post, Daily Kos, MSNBC, and many other liberal sources. What they do is take facts, polls or arguments and add a liberal spin in a weak attempt to make bad news for liberals look good. These are easily debunked and exposed as lies by going to the original source and posting the hard, cold facts with NO spin.

Note: At this point, you have won. It should never take more than one
post to win an argument with a liberal. It is recommended that you claim victory and disengage at this point. If you continue, for fun or
experimental purposes, no further logic will be forthcoming from the
liberals.

2. The Next Step For The Liberal Will Be To Attempt To Discredit Your
Source

If it is Fox or any perceived "right wing" source, they will refuse to
believe it. If it is a non-partisan source, they will claim it is right
wing, if it is a left of center source, they will find another lefty
source to "prove" you are wrong. They will not discuss the facts
themselves, as they know they have lost. If you must go down this road
(there is a high entertainment value), don't allow this diversion. Go
back to the facts.

3. The Limbaugh Defense:

This is one that comes out early and often. Although you know they never listen to Rush Limbaugh and have no idea what he says, they will drag him out and claim you are a Ditto head. This is another diversionary tactic. It has no relevance and is an attempt to change the subject. The more desperate they are, the more childish and ridiculous the reference to Limbaugh becomes: Flush, LimpBag, etc. Ignore this and re-post the facts. DO NOT BE DIVERTED.

4. The Personal Attack:

Another common thread. Also designed to divert the lost argument. NEVER give any hint of personal information. Even something as innocuous as "I am a chef".

They will attempt to engage you and call you a liar to divert attention
from the original lost argument. Ignore this and re-post the facts yet
to be refuted.

5. Name Calling:

Still another diversion. If you fail to give them any personal information, they will attempt to draw you out to gain more insight into your personal side. Then they will return to step 4. Ignore this.

6. The Liberal Bat Signal:

When they find out they are unable to engage
you, divert you or goad you into a completely irrelevant topic, they
will send out the Bat Signal. This is where a bunch of Liberals (or
often, the same one using several names, i.e., Rudy) post a number of
rapid fire posts congratulating the Liberal on handing you your head on
a platter. This tactic often works on even the most logical and
disciplined of us. The urge to rant must be resisted. Your rant will
supply them with all the personal insight they need to spew hatred and
personal attacks. The best tactic here is to use the same tactic back at
them.

Keep in mind, a Liberal will never admit you have a valid point (Dutch
did, once), much less that you won a debate. So, the only reasons to
continue a dialog with a liberal after the initial statement of facts
that established your victory are for entertainment and educational
purposes. If you refuse to take the bait and demand the topic remain on
the original premise, they will eventually just go away and try to find
someone else that will engage them on their terms.

Now, go away, Snowflake.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)