Fox News makes me laugh

Again, Fox News is usually pretty fair and balanced. They lean a little right, but not as far as CNN, NYT, and 95% of national media leans to the left. Hume is excellent. Hannity, O'Reilly, the morning show, etc. are not news, and they are far more populist than they are conservative or traditionally liberal. It's like someone on the right complaining that Olbermann is biased. That's his job.

As for converting folks, or firing personal attacks, take a look to see who usually fires the first shot. I have gotten my point across several times, even if you don't realize or accept it. Your attempt to silence those that don't agree with you is not surprising. It is frustrating when you are continually proven wrong, so it is easier to ask folks who disagree to leave.

I'm not trying to silence your opinions at all. You have ceratinly stated them many times. I take them or leave them. You have however failed to prove my opinion wrong except within your mind. But your responses have become more of a personal attack. Perhaps a little kindness, or your distance would be better than the proverbial head to wall. Just thinking of your health.

I'm not trying to silence your opinions at all. You have ceratinly stated them many times. I take them or leave them. You have however failed to prove my opinion wrong except within your mind. But your responses have become more of a personal attack. Perhaps a little kindness, or your distance would be better than the proverbial head to wall. Just thinking of your health.

You don't really offer opinions. You put up the smilie faces, and the clapping smilie faces, and the popcorn eating smilie faces. I don't recognize smilie faces as intellectual debate.

Grievance is a complaint, or cause for complaint. Grieving is holding sorrow, or being mornful. Didn't know I had to spell it out.

Well at least I know you know how to use a dictionary.

As for greed, here is the definition - "An excessive desire to acquire or possess more than what one needs or deserves, especially with respect to material wealth".

Period. But then you add this...By definition, someone that is greedy is always wanting more, so it is not in their interest to destroy their source of livelihood. It is in their interest to replace it, to accumulate more material wealth.

That is your definition of Greed.

I know how to use a dictionary as well.

Greed is selfish excessive or uncontrolled desire for possession or pursuit of money, wealth, food, or other possessions, especially when this denies the same goods to others. It is generally considered a vice, and is one of the seven deadly sins in Catholicism.

Some desire to increase one's wealth is nearly universal and acceptable in any culture, but this simple want is not considered greed. Greed is the extreme form of this desire, especially where one desires things simply for the sake of owning them. Greed may entail acquiring material possessions at the expense of another person's welfare or otherwise reflect flawed priorities.

You don't really offer opinions. You put up the smilie faces, and the clapping smilie faces, and the popcorn eating smilie faces. I don't recognize smilie faces as intellectual debate.

I find it best not to argue with someone who already has their mind made up. I have stated my opinions in other threads to you. Have you forgotten or do you just not care to listen to anyone else? I don't choose to continually repeat myself to someone who is judgemental. So I don't waste alot of my time on you anymore. There is no sense beating a dead horse.

However you are missing or ignoring the point of my post. I will restate it for you, perhaps you can post to what the topic is instead of name calling and personal attacks on someones signature line if they don't agree with you. If that fails perhaps you are posting to no avail as you lose your credibility.
You find a topic to post to, you state your opinions and don't attack others, we'll listen. We might not agree, but we'll listen. Debate on topics should never be personal and when it is, perhaps we need to leave it alone.

I find it best not to argue with someone who already has their mind made up. I have stated my opinions in other threads to you. Have you forgotten or do you just not care to listen to anyone else? I don't choose to continually repeat myself to someone who is judgemental. So I don't waste alot of my time on you anymore. There is no sense beating a dead horse.

However you are missing or ignoring the point of my post. I will restate it for you, perhaps you can post to what the topic is instead of name calling and personal attacks on someones signature line if they don't agree with you. If that fails perhaps you are posting to no avail as you lose your credibility.
You find a topic to post to, you state your opinions and don't attack others, we'll listen. We might not agree, but we'll listen. Debate on topics should never be personal and when it is, perhaps we need to leave it alone.

I've argued with many, many people on here, so forgive me if I cannot recall someone with an arbitrary screen name posting something a while back. All of the dargs, cheerings, dwells, etc. run together.

Again, I'm not the one attacking. I'm arguing. You all should could learn from it. As an exercise, go back in this thread alone and compare all of the name calling. All of the times people said they wanted to hit me, etc. It doesn't bother me, because I doubt internet people are very tough, but it's ridiculous to paint this on me.

Well at least I know you know how to use a dictionary.



Period. But then you add this...By definition, someone that is greedy is always wanting more, so it is not in their interest to destroy their source of livelihood. It is in their interest to replace it, to accumulate more material wealth.

That is your definition of Greed.

I know how to use a dictionary as well.

Greed is selfish excessive or uncontrolled desire for possession or pursuit of money, wealth, food, or other possessions, especially when this denies the same goods to others. It is generally considered a vice, and is one of the seven deadly sins in Catholicism.

Some desire to increase one's wealth is nearly universal and acceptable in any culture, but this simple want is not considered greed. Greed is the extreme form of this desire, especially where one desires things simply for the sake of owning them. Greed may entail acquiring material possessions at the expense of another person's welfare or otherwise reflect flawed priorities.

Fair enough. What good is money, referenced in your signature, recognizing that money is a means of exchange, if it cannot purchase something as necessary as food?

Again, Fox News is usually pretty fair and balanced. They lean a little right, but not as far as CNN, NYT, and 95% of national media leans to the left. Hume is excellent. Hannity, O'Reilly, the morning show, etc. are not news, and they are far more populist than they are conservative or traditionally liberal. It's like someone on the right complaining that Olbermann is biased. That's his job.

As for converting folks, or firing personal attacks, take a look to see who usually fires the first shot. I have gotten my point across several times, even if you don't realize or accept it. Your attempt to silence those that don't agree with you is not surprising. It is frustrating when you are continually proven wrong, so it is easier to ask folks who disagree to leave.

~ now that is something to laugh about:funn:

Fair enough. What good is money, referenced in your signature, recognizing that money is a means of exchange, if it cannot purchase something as necessary as food?

We will not need money when everything else is gone.

You may not have stooped to bebee's level, but you HAVE included insults, questioned people's intelligence, and generally phrased your comments in a combative/argumentative way.

As your recent post says, you are arguing, not discussing. I think you have some great ideas and raise some good points, but I quickly lose interest when it becomes about scoring points and constantly rehashing old arguments and finger pointing rather than a discussion.

We will not need money when everything else is gone.

Why would one want to acquire money if it is of no use since everything else is gone? It's a ridiculous argument. Do people have any desire for Confederate money, other than collectors? Of course not, because it is of no use to purchase things valuable. If food is scarce, it will be very expensive, and the state will probably accuse Publix of gouging.

~ now that is something to laugh about:funn:

I'm speaking of the news, not the talk shows.

6th Gen, you state:
By definition, someone that is greedy is always wanting more, so it is not in their interest to destroy their source of livelihood. It is in their interest to replace it, to accumulate more material wealth. "

No, it is not always in the interest of greedy people to replace the source of their livelihood. They pick up and move on to the latest and greatest without regard to the environment and others.
Perhaps you would understand the quote better if you came to New York and ate a Hudson river trout if you could find one without 3 heads.

I saw a picture of Ms. Kitty. I think she's pretty.
That was an extemely lame, immature and plain rotten thing to say. That's just pathetic.
I could say more, but I won't.

P.S.
Bite me

P.S.
Bite me

:funn:

Again, Fox News is usually pretty fair and balanced. They lean a little right, but not as far as CNN, NYT, and 95% of national media leans to the left. Hume is excellent. Hannity, O'Reilly, the morning show, etc. are not news, and they are far more populist than they are conservative or traditionally liberal. It's like someone on the right complaining that Olbermann is biased. That's his job.

As for converting folks, or firing personal attacks, take a look to see who usually fires the first shot. I have gotten my point across several times, even if you don't realize or accept it. Your attempt to silence those that don't agree with you is not surprising. It is frustrating when you are continually proven wrong, so it is easier to ask folks who disagree to leave.

Olbermann is hammering away at someone who would have already been fired for cause in the private sector. Bush is a study in the need for term limits. I say this as a registered Repub tired of the hijacking of my party by intellectual lightweights. Fox News' comedy show undermines any credibility about "fair and balanced".

Oh he'll be back. Give him a few hours to "reload" whatever it is that fuels him.

2b is a 3b wanna b.

You may not have stooped to bebee's level, but you HAVE included insults, questioned people's intelligence, and generally phrased your comments in a combative/argumentative way.

As your recent post says, you are arguing, not discussing. I think you have some great ideas and raise some good points, but I quickly lose interest when it becomes about scoring points and constantly rehashing old arguments and finger pointing rather than a discussion.

I would agree with this and I ask everyone to be kind, or at least respect each others' opinions. Even if they're wrong.

I would agree with this and I ask everyone to be kind, or at least respect each others' opinions. Even if they're wrong.

So this rule applies to those who intentionally provoke in a negative way or who are very obviously flaming?

I would agree with this and I ask everyone to be kind, or at least respect each others' opinions. Even if they're wrong.

:scratch: ....

Well, just let me say...I am going OUT to dinner tonight.

I'm speaking of the news, not the talk shows.

me too!!!!

Miss Kitty, I saw a picture of you and understand now why you are so bitter. You may want to limit your eating out so frequently.

This has got to be the most unkind post ever. If you have ever had the:funn: chance to meet our Kitty you would know that she is lovely.

This has got to be the most unkind post ever. If you have ever had the:funn: chance to meet our Kitty you would know that she is lovely.

I don't think we will be hearing anymore from this "character" anymore unless of course she mutates into another "character".

So this rule applies to those who intentionally provoke in a negative way or who are very obviously flaming?

I have been provoking people for years, and I'm obviously flamming.

And yet, much to my disappointment, nobody ever picks on me...........

:scratch: ....

Well, just let me say...I am going OUT to dinner tonight.

I wasn't referring to the ugly post about you. That was uncalled for and untrue, and the offender has been banned. Probably should be deleted.

I have been provoking people for years, and I'm obviously flamming.

And yet, much to my disappointment, nobody ever picks on me...........

Because we love your gay self. ;-)