The O'Crappy Factor.

[Brian37]

Nope, it isn't a matter of just not liking him. Go back and re read my OP.

I take the same approach to all arguments. PROVE IT, the same distraction is used by anyone on any subject. Get them lost in the yellow brick details when they have not established the data in the first place.

Bad logic works the same.

I like what I believe=yellow brick road crap= desired outcome.

Things that work universally do not make arguments from personal bias.

Allah exists because the Koran says so.

Economics don't work like that either. Closed societies and open societies for political or religious reasons, make the same arguments and all of it ignores diversity.

Again, I have pointed out to him wealth that agrees with me, not him. Which is why I am not interested in going any further with him.

If the numbers worked the way he claimed other rich people would not be disagreeing with him. I am done with him. He is simply justifying his own bias. Same crap religion does.

I see that you refuse to deviate from your underhanded tactic. You say O'Rielly is a douchebag yet even though it is in your power to present video of Orielly being a "douchbag" you refuse. Why is that?

Are you afraid that if you presented some video people might not agree with you? Are you afraid that if you presented some actual video people might use it to show you are wrong? I suspect this is why you refuse to engage in the trivial effort of actually showing the thing you are criticizing.

When you make nebulous accusations as you have done. You make it very difficult for people to actually challenge you because your charge is so out there....nobody knows what it is you actually are claiming. For once in your life be honest and objective. Post a clip of O Rielly then make your case why he is being a douche bag. Just claiming O Rielly is a douchebag is underhanded. There is simply nothing to evaluate on merits and the only reason you do it in this manner is either you are too stupid to do it otherwise....or you are simply dishonest and don't want to give the opposition a specific charge in which they can defend themselves.

Either case is not flattering to you thats for sure. This whole thread is an example of how you are just a big flaming ass.

Nothing "underhanded" about accepting that life is messy and diverse. The economic right and libertarians have the same playbook as Che supporters and Stalin. The same flawed logic religion suffers from.

"It works for me". I dont doubt he thinks it is working for him, I doubt his interpretation. Just like I doubt religious perceptions.

The only thing in life that works is evolution, and evolution does not give one crap who wins. If you accept that first, you can allow for diversity without projecting your own pattern on others.

There are different economic theories, but all of it still amounts arguments to gain resources, because economics only addresses the self interests of the competing factions who are distracted by open vs closed market. The reality is that all aspects of society need resources, to gain and maintain power, and religion and political party and business all do that.

Now if you are going to defend Haywood then do it, don't be half assed about it.

He is not doing anything differently in his tactic that I have seen from theists. It is still a flaw in his perception and a kneejerk reaction to any challenge to his pattern seeking.

I can accept wealth, I cannot accept wealth that ignores other segments of society, as I would Gaddafi, or China's authoritarian capitalism or Stalin's party monopoly of wealth, or Saudi Arabia's monopoly on religion and wealth.

In America our monopoly is class based.

Humans are pattern seekers , and all he is doing is defending his POV of a pattern, and it isn't even my argument that everything he wants is bad, just that he is stuck like a broken record.

1. I am not against wealth. I am against monopolies. Be it wealth to create a religious monopoly like Saudi Arabia. Or wealth to create a party monopoly like China.

His problem is that he stupidly thinks America does not do the same.