- Joined
- Apr 2, 2013
- Messages
- 9,809
- Reaction score
- 286
WOW, this is the garry johson i want in the debate. aggressive, brave and not afraid to trade punches.
even though i wouldn't say the word " illegal immigrant" is that offensive.
Elections Gary Johnson at 12% (3% away from debates), potential game changer
- Thread starter VivaRevolution
- Start date
WOW, this is the garry johson i want in the debate. aggressive, brave and not afraid to trade punches.
even though i wouldn't say the word " illegal immigrant" is that offensive.
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2007
- Messages
- 10,620
- Reaction score
- 3,892
Gary Johnson is a money pit for his cult followers. He gets about 1% or less of the popular vote each time. This 1% would not even vote at all if he wasn't on the ballot. The 9% he polls at right now will either stay home or vote for someone else come election day. He will get the same 1% or less this time around that he always gets.
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2009
- Messages
- 61,022
- Reaction score
- 359
Johnson's up to 11%. Trump is dead even with Hillary in most polls now.
- Joined
- May 12, 2010
- Messages
- 24,621
- Reaction score
- 1,315
Wow, at you claiming that Zinn saying Columbus brought 1200 people = 1200 soldiers.
Debate ploy?
How about this instead.........
Honest question here. You aren't even a little embarrassed by making this absurd argument, that a child should be able to see through?
I mean if I go quote 4 statements that prove you are a liar and a fat mouth, will you stop replying to me?
Where'd you go, dude? I thought you were going to provide me with 4 statements that prove I'm a lair and a fat mouth? Instead you just went silent? What gives?
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2016
- Messages
- 34,002
- Reaction score
- 0
Oh I forgot about you, but I'm glad I did because I want to make this an AV bet now, or you can shut the fuck up.
Here is the bet, I can show your bold faced lies twice now from this thread. First you said 1200 soldiers over and over, and then backtracked to 1200 people. Then you went from calling Zinn a liar over and over to claiming he is telling half truths.
If I can pull quotes showing these two very contradictory statements, that aren't just half truths but outright lies, I get your AV for 3 months. Deal?
If you don't want the bet, then shut the fuck up, and go away.
- Joined
- May 12, 2010
- Messages
- 24,621
- Reaction score
- 1,315
Oh no, not an AV BET!! could you be a little more pathetic and childish?
LOL at "I forgot". You ran out of your own thread like a little coward. I said the rest of history says 1200 people, many women and children, you just can't read motherf**ker. I've posted the same, direct link to his book over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again and you've made no attempt to actually address what Zinn really wrote, which was what you said you were going to "provide like 4 examples of". You on the other hand have decided to attempt to try vainly to latch on to the language I used, to twist my argument up into something it isn't to "win". You need to do this because your argument, just like Zinn's has been dishonest from the beginning. As I've said many times, that only works on stupid people. That won't work on me. I know exactly what I've said, and the point I've argued the entire time. Take your smoke and mirror attempts elsewhere, and simply take an honest (for once) crack and answering a single question I've asked. Just go all the way back to the beginning of this conversation and provide that "well sourced biblography" you've talked about yet never produced. Do any of the crap you've ran your mouth about. Please.
And he is telling half truths. Do you not know what a "half truth" is? here, I'll help you.
https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=half+truths
Yes, the number was 1200, and there were 17 ships, but he didn't return with 1200 "men" and 17 ships with the clear aim of slaves and gold as Zinn has claimed. I've asked you for literal weeks now to back that one, single statement up, and you won't. Because you can't. You won't admit you can't because you're a liar.
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2016
- Messages
- 34,002
- Reaction score
- 0
- Joined
- May 12, 2010
- Messages
- 24,621
- Reaction score
- 1,315
LOL, wow.
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2016
- Messages
- 34,002
- Reaction score
- 0
LOL wow, what....take the bet or tuck your tail between your legs and leave the thread.
- Joined
- May 12, 2010
- Messages
- 24,621
- Reaction score
- 1,315
What do you think you're achomplishing with this? I know exactly what you'er doing. You're going to try to fall back on the post that I said he wasn't telling half truths, he was lying, right? Do you not realize how stupid and childish that makes you look? A HALF TRUTH BY DEFINITION IS A LIE. Jesus, dude, are you retarded or something? Again, just stop. Try backing yours and Zinn's nonsense up with some actual proof. I'm not interested in playing semantic word games for another three weeks.
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2016
- Messages
- 34,002
- Reaction score
- 0
1200 soldiers, becoming 1200 people, and the claim that he was a liar, to telling half truths.
Take the bet or shut the fuck up.
- Joined
- May 12, 2010
- Messages
- 24,621
- Reaction score
- 1,315
Dude, again, do you read? THE REST OF HISTORY SAYS 1200 PEOPLE CAME TO THE NEW WORLD. I ALREADY LAID THAT OUT FOR YOU. Zinn claims Columbus brought 1200 men and 17 ships. That isn't the case, that's a complete fabrication. That's a lie. You're trying to say that I said Zinn originally stated 1200 men, then I back tracked and said that Zinn only claimed 1200 people. That's a total lie. You're both liars. I don't really see where you think you have an angle to play here. So just try to back your idol's claim up like i've been asking for almost a month, or you shut the f**k up. Do any one of the numerous things you said you'd do.
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2016
- Messages
- 34,002
- Reaction score
- 0
No you said that Zinn claimed Columbus brought 1200 soldiers, which is why you won't take the bet.
You want some syrup with your waffling?
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2016
- Messages
- 34,002
- Reaction score
- 0
How do you conclude that it is?
Why wouldn't he call them soldiers if that is what he meant?
The fact here is that Ifd was calling Zinn a liar, for a book that he writes and openly states that he is writing from a different point of view, then other historians write from. He wrote from the view of the average person, not the power brokers.
He openly states this again and again in his book, and that this is a form of bias.
The claim went from liar to half truths, and from 1200 soldiers to 1200 men.
The funniest part is that this all started with me and Idf, because he made this claim, and I asked him to source it, and it was like pulling teeth to get him to do so. When he finally did, his source didn't say what he was claiming, and yet somehow he still declares victory like I am the problem here.
If Ifd was more honest in what he was saying, that Zinn wrote that book from a biased perspective, I would have no issue with that, but instead what he was doing was calling Zinn a liar, and sticking to his guns when called out on it.
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2003
- Messages
- 24,414
- Reaction score
- 0
Because I speak english, write in english, and read english.
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2016
- Messages
- 34,002
- Reaction score
- 0
Well then you should understand that the word soldiers, and men are two completely different words.
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2003
- Messages
- 24,414
- Reaction score
- 0
Okay bub.
- Joined
- May 12, 2010
- Messages
- 24,621
- Reaction score
- 1,315
Yes, I did. I never waivered from that position, you goof. There is no bet to take. There is no waffling going on. I've never once retreated from the position that Zinn said 1200 "Men" and that his use of "Men" was meant to indicate soldiers. You just can't read. For the 40th time, stop trying to project your inability to comprehend onto me. If you can find me back tracking from that in the least, you can prove it.
- Joined
- May 12, 2010
- Messages
- 24,621
- Reaction score
- 1,315
LOL, where was it like pulling teeth, you absolute liar? I provided the link to his book 8 times, motherf**ker!! Oompaloompa had to explain to you that "1200" and "Twelve Hundred" are the same thing. Honestly, this goes way beyond an inability to read and is starting to venture into you just straight up having a mental disorder.
"Men" being interchangable with soldiers. It's always been exactly that. You're just still lamely clinging to the hope that you can convince someone otherwise
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/men
7. a male follower or subordinate:
the king's men. He's the boss's number one man
And from the very same link, under "British Dictionary Definitions for Men"
10. (usually pl) a member of the armed forces who does not hold commissioned, warrant, or noncommissioned rank (as in the phrase officers and men)
11 .a member of a group, team, etc
16. a vassal of a feudal lord
24.to provide with sufficient people for operation, defence, etc.
Would you like me to keep going with owning you, or no?
Uh... Yeah... that's because that's exactly what's going on. I'm destroying you and you're completely the problem. I'll take that historical evidence that backs up Zinn's claim of Columbus bringing 1200 SOLDIERS with him to conquer and enslave the natives, please. Along with that bibliography you promised. Or you could just admit that you're a liar and Zinn is too.
Oh, I have no issue with saying the man was biased. He was also a liar, and so are you. If he had just been biased I wouldn't have so much contempt for him. But his entire book is a lie. I would have gone deeper and deeper into the mass of lies he told just about the story of Columbus, about how there was no possible way Columbus killed 8 million people. How Zinn tells the story of a generic "arawak" tribe, despite the fact that Columbus interacted with three seperate Tribes in his time in the the West Indies on his first voyage. We would have gone into how Zinn breezes past the atttack by the Carib on Fortress Navidad while Columbus returned to Spain, and the killing and eating of the 39 men inside of it by the tribe, whose name is the origin for the word "cannibal". Zinn dismisses this and claims that the Spanish were actually killed because they were kidnapping local women from the defenseless natives. We could never get that far because you could never support a single one of your positions and elected to try to play a semantics game with me for the last 3 weeks or so and just made yourself look like a dick.
We could never that far because lying was far more important to you, as I've now proven beyond a shadow of a doubt for a few weeks now. I'm sticking to my guns because I'm entirely, completely, 100% correct in every possible aspect. Are you starting to catch on to that yet?
