Official War Room Awards 2017

Jack V Savage said:
No, you've never done it, and you can't because I don't lie. That's just your standard attack when you're caught lying yourself.



There was no troll job. I noted that this thread was going along an argument style that I refer to as an "Anung special" and you started flipping out. But that's what I call it. Named after you, of course, but surely you wouldn't deny that a lot of our discussions are you telling me what I secretly believe and me telling you that you're wrong, right?
Click to expand...

Where did I lie?
 
Anung Un Rama said:
Yeah, Hack was trolling me a few months back and kept “@“ing you and Trotsky. So I asked you to read the Kansas TANF thread (pretty sure I linked it at the time, too). To show you what a dishonest hack Hack is.
Click to expand...

Hmm. What do you think was dishonest in that thread?
 
Jack V Savage said:
I always point it out at the time. One I remember shaking my head about was when you kept insisting that the TPP was written by a certain number (you said the number) of lobbyists.
Click to expand...
Lol, yeah I think my number was 663 and the actual number turned out to be 667 or something? LOL
 
Anung Un Rama said:
Yeah, Hack was trolling me a few months back and kept “@“ing you and Trotsky. So I asked you to read the Kansas TANF thread (pretty sure I linked it at the time, too). To show you what a dishonest hack Hack is.
Click to expand...
So, why not just post a link now? Or, better yet, actually produce the quotes of him lying? You really should be willing to back up a claim of that nature.
 
Anung Un Rama said:
Lol, yeah I think my number was 663 and the actual number turned out to be 667 or something? LOL
Click to expand...

Huh? No. The claim that lobbyists wrote it at all is wrong. You took a correct claim made by Chomsky or someone (labor and industry groups and other NGOs were allowed to review and provide feedback on sections related to their interests) and distorted it to the very incorrect claim that lobbyists wrote the agreement. I corrected you on it, and you persisted in your dishonest account.

Anung Un Rama said:
That I was a radical right winger who supported tyranny or some ridiculous shit.
Click to expand...

LOL! You think that's an accurate recollection of my position? You're doing it again.
 
Jack V Savage said:
Huh? No. The claim that lobbyists wrote it at all is wrong. You took a correct claim made by Chomsky or someone (labor and industry groups and other NGOs were allowed to review and provide feedback on sections related to their interests) and distorted it to the very incorrect claim that lobbyists wrote the agreement. I corrected you on it, and you persisted in your dishonest account.



LOL! You think that's an accurate recollection of my position? You're doing it again.
Click to expand...
Actually I quoted Chomsky directly. I remember because you called me a liar and I proved it was Chomsky's quote. I got the number off by a digit, which you never clarified, you just threw out a blanket liar accusation like you do all the time. Same way when I made a grammatical error in a thread and you called me a liar for 3 pages until I figured out wtf you were talking about—- I corrected and acknowledged the error —-but you continued to call me a liar for it. That’s the kind of dishonest piece of shit you are.
 
Jack V Savage said:
This is the whole quoted post:



Doesn't really work on its own, does it? But what do I win?
Click to expand...

Where's the anger? What definition you using? Certainly not this one.

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/anger

angernoun [ U ]
UK /ˈæŋ.ɡər/ US /ˈæŋ.ɡɚ/
strong feeling that makes you want to hurt someone or be unpleasantbecause of something unfair or unkind that has happened:
Click to expand...



Lead said:
I'm confused because I think you want more examples than alt right but that is what I was talking about and saw examples of it being used. I didn't have multiple examples with altright being only one of them. I think we are looking at the switched around.
Click to expand...


So when jack gave that test of a term's meaning and you said "I could agree with that", you weren't actually agreeing? Or you didn't think it through to decide if the test had merit outside this one example?

I inferred you mentally applied it to other terms and was curious as to the answer to my initial question.
 
Jack V Savage said:
Huh? No. The claim that lobbyists wrote it at all is wrong. You took a correct claim made by Chomsky or someone (labor and industry groups and other NGOs were allowed to review and provide feedback on sections related to their interests) and distorted it to the very incorrect claim that lobbyists wrote the agreement. I corrected you on it, and you persisted in your dishonest account.



LOL! You think that's an accurate recollection of my position? You're doing it again.
Click to expand...
That was your position on my position. And more to the point you would reference that thread all the time to prove your position, banking on nobody reading it. And to your credit, even when I begged people to read the short thread, nobody did.
 
Anung Un Rama said:
That was your position on my position. And more to the point you would reference that thread all the time to prove your position, banking on nobody reading it. And to your credit, even when I begged people to read the short thread, nobody did.
Click to expand...

That's not true, of course. What happened a few times is that you were trying to pull some weird leftier-than-thou thing on me (seems stupid but that's what you did), and I pointed to your Ron Paul fanaticism and your position in that thread to show that you're not really that far left.
 
Anung Un Rama said:
That was your position on my position. And more to the point you would reference that thread all the time to prove your position, banking on nobody reading it. And to your credit, even when I begged people to read the short thread, nobody did.
Click to expand...

Nobody but you and Jack nuthuggers are even reading this (current exchange). :D:D
 
Jack V Savage said:
That's not true, of course. What happened a few times is that you were trying to pull some weird leftier-than-thou thing on me (seems stupid but that's what you did), and I pointed to your Ron Paul fanaticism and your position in that thread to show that you're not really that far left.
Click to expand...
Of course it’s true and this is just more lies from you. Funny you should bring up my Ron Paul support. Not only did misrepresent that position, but you had @dochter (who is dochter these days?) and @PolishHeadlock calling you out on it.
 
Bald1 said:
Lol. You're out to lunch on this.

- @JDragon nominated me lest bias WR poster
- I replied that there are topics I'm not impartial on
- @Jack V Savage and I got on the topic of Evergreen, and Weinstein
- bunch of other folks chimed in on the same topic
- pages later you had a brainfart due to not reading many previous posts

It's all good. Nobody is perfect, but goid luck trying to put a spin on this.
Click to expand...

I'm somehow happy I dragged you into the mud here <{jackyeah}>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,280,251
Messages
58,269,549
Members
175,989
Latest member
wagoat

Share this page

Back
Top