|
Post by islandgirl on Apr 10, 2004 5:52:41 GMT -5
I thought I knew all the lame argument tactics, but I don't know this one. Please clarify. Oh okay. The "I know you are but what am I" lame comeback is a common technique used amongst second graders. It was later borrowed and made famous by Pee Wee Herman on his show when he was at a loss of what to say as a comeback and consciously trying to act lame. There are variations of this technique. Some examples of statements and lame responses are: Person A-"You're lame." Person B-"Nuh uh, YOU are lame!" (or a variation thereof) or Person A- "That's irrational" to which Person B responds -"YOU are so irrational!" or Person A- "Aww, don't get so huffypuffy. I can see you're upset." Person B- "Obviously YOU are mad!" Person A- "Come back when you have a rational argument." Person B- "Come back later when you can present a rational argument." etc., etc. Hence, the obvious lameness. Sometimes there are variations of this: Person A-"Dumbya sucks. Where are the WMD's?" Person B-"Poppycock!! Quit expressing your OPINION I say!! This is no place for OPINIONS! Get out of here!!" or Person A- "Dumbya really really sucks. He even went AWOL and then pretended he didn't." Person B- "Jane Fonda (or/Edward Kennedy/anyone) sucks worse, so there!!" Oh wait, sorry, got off track here... those are examples of the Hands-Over-Ears and Avoidance techniques also commonly used by Lame-Ohs. Never mind. Back to your question, of course, there are slightly shielded variations of this but, basically, Person B, always regurgitates what Person A previously said to him in some form even if it's months later -- I guess, when it hits a nerve. This technique is always used exclusively by Lame-Ohs. Classic examples of use can be found in this thread, the Jobs Jobs Jobs thread, as well as other threads here. I'm sure you will see more of it in action here by Person(s) B --with more deft examples than I can ever come up with since I'm sure it's a honed skill. It's actually pretty comical to see when you get extremely bored.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 10, 2004 10:05:25 GMT -5
Bravo, IslandGirl!
That is BiK in a nutshell.
BiK in a Nutshell. Sounds like an appetizer...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 10, 2004 10:14:04 GMT -5
Good point Rus. Liberals (Yes I'm lumping them all together) never have any answers to real problems, all they do is criticize. Every response they make is but a mere criticism. I guess it's easier to say what you wouldn't do when you've no clue as to what you would do to solve the problems of today's world. So Bush bashers, what would you do? BiK, I have told you on numerous occasions what I would have done and what I would do now. You continually dismiss my suggestions. For you to claim that all we do is criticize is laughable, especially when all you seem to be able to muster is blind "patriotism." So I'll tell you again: we needed then and we need now to build a world-wide coalition. Our focus should not have been on Iraq. Now that we are in the process of helping to destroy that country, we need to admit we made a mistake and get help. But this Administration cannot admit they made a mistake. No, much better to be steadfastedly wrong than to admit you were wrong. Or pretend you never did something or said something in the first place. I have lots of ideas. You want more? All of this goes back to the discussion I am having with LWood in the "RNC" thread. I believe you need to be open to debate, open to argument and willing to bring reason to bear. Bush believes he is doing Good, that he is part of the Right. It's all black and white for him and the grayness in the world is beyond his powers of comprehension.
|
|
|
Post by Gorf on Apr 10, 2004 11:29:02 GMT -5
Good point Rus. Liberals (Yes I'm lumping them all together) never have any answers to real problems, all they do is criticize. Every response they make is but a mere criticism. I guess it's easier to say what you wouldn't do when you've no clue as to what you would do to solve the problems of today's world. So Bush bashers, what would you do? Let's start with impeaching Bush. Retroactively reversing the Bush tax cuts and policies against the environment and heavily in favor of his cronies in the oil industry. How about a sharp restructuring of the IRS and taxation? Perhaps total removal of income tax in favor of a consumption tax that. Since the IRS spends over 50% of the taxes they collect on trying to actually make the collections the consumption tax could bring in appreciably less money and still yield more overal money for the goverment to spend on necessary budget items. (R)uffda! already has already made a solid suggestion for working within a UN framework in trying to deal with global issues such as terrorism. Sure we need to also worry about domestic issues at the same time but we do need to work with other countries on the global level. I don't recall you putting forth any proposals for solutions for anything, yet here you are criticizing other for not making their own propositions. BTW: Didn't you start out in these threads originally by making criticisms of Kerrry?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 10, 2004 11:52:25 GMT -5
Speaking of taxes, why is Bush so focused on tax relief on investments? His ideas re dividends and capital gains just make no sense.
This is INCOME, pure and simple. Bush is all about helping people who are already well off rather than making it easier for the have-nots to succeed.
Trickle-down didn't work for Reagan and it won't work for Bush.
How is it fair that individuals are primarily taxed on their salary (including Social Security and Medicare) while investors get break after break after break?
|
|
|
Post by Gorf on Apr 10, 2004 15:18:48 GMT -5
That's partially while I agree with the idea that eliminating imcome taxes altogether and replacing it with a consumption tax is at least worth some consideration.
Individuals and companies would pay a (hopefully not convoluted formulaic) percentage tax akin to a sales / use tax on things they purchase.
The determination of how much individuals and companies pay in consumption taxes is largely in their own hands.
Taxes are "collected" as with current sales taxes at the time of purches so there is a much lesser need for IRS r need all of their special agents and commissions to have a plethora of special agents and commissions to enforce collections.
I'm sure there would still be some need along those lines since there certainly are companies and people that currently do their best to avoid even paying sales taxes.
Did you know if you purchase something from say out of state from a company that doesn't have a business entity in your state so they don't charge you sales tax on your purchase that you're "technically" supposed to pay a "use tax" on that purchase that is generally equivalent of your local sales tax?
Not 100% sure that applies to individuals but I get nice letters from the state for my small business requesting me to report my use tax levels periodically.
|
|
|
Post by Barefoot In Kailua on Apr 10, 2004 17:32:17 GMT -5
BiK, I have told you on numerous occasions what I would have done and what I would do now. You continually dismiss my suggestions. For you to claim that all we do is criticize is laughable, especially when all you seem to be able to muster is blind "patriotism." So I'll tell you again: we needed then and we need now to build a world-wide coalition. Our focus should not have been on Iraq. Now that we are in the process of helping to destroy that country, we need to admit we made a mistake and get help. But this Administration cannot admit they made a mistake. No, much better to be steadfastedly wrong than to admit you were wrong. Or pretend you never did something or said something in the first place. I have lots of ideas. You want more? I sure do. As Randy Jackson would say (I Know Islandgirl will like this reply ) "Man, it just didn't do it for me man, I'm not feeling it. It was just alright, dawg." ;D
|
|
|
Post by Barefoot In Kailua on Apr 10, 2004 17:34:02 GMT -5
Bravo, IslandGirl! That is BiK in a nutshell. BiK in a Nutshell. Sounds like an appetizer... Eat me!
|
|
|
Post by Barefoot In Kailua on Apr 10, 2004 17:35:52 GMT -5
Oh okay. The "I know you are but what am I" lame comeback is a common technique used amongst second graders. It was later borrowed and made famous by Pee Wee Herman on his show when he was at a loss of what to say as a comeback and consciously trying to act lame. There are variations of this technique. Some examples of statements and lame responses are: Person A-"You're lame." Person B-"Nuh uh, YOU are lame!" (or a variation thereof) or Person A- "That's irrational" to which Person B responds -"YOU are so irrational!" or Person A- "Aww, don't get so huffypuffy. I can see you're upset." Person B- "Obviously YOU are mad!" Person A- "Come back when you have a rational argument." Person B- "Come back later when you can present a rational argument." etc., etc. Hence, the obvious lameness. Sometimes there are variations of this: Person A-"Dumbya sucks. Where are the WMD's?" Person B-"Poppycock!! Quit expressing your OPINION I say!! This is no place for OPINIONS! Get out of here!!" or Person A- "Dumbya really really sucks. He even went AWOL and then pretended he didn't." Person B- "Jane Fonda (or/Edward Kennedy/anyone) sucks worse, so there!!" Oh wait, sorry, got off track here... those are examples of the Hands-Over-Ears and Avoidance techniques also commonly used by Lame-Ohs. Never mind. Back to your question, of course, there are slightly shielded variations of this but, basically, Person B, always regurgitates what Person A previously said to him in some form even if it's months later -- I guess, when it hits a nerve. This technique is always used exclusively by Lame-Ohs. Classic examples of use can be found in this thread, the Jobs Jobs Jobs thread, as well as other threads here. I'm sure you will see more of it in action here by Person(s) B --with more deft examples than I can ever come up with since I'm sure it's a honed skill. It's actually pretty comical to see when you get extremely bored. And you're concerned with me Embarrassing myself? Poppycock!
|
|
|
Post by Barefoot In Kailua on Apr 10, 2004 17:43:32 GMT -5
>-(Gorf)-<[} link=board=news&thread=1081447281&start=33#2 date=1081614542] BTW: Didn't you start out in these threads originally by making criticisms of Kerrry? Yup but unlike you people I don't pretend to know what ALL the answers are. I don't trust the man. My criticism isn't veiled as a pretext to answers. Poppycock! I'll be back to laugh at all of your responses later. I'm off to enjoy the sun, ta ta.
|
|
|
Post by Gorf on Apr 10, 2004 23:14:19 GMT -5
Yup but unlike you people I don't pretend to know what ALL the answers are. I don't trust the man. My criticism isn't veiled as a pretext to answers. Poppycock! I'll be back to laugh at all of your responses later. I'm off to enjoy the sun, ta ta. The criticizer of criticisms criticizes again. Observationally speaking of course - I'd hate to be chastised for being critical of anyone or anything again myself.
|
|
|
Post by Hadrian on Apr 10, 2004 23:59:45 GMT -5
I don't know what all this talk about taxation is about. I prefer to keep all my money laundered in offshore accounts. An Italian restaurant and an olive oil import business are my fronts. I actually pay very little taxes. In fact, the govt owes me some money. And fast!
|
|