Change?

Pretty much Terry. And unlike you and Frank, I'm also willing to admit when I don't know something and if I'm proven wrong, I'm willing to admit it. I've seen that trait in Sam as well.


Bullshit. Sam has never admitted a mistake to me. I think you have, once.

I, on the other hand, just admitted to one in a thread the other day - I had mistakenly thought Sam was going after Steph for being a democrat (in my defense, Sam quoted sherm through Steph instead of going right to sherm's post).

You won't admit that you wrongly refer to me as being on the left, even when you can't point to any of my takes on issues that would be anything but classically conservative.

I don't give a fat rat's ass what he's admitted to you Terry.

And I've told you, I think you're on the left based on my personal opinion, which I'm entitled to. I don't have to prove it. Is there some reason you can't accept that?

I don't give a fat rat's ass what he's admitted to you Terry.

Of course not, because it would show you to be wrong.

The challenge for you is to back up a single one of your assertions.

Find us one post where Sam admitted to an error, to ANYBODY. Shouldn't be hard as you KNOW that he has.

Here is a chance to admit you were wrong, Aaron. You said I "discounted" Palin (in terms of future politics, I assume).

Show me where I did so.

You are so full of BS that you don't even pay any attention to how or where you shovel it.

Aaron wrote:From what I know Frank, Sam's a better man then you.

Thank you.

If you aspire to be no better than a Ziggy or even the great SamCogar, then, well, you are right where you want to be, apparently.

Terry, the impression I get from your post is that you have no respect for her whatsoever and you think she is so inept that she cannont be a player in national politics.

That is my opinion based on what I've observed.

Yes, I could be wrong in that you've 'discounted' Palin and if I hurt your feelings I'm sorry.

Can you please find it in your heart to forgive me???

ziggy wrote:

Aaron wrote:From what I know Frank, Sam's a better man then you.

Thank you.

If you aspire to be no better than a Ziggy or even the great SamCogar, then, well, you are right where you want to be, apparently.

Me thinking Sam is a better man then you has nothing to do with my aspirations Frank.

Aaron wrote:I'm also willing to admit when I don't know something and if I'm proven wrong, I'm willing to admit that as well. I've seen those traits in Sam during my time communicating with him.

I have not those traits in Frank. In him, I've seen dishonesty and lying.

We all know that to be absolutely true- because some "Executive Order", that Aaron say is "law", says so!

Merely one example Frank.

Terry, the impression I get from your post is that you have no respect for her whatsoever and you think she is so inept that she cannont be a player in national politics.

That is my opinion based on what I've observed.

Yes, I could be wrong in that you've 'discounted' Palin and if I hurt your feelings I'm sorry.

Can you please find it in your heart to forgive me???

So cute!

You are wrong in that I have discounted Palin. I'm the one that pointed out that she has been in the media more than ever, lately.

Inept doesn't describe how I judge Palin.

Tell you what, since you feel compelled to defend her honor, point to one thing she has done that shoes her to be "ept".

Regardless, I also never said she couldn't become a player in national politics. Like I said, 28% of the population thought she was qualified to be president.

The same number of people that want a third Bush term and the return of 8-tracks.

Aaron wrote:Me thinking Sam is a better man then you has nothing to do with my aspirations Frank.

If you only measure of your hero Sam is to compare him to Ziggy, then that speaks volumes about your aspirations to be like Sam. You would do well to think more of yourself than that.

I admitted I was wrong Terry and I've not defended Palin. Other then what I'd like to do to her, I really don't think much OF her and I've never said she is 'ept'.

ziggy wrote:

Aaron wrote:Me thinking Sam is a better man then you has nothing to do with my aspirations Frank.

If you only measure of your hero Sam is to compare him to Ziggy, then that speaks volumes about your aspirations to be like Sam. You would do well to think more of yourself than that.

I'm not comparing Sam to you Frank; I'm saying I think he's a better man then you. And you trying to say I aspire to be like him because I think he is a better man then you is just another example of your deceitfulness, which as I said, is one of the reasons I think he is a better man then you.

Aaron wrote:I'm not comparing Sam to you Frank; I'm saying I think he's a better man then you. And you trying to say I aspire to be like him because I think he is a better man then you is just another example of your deceitfulness, which as I said, is one of the reasons I think he is a better man then you.

I have not denied that Sam is a better man than I am. But I said and say again that your apsiration is to be like Sam- as demonstrated by your more and more nearly lockstep immitation of him. Two years ago here you were able to think for yourself. But you are getting intellectually lazy, and now you rarely have any more substance of thoughts and facts than Sam does. Your primary demonstrated purpose is mostly to piss people off. Sam has taught you that well.

Just because others might agree with me doesn't mean I don't think for myself Frank.

And if my primary purpose was to piss you off, I'd tell you exactly what I think.

As it is, if I make a statement, I provide a link. If I don't then I'm expressing my opinion which, as I said earlier, unlike you, I've come to based on considering all sides of the topic.

Aaron wrote:Just because others might agree with me doesn't mean I don't think for myself Frank.

And if my primary purpose was to piss you off, I'd tell you exactly what I think.

As it is, if I make a statement, I provide a link. If I don't then I'm expressing my opinion which, as I said earlier, unlike you, I've come to based on considering all sides of the topic.

Yeah for Aaron. SamCogar could not have said it better.

No, Sam would have told you you're a pompous, arrorgant piece of shit that don't know you're ass from a hole in the ground...

Or something simillar.



Me, I just know that among other things, you're full of crap Frank. The conversation regarding McGraw proves it. You spouted enough garbage to fill a landfill but not once did you provide a link or any other proof backing up your tripe.

............................. but not once did you provide a link or any other proof ..........................

You are the one making the charge of violation of the law. It is up to you to make the legal case, to show the "proof" that there was even a law to be violated.

It is about the Constitution, about due process and all that.

Constitutionally, when a person is charged with violating a law, the specific law violated must be cited- Chapter, Article and Section. And a penalty for violation must have been provided- in the law.

A "link" to someone or other's opinion does not satisfy that requirement.

It is up to the prosecution, not to the defendant, to make the affirmative case.

Otherwise there is no case for charging a violation of any law, "Executive Order" nor anything else.

I proved there was a law, I proved it applied to him through his representation of a federal agency thus I proved he was in violation of the law. But you can’t accept that so you, as you've often done, whipped out the ole, "If he broke the law then why wasn't he arrested, prosecuted" crap and think that makes him innocent.

We both know why he wasn't prosecuted and it has nothing to do with if he broke a low or not. It’s because he's DM and this is WV and crooks like McGraw never get prosecuted, they get re-elected. Time and time again.

We both also know he broke the law and his own admission that he “no longer hires on contingency fee basis” is proof enough for me.

But even if he wasn't violating a law, which he was, ethically, he was wrong and you know it. He was paying for political donations with no bid contingency fee contracts, you know that’s what he was doing and you know he was wrong. But as you're one of his apologists so you would never admit it.

The fact that you continue to apologize for him makes you just about as bad as he is, in my book Frank.

As for you holier then thou attitude, when you apply it to Don Blankenship and Massey Coal and others you oppose, maybe then you'll have a smidge of credibility. Until then, you're a partisan political apologist hack.

Period!!!

I proved there was a law, I proved it applied to him through his representation of a federal agency thus I proved he was in violation of the law.

You didn't prove anything. All you did was state your opinion. You are entitled to an opinion, but that doesn't make for violation of a law that doesn't even exist.

As for you holier then thou attitude, when you apply it to Don Blankenship and Massey Coal and others you oppose, maybe then you'll have a smidge of credibility.

I don't pretend to be holier than anyone. Just today I turned down your challenge to assert that I was holier than SamCogar even. But if you say Sam is a better man than I am, who am I to say otherwise? I am just Ziggy, warts and all. That you keep trying to make me something else speaks volumes about your insecurities.

Ah, yet another thread to make me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

How is it I can like you all so much and yet you can have such nasty arguments with each other?

btw, Terry....

I called you sexist because your treatment of Palin was unfair. You repeatedly criticized her for not speading what you consider adequate time with her children, yet you never said a peep about Obama's children. You never complained of Biden's decision to take his seat in the Senate immediately after his children lost their mother and baby sister......although the youngest was preschool age.

When this was pointed out to you your tact changed. You began accusing her of using them as campaign props, I suppose because Trig was with her on the campaign trail (she breastfeeds) and her other children frequently accompany her. I have never, ever once, heard you make similar charges against a man running for public office, no matter what the ages of his children. That, in my opinion, is sexist.

How is it I can like you all so much and yet you can have such nasty arguments with each other?

Haven't your kids taught you anything?

We're fighting for your attention, dammit.

I'm not fighting. I'm stating my opinion in most cases and fact on the McGraw thread. I can't help it that Frank's a partisan hack apologist that won't admit he's wrong.

But your attention doesn't hurt though.

Aaron wrote:I can't help it that Frank's a partisan hack apologist that won't admit he's wrong.

That seems to be a common condition 'round these parts.

I called you sexist because your treatment of Palin was unfair. You repeatedly criticized her for not speading what you consider adequate time with her children, yet you never said a peep about Obama's children. You never complained of Biden's decision to take his seat in the Senate immediately after his children lost their mother and baby sister......although the youngest was preschool age.

Neither Obama nor Biden were highlighting their FAMILY VALUES and their "hockey mom" status.

Can't you get that? I didn't go after her because of what she does with her kids. I could care less.

I went after her because she says she is one thing while she does another. What part of being a stay-at-work mom is part of conservative FAMILY VALUES? What part of taking your kids out of school and staking them out in the public spotlight while you use them as campaign props is part of conservative FAMILY VALUES?

That isn't sexist. If either Biden or Obama was running on his FAMILY VALUES, I would have said the same thing.

I also went after her because she slams "wealth redistribution" while holding out both hands for Alaska pork. Does that make me sexist, also?

You are wrong, Steph. Just because I point out someone's hypocrisy doesn't make me a bigot of any kind.