You're really bordering on whingeing.
I understand that, but you attacked me with childish banter. Debating is one thing, it's how you engage in the debate that matters. I acknowledged it at first as "hysterics", yet you continued with it, and I discounted it as personal attacks.
You seem more concerned with how I say something rather than what I say. Interesting.
No, what common on the left is they resort to personal attacks, something which you fully engaged yourself without thinking about your composed posts.
Let's put this in perspective - sinkspur, and let's be honest, is perhaps one of the most vile posters when it comes to personal attacks - and I'm not speaking as a victim of them, just as a general observation. The attacks on people here who have dared to say anything negative about Harriet Miers have been just terrible - for example, Ann Coulter, the old standby of the conservative movement - is called everything from an anorexic harpie to much, much worse. You can withstand being kicked a little when you're not paying attention when something important is being said.
You're given a chance to take back what you said, as this forum has a built in "firewall" of sorts, but you didn't take that chance obviously. It was only until that point which I defended MY honor as a civil debater on this forum that you went on defense.
I start off civil. When people don't respond to that, then I attack until they DO pay attention. It is instructive however that you're turning this thread into one long complaint about me. I am only concerned about ensuring that it's clear to those reading that the greatness of Ronald Reagan stands the test of time. You're more concerned about whether or not I'm being nice to you.
Ivan
No, I'm not bordering on whingeing [sic]. I'm not even close to whining. I'm merely defending my honor as a civil poster, something you have a slight problem with.
You seem more concerned with how I say something rather than what I say.
Deal with it. I turned the other cheek and you slapped me. I'm not here to be your personal punching bag when you're rage is pent up, just because facts got your hair stood up on end.
The attacks on people here who have dared to say anything negative about Harriet Miers have been just terrible - for example, Ann Coulter, the old standby of the conservative movement - is called everything from an anorexic harpie to much, much worse.
Well, I wouldn't go that far in describing Ann Coulter, but I will say, she has gone off the deep end a long time ago. I lose a certain amount of respect when someone attacks somebody whom I respect and admire. I'm sure you would agree. President Bush hasn't had it easy. His administration was put to the test the moment he stood on the rubble of the WTC.
I start off civil. When people don't respond to that, then I attack until they DO pay attention.
So do I, but you obviously launched into me as if I was the "most vile poster" on this forum.
You can withstand being kicked a little when you're not paying attention when something important is being said.
How can I ignore it, when I'm getting kicked by you in posts directed by you?
It is instructive however that you're turning this thread into one long complaint about me.
Complaint and criticism are two different things. I wasn't complaining about you, which leaves being critical about how you've conducted yourself thus far.
I am only concerned about ensuring that it's clear to those reading that the greatness of Ronald Reagan stands the test of time.
You've obviously concerned yourself with the facts that got in your way.
You're more concerned about whether or not I'm being nice to you.
You shouldn't have to be told to restrain yourself.