What trick Charles? Just another way to duck the issue and question?
I should also point out the obvious since you took it upon yourself to Ping Jim...
Democrats and liberals get massively upset when conservatives bring up past statements and positions on issues when they become relavant. They then attempt to put blame on their opponents.
Charles gets massively upset when I bring up his past statements and positions on issues when they become relavant. Note complaints over supposed ‘rules violations’ made on this very thread. Notice also the attempt to ‘blame’ me on any number of things so far.
I welcome people to look up my past statements on positions and issues and my past post history shows me making that very comment MANY times.
One of these things is not like teh other.
You may have had pure motives, although given your demeanor I doubt that. But the rules of this forum are that you don't post anything defending Romney. Since that rule was established, I have followed it meticulously. There is no way I could answer your question without defending my beliefs about Romney in 2008, which would violate the rules.
And if you didn't report it, I'm sure someone would. As I do not support Romney in any way, shape or form, it would really suck to get banned for him.
Democrats and liberals get massively upset when conservatives bring up past statements and positions on issues when they become relavant.
That is not a trait unique to liberals and democrats. Cain supporters get pretty upset with me if I quote something Cain said that isn't the "latest" clarification on a subject. Or put in a more positive light, people will also get upset if they have denounced a prior opinion and others falsely accuse them of still holding that position.
Charles gets massively upset when I bring up his past statements and positions on issues when they become relavant
Actually, I have not gotten upset at all over you bringing up my past statements. I even asked you to link to them so everybody could read them, and offered my entire posting history to the thread. I have plenty to regret, but nothing to hide. I don't hide my identity, and know that the web is forever.
Note complaints over supposed ‘rules violations’ made on this very thread
That wasn't a complaint. I was NOT complaining about the rules put in place regarding Romney. I was EXPLAINING to you why I could not answer your question. I pinged Jim because they are his rules, so if you didn't like them, you could take it up with him, and so if someone later suggested I was breaking the rules, Jim would already be aware of the conversation and see that I was studious in avoiding the appearance of violating the rules he has established. Please don't suggest I complained about the rules -- I have not.
Notice also the attempt to ‘blame’ me on any number of things so far.
I preemptively blamed you for trying to get me in trouble. I apologize, because now that I have had some sleep, I once again know that I am not a mindreader, and would not know your motives. I cannot answer your question, and I have explained why. You are wrong that it has anything to do with me being upset, or that I complained about the rules or that I cite the rules to save me from answering your question.
I welcome people to look up my past statements on positions and issues and my past post history shows me making that very comment MANY times
I'm not sure what "comment" you are refering to here, so I cannot look up to see, nor do I think anything I've said would have any bearing on any prediliction on your part to make a comment repeatedly.