I'm sorry, but when someone says something like that, I'm going to say something back. It's not an attempt to troll or whatever you want to call it, I just really think that lahi's sort of attitude should be called out.

No, it wasn't. I just hate it when he does that and I'm not going to keep my mouth shut.

Then realize you're no better than him and we'll all be one happy family.

you actually had a problem with people saying things like that to lahi or him saying those things, you would have been talking to TFE (sorry, hon) in the Cath/Mormon thread as well, lahi too.

I think the difference is that you are using arguments to back yourself up whereas Rusty has a tendency to just kinda say GTFO.

Not that I'm taking sides here, I have no idea where Rusty's reputation comes from, I've been gone for a while.

I think the difference is that you are using arguments to back yourself up whereas Rusty has a tendency to just kinda say GTFO.

Not that I'm taking sides here, I have no idea where Rusty's reputation comes from, I've been gone for a while.

Um, it did read like that.



How does this mean anything other than "Southern historians = bitter racists, Northern historians = fair and balanced"?

I don't know why Rusty is immune to the rules about spam.

When he jumps into a conversation to add nothing to it other than a facepalm, whether literal or otherwise, it's spam.

And he does it constantly.

Have we not been arguing about this for two pages?

Okay, PERFECT example. It's incredibly hard to come up with any intelligent response to something so stupid, something that annoys me so much that I cannot come up with a response to it.

3. NO SPAM.

Spam includes:

b. Writing posts without meaning.

d. Writing posts like "I agree" that do not contribute to the conversation.

The exact definition of spam is not limited to the above, and is to be determined by the admins and moderators.

Okay, PERFECT example. It's incredibly hard to come up with any intelligent response to something so stupid, something that annoys me so much that I cannot come up with a response to it.

Your arrogance knows no bounds.

Coupled with your ignorance, you truly are a dangerous foe.

TFE, the reason I'm not jumping onto you is twofold: 1) You seem to have a purpose here other than causing drama. 2) You're funny. 3) You might make snide remarks, but you do so in the context of more robust, substantial debate. 4?) You don't appear to take the internet too personally.

I think the way history looks upon Lincoln suggests he wasn't a tyrant. History tends to be unforgiving to tyrants. Then again, most tyrants don't have something like the Civil War to offset their bad image. We do tend to think of Lincoln as a better man than he actually was... for example, he was a racist, but most people tend to sweep this fact under the rug because he did think slavery is wrong and he freed the slaves. Still, I think if he were a bad leader, he'd be remembered as such.

- Kef

for example, he was a racist, but most people tend to sweep this fact under the rug because he did think slavery is wrong and he freed the slaves