Apology to the board

U

USFREEDOM911

MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN
I wasn't here when Dixie embarassed himself by trying to claim that an item couldn't be divided in 3 equal parts.
I just thought it was an inside joke and that most of you were just using whatever occured to poke at him.

After coming to the realization that not only is he pig headed, but that he's also a hypocrite and a liar, I now realize what an idiot he is.

He likes to play antics with semantics, gets stuck on minutia that has nothing to do with the matter at hand, and then will attemt to lie, in order to try and retain a semblance of integrity.

Therefore my apology is for not believing in what you guys tried to warn me about. :palm:
 
Dixie has a strong belief that he is right, and is willing to fight to the end of time to prove that he believes it strongly even when all hope is gone.

I like Dixie, he's good people who has never changed an iota of opinion since I have known him. He's a solid social conservative (where we sometimes disagree), but he's also a fiscal conservative. That combination of beliefs is rare, and more often we agree than disagree.
 
Damocles said:
Dixie has a strong belief that he is right, and is willing to fight to the end of time to prove that he believes it strongly even when all hope is gone.

I like Dixie, he's good people who has never changed an iota of opinion since I have known him. He's a solid social conservative (where we sometimes disagree), but he's also a fiscal conservative. That combination of beliefs is rare, and more often we agree than disagree.
Click to expand...

Would that be abouit 2/3 of the time, or more?? :cof1:
 
I really enjoy having Dixie on JPP. I dont agree with him often, and find him to have a lack of integrity when it comes to argueing his points.

He is a great example of someone who believes rather than thinks.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
I wasn't here when Dixie embarassed himself by trying to claim that an item couldn't be divided in 3 equal parts.
I just thought it was an inside joke and that most of you were just using whatever occured to poke at him.

After coming to the realization that not only is he pig headed, but that he's also a hypocrite and a liar, I now realize what an idiot he is.

He likes to play antics with semantics, gets stuck on minutia that has nothing to do with the matter at hand, and then will attemt to lie, in order to try and retain a semblance of integrity.

Therefore my apology is for not believing in what you guys tried to warn me about. :palm:
Click to expand...
Say what you want to about Dixie....around here, he's the life of the party. No one but no one has created as many 500 post threads as Dixie has.
 
Damocles said:
Dixie has a strong belief that he is right, and is willing to fight to the end of time to prove that he believes it strongly even when all hope is gone.

I like Dixie, he's good people who has never changed an iota of opinion since I have known him. He's a solid social conservative (where we sometimes disagree), but he's also a fiscal conservative. That combination of beliefs is rare, and more often we agree than disagree.
Click to expand...
That's why I was seriously....and I do mean SERIOUSLY bummed when he declined to participate in the debate competition. It just won't be the same with out him. Maybe he'll listen to you Damo?
 
Damocles said:
I was hoping. He can argue well.
Click to expand...

DYCDB.gif
 
Damocles said:
Dixie has a strong belief that he is right, and is willing to fight to the end of time to prove that he believes it strongly even when all hope is gone.

I like Dixie, he's good people who has never changed an iota of opinion since I have known him. He's a solid social conservative (where we sometimes disagree), but he's also a fiscal conservative. That combination of beliefs is rare, and more often we agree than disagree.
Click to expand...

Social and fiscal conservatives are a rare combo??? Just about every social conservative I know is both. If by social conservative you mean on the issues of abortion and homosexual marriage. The rarer conservative, at least based on the rather large pool I know, are the ones who self-identify as either one or the other. I even know classical liberal's and libertarian’s who oppose abortion based on the idea of an individual right to life.

The classical conservative believes in smaller government that adherer’s to slow change as opposed to welfare liberal's who push for change along ideological lines. The subset social conservative wishes to put the same kind of restraint of social evolution with regards to governments redefining laws and its undoing laws that protect human life. The subset fiscal conservative stands for just that; fiscal responsibility and wishes for a government that lives within its means and doers not grow itself to an excessive size where it would incur debt. Last is the subset neo-conservative who I think is very rare, though not according to taichi.
 
BTW, for the record. Dixie does an excellent job of arguing his position. He neither uses more adhoms nor acts more stubborn then any of the rest of all y'all. He does take a lot of time and makes a genuine effort to provide an in depth and thoughtful response and or statements of his position...he's as entiled as anyone on here to lob slams when he chooses.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
I wasn't here when Dixie embarassed himself by trying to claim that an item couldn't be divided in 3 equal parts.
I just thought it was an inside joke and that most of you were just using whatever occured to poke at him.

After coming to the realization that not only is he pig headed, but that he's also a hypocrite and a liar, I now realize what an idiot he is.

He likes to play antics with semantics, gets stuck on minutia that has nothing to do with the matter at hand, and then will attemt to lie, in order to try and retain a semblance of integrity.

Therefore my apology is for not believing in what you guys tried to warn me about. :palm:
Click to expand...

trying to claim that an item couldn't be divided in 3 equal parts?

Remember it well....

Just for the sake of accuracy....his claim was that the number 1 could not be divided by 3 equally...in other words, without a remainder....
and it started an argument that went on for months.....became very funny at times....and entertained us for hours upon hours....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top