carlfense Posted August 30, 2013 Share Posted August 30, 2013 I would comment on that, but I'm afraid I'd be chided for being off the subject. Commenting in this fashion is changing the subject. You monster. Link to comment
Junior Posted August 30, 2013 Share Posted August 30, 2013 I would comment on that, but I'm afraid I'd be chided for being off the subject. Commenting in this fashion is changing the subject. You monster. 1 Link to comment
tschu Posted August 30, 2013 Share Posted August 30, 2013 I would comment on that, but I'm afraid I'd be chided for being off the subject. Commenting in this fashion is changing the subject. You monster. this Link to comment
Mavric Posted August 30, 2013 Share Posted August 30, 2013 [To answer your question, it has something to do with the law. And this is the point I was making in the first place. Congrats, you finally got there. There's more to enacting a law than simply writing it. You do realize this isn't the out of context quote thread, right? I would comment on that, but I'm afraid I'd be chided for being off the subject. No, I would just apprecaite it if you would actually quote and respond to my entire point, not just picking one thing out of context. Link to comment
Mavric Posted August 30, 2013 Share Posted August 30, 2013 So you're conceding my point, or changing the subject as well? No . . . I'm realizing that you don't seem to have a point at all (or at least that I have no idea what that point is) so I'm trying to steer this somewhere more productive. If that's changing the subject . . . guilty. My point is people like to make grand generalizations that sound good to them but refuse to back them up when called on them. Case in point: What does the ideas some Republicans had 20 years ago have to do with handicapping ObamaCare? Link to comment
Junior Posted August 30, 2013 Share Posted August 30, 2013 [To answer your question, it has something to do with the law. And this is the point I was making in the first place. Congrats, you finally got there. There's more to enacting a law than simply writing it. You do realize this isn't the out of context quote thread, right? I would comment on that, but I'm afraid I'd be chided for being off the subject. No, I would just apprecaite it if you would actually quote and respond to my entire point, not just picking one thing out of context. It's not taken out of context at all. Streamlined to focus on relevant statements, yes, but not out of context in any way. Link to comment
Junior Posted August 30, 2013 Share Posted August 30, 2013 So you're conceding my point, or changing the subject as well? No . . . I'm realizing that you don't seem to have a point at all (or at least that I have no idea what that point is) so I'm trying to steer this somewhere more productive. If that's changing the subject . . . guilty. My point is people like to make grand generalizations that sound good to them but refuse to back them up when called on them. Case in point: What does the ideas some Republicans had 20 years ago have to do with handicapping ObamaCare? I've backed up my statements when asked to. The fact that you refuse to acknowledge that isn't on me. In fact, when I directly respond to a question you ask, you accuse me of trying to change the subject. Talk about a fool's errand. Link to comment
KJ. Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 So you're conceding my point, or changing the subject as well? No . . . I'm realizing that you don't seem to have a point at all (or at least that I have no idea what that point is) so I'm trying to steer this somewhere more productive. If that's changing the subject . . . guilty. To answer your question, it has something to do with the law. But it has nothing to do with the language of the law as passed. You must think that this distinction is important. Why? Carl, is there a reason why you delicately put spaces between all periods in the ellipsis? You're not a fan of the precomposed version? I know the grammar manuals recommend the spaces, but this is a message board man! Have you considered the extra 0.61 seconds you waste typing . . . instead of ...? Just curious. Link to comment
carlfense Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 Carl, is there a reason why you delicately put spaces between all periods in the ellipsis? You're not a fan of the precomposed version? I know the grammar manuals recommend the spaces, but this is a message board man! Have you considered the extra 0.61 seconds you waste typing . . . instead of ...? Just curious. Habit. The proper thing to do would be to reformat my posts so that ellipsis aren't necessary . . . but that would take more time. Link to comment
carlfense Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 Case in point: What does the ideas some Republicans had 20 years ago have to do with handicapping ObamaCare? Now you're changing your point/the subject? Link to comment
Recommended Posts