General Discussion

krispos42

(49,445 posts)

385. No, stating facts is not speaking the truth

Sun Mar 24, 2013, 10:46 PM

Mar 2013

That's how Faux News gets away with their bullshit; selective facts.

If a person entered this thread and read ONLY YOUR POSTS, they would have NO clue that:

1) The person I was arguing with was also posting repetitive replies
2) The person I was arguing with began posting repetitive replies FIRST

And they would not have known until yesterday that YOU were the person I was exchanging repetitive posts with!

So you from the beginning KNEW that when I stated the person I was arguing with in the Meta thread a) was also posting repetitive replies, and b) initiated the repetition, that I was 100% factually correct in my assessment.

So, since the information you gave would not have given a disinterested 3rd party the complete picture, nor given him or her the hypocrisy of YOU smearing ME over repetitive posting, IT CANNOT BE TRUTH.

So, it's a smear against me, and it certainly wasn't the truth. And you dare to tell ME that I replied to nothing?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

661 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

New details of Newtown shooting prove assault weapons ban is needed [View all] rdharma Mar 2013 OP

There is a problem with Maddow's logic. Jenoch Mar 2013 #1

He did not change out the 30 round magazines rdharma Mar 2013 #2

He didn't empty the mags before changing them out hack89 Mar 2013 #4

"He reloaded more times than Rachel said"....... rdharma Mar 2013 #12

The point is more reloads =/= less danger hack89 Mar 2013 #16

"He only needed 20 bullets" rdharma Mar 2013 #33

He was fucking crazy in case you didn't notice. hack89 Mar 2013 #44

"smaller magazines would not have made a difference" rdharma Mar 2013 #58

I support limits on magazine capacity hack89 Mar 2013 #67

That's the silly game so many of our "pro gun progressives"* play: scream and yell and gnash teeth apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #70

"pro gun progressives"* rdharma Mar 2013 #97

So why not come right out Bay Boy Mar 2013 #105

He would have killed fewer if he had not shot 152 treestar Mar 2013 #104

One bullet almost hit someone outside in the parking lot for crying out loud! VanillaRhapsody Mar 2013 #326

You listen to me and you listen good. lapislzi Mar 2013 #111

+1,000. Very moving. But it's falling on deaf ears: our "RKBA enthusisasts" simply don't care how apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #112

Not only do they just not care, they don't give a flying indepat Mar 2013 #378

Nice story bro hack89 Mar 2013 #117

I am going to have to put you on Ignore. lapislzi Mar 2013 #122

That's one of our "pro gun progressives"* for you: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #124

Bye. nt hack89 Mar 2013 #129

Wow laundry_queen Mar 2013 #281

It was a cheap tactic done to marginalize other opinions and end debate hack89 Mar 2013 #291

Emotional hyperbole? laundry_queen Mar 2013 #292

It was not a parent of a Newtown child I was addressing hack89 Mar 2013 #293

:) Keep posting! laundry_queen Mar 2013 #294

This message was self-deleted by its author thucythucy Mar 2013 #303

That poster loves guns more than life. morningfog Mar 2013 #297

I'll join you in that response.. defacto7 Mar 2013 #269

omg! SammyWinstonJack Mar 2013 #137

The word that comes to mind is "heartless". Seems "pro gun progressives" aren't progressives at all. baldguy Mar 2013 #141

My heart goes out to the children and the parents hack89 Mar 2013 #143

You don't wish to be exposed to the ugly results of your extremist RW political positions. baldguy Mar 2013 #146

Except none of the proposed bans will prevent another Sandy Hook hack89 Mar 2013 #150

Still whining the same RW NRA talking points - but now you're backpedaling. baldguy Mar 2013 #153

I support everything you mention except for an AWB hack89 Mar 2013 #154

Too bad that too many gun nuts will cling to their handguns even more that their assault weapons. baldguy Mar 2013 #156

So why do none of the laws actually remove assault rifles from society if they are so dangerous? hack89 Mar 2013 #157

Because your pals at the NRA and other RW extremists would howl in pain if we confiscted them. baldguy Mar 2013 #162

So the President and Diane Feinstein are scared of the NRA? hack89 Mar 2013 #163

It's not fear. It's recognizing the political realities of dealing with unreasonable extremists. baldguy Mar 2013 #165

This message was self-deleted by its author hack89 Mar 2013 #166

Baldguy that is one of the best thucythucy Mar 2013 #301

The Dem platform supports the right of citizens to own weapons Mojorabbit Mar 2013 #327

I think most people would go for something reasonable... Melon_Lord Mar 2013 #302

what laws are those? Have you helped your congressperson craft such legislation? CTyankee Mar 2013 #344

I dedicate most of my political efforts towards healthcare hack89 Mar 2013 #354

Can you share with us the arguments you used in favor of the background CTyankee Mar 2013 #355

I live in a state with universal background checks hack89 Mar 2013 #356

Do you agree that it is the lack of a) strong federal laws that apply to ALL states and CTyankee Mar 2013 #357

I think that stronger federal laws regarding background checks are required. hack89 Mar 2013 #358

So you don't buy the argument that such a measure is the slippery slope to a national registry? CTyankee Mar 2013 #359

With no record keeping requirements for private sales hack89 Mar 2013 #360

do you publicly espouse this position? I mean with strong 2nd A. people... CTyankee Mar 2013 #361

I have stated in many threads that I support universal background checks hack89 Mar 2013 #362

I don't mean here on DU. I mean in places where your voice would reach CTyankee Mar 2013 #363

I don't post on many other boards hack89 Mar 2013 #364

... SammyWinstonJack Mar 2013 #136

Thank you. It was a difficult day. lapislzi Mar 2013 #148

This message was self-deleted by its author thucythucy Mar 2013 #304

thanks for sharing that - and sharing your time with that parent DrDan Mar 2013 #376

Probably because he actually reads and does his homework. Clames Mar 2013 #113

He changed them out before they were empty. krispos42 Mar 2013 #31

"He left at least one magazines with 15 rounds in it on the floor." rdharma Mar 2013 #59

Don't confuse the Gungeon Host with facts: you'll get a string of "Ibids" in reply. apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #76

I'm still waiting for you to acknowledge that I was right and you were wrong. krispos42 Mar 2013 #88

Good luck with that. Lizzie Poppet Mar 2013 #91

That "RKBA enthusiasts" get so sky-windingly angry about my spot-on sig line apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #94

Baloney. You got taken to town on the facts; posted excuses why you couldn't reply to the facts apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #92

Would semiautomatic rifles fed from detachable magazines still be sold under the new AWB? krispos42 Mar 2013 #95

Baloney. You got taken to town on the facts; posted excuses why you couldn't reply to the facts apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #96

Still can't admit I was right and you were wrong? krispos42 Mar 2013 #99

Now we're back to the "I know you are but what I am?" stage of your typical "debate" strategy... apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #101

So... no. krispos42 Mar 2013 #106

Of course "no," since you were incorrect on the facts, as shown. n/t. apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #108

Okay, show me how Feinstein's proposed AWB... krispos42 Mar 2013 #116

No. That was never a claim made, nor a topic under discussion other than by *you*. apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #118

Yes, it was. krispos42 Mar 2013 #127

*Placeholder* reply for sub-thread stem, re, *Bookmarked* thread for future reference. n/t. apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #131

Simply false. I have repeated the facts of your "Ibid" silliness in that thread all over DU, apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #132

You've been making an ass of yourself all through DU, is what you mean. krispos42 Mar 2013 #171

Ahhh, now the "Ibid King" reverses course and admits what I have stated is the "truth," if only apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #173

again, no matter how you slice it... krispos42 Mar 2013 #178

Nope: no matter how it's "sliced," it's FACT. And you well know it. apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #179

Again, no matter how you slice it you got caught making stuff up in this sub-thread: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #550

Yeah, like I was making up going on vacation? krispos42 Mar 2013 #595

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #579

A new link? krispos42 Mar 2013 #600

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #592

Another repetitive post krispos42 Mar 2013 #602

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #627

Our Gungeon Host* is so, so busted: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #489

No, I'm so so so busted krispos42 Mar 2013 #510

Indeed, you are. Making stuff up then having to desperately back pedal from it is funny stuff. apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #520

Yup, I've backpedaled all right krispos42 Mar 2013 #552

Yup, you have - *REPEATEDLY*. You finally admit it. Link to your getting caught red-handed here: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #557

LOL krispos42 Mar 2013 #618

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #598

Oh noes! I'm nekkid! krispos42 Mar 2013 #620

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #625

Wrong, but worth going over again: the question was your made-up insertion of a matter not apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #135

Our Gungeon Host* has just busted *himself* downthread; check it out folks: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #530

LOL krispos42 Mar 2013 #564

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #569

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #621

LOL, you're just clicking "reply" at random now. krispos42 Mar 2013 #642

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #651

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #639

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #656

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #562

Nope, not the littlest bit krispos42 Mar 2013 #624

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #630

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #650

Get ready for it, folks! This was pretty much the same prelude to the string of "Ibids" apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #109

Message auto-removed Homerj1 Mar 2013 #149

Our Gungeon Host* has just busted *himself* downthread; check it out folks: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #523

Hey, I found a graphic to show your credibility krispos42 Mar 2013 #590

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #597

My God, what a juvenile twit. rl6214 Mar 2013 #611

One would almost think folks were rummaging around in sock drawers... apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #626

Sorry *sport* no Sock here rl6214 Mar 2013 #649

Our Gungeon Host *is* quite juvenile, as shown: he's also a bully, one who has problems telling the apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #658

That must be why your posts outnumber his 3to1, right. rl6214 Mar 2013 #660

You got caught blatantly making stuff up in this sub-thread, and the proof is here: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #547

I got caught having two conversations in two subthreads krispos42 Mar 2013 #593

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #599

ROFL krispos42 Mar 2013 #526

And watch the Gungeon Host get caught up in the tangled web of his own disproved assertions *here*: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #534

Watch out, I might start making repetitive posts! krispos42 Mar 2013 #570

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #576

Our Gungeon Host* has just busted *himself* downthread; check it out: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #500

My favorite denier of reality keeps busting himself krispos42 Mar 2013 #525

You just posted a link to proof of your own mendacity. Smooth move - it doesn't get much easier apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #528

I admit it krispos42 Mar 2013 #560

You were *wrong* on the Feinstein ban: America supports it. DU supports it. And you know it. apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #563

I don't recall ever saying the America or DU didn't support it. krispos42 Mar 2013 #633

You have been out in front against the AWB since Day One; more mendacity. Meanwhile: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #637

And you've been for it, which doesn't disprove my previous post. krispos42 Mar 2013 #643

Oh yes it does - you contradict yourself *AGAIN*. Meantime: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #645

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #561

You should know.. you're doing it. krispos42 Mar 2013 #622

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #631

No, I didn't: that was your Strawman-hijacking of the topic. You simply asked a rhetorical apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #98

Ummm.... krispos42 Mar 2013 #100

Uh-huh. It's spot-on factual recounting of the matter, and you well know it. apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #102

Link? krispos42 Mar 2013 #115

Uh-huh. n/t. apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #120

What's most hilarious is that you are well aware the thread was in Meta, and yet *still* apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #121

What else is in the lost "Meta" thread? krispos42 Mar 2013 #128

So now you are denying you ever posted "Ibid" repeatedly in that thread? Really? apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #130

"Ibid" is the new "yargle bargle blargh" - nt ThoughtCriminal Mar 2013 #144

I'm pointing out that your smoking gun is gone krispos42 Mar 2013 #172

"a whole bunch of alleged "ibids" - "I don't and haven't denied" <---Two bare-faced contradictory apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #174

When the evidence goes away... krispos42 Mar 2013 #180

No, when one states it's "alleged" one states one doesn't KNOW whether the allegation(s) made apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #181

I'm stating for the audience (that is laughing at you)... krispos42 Mar 2013 #186

In other words, you are attempting to DECEIVE the "audience" because you know for a FACT apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #190

I know the facts as you present them are 40% true krispos42 Mar 2013 #196

No, the facts I presented are 100%, even though above you stated they were UNTRUE, mere apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #199

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #565

LOL krispos42 Mar 2013 #636

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #644

Hey, every reply in this thread between us has been initated by YOU, not me. So you can apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #183

Yeah, you smear me, then act all confused that we have a discussion about it krispos42 Mar 2013 #185

What I tell you, folks? The guy who INITIATES the contact with another poster to accuse them of apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #188

Yes, because parallel posting of... krispos42 Mar 2013 #191

Again: YOU initiated this exchange, not I; you have been offered the opportunity to terminate the apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #194

Who insulted whom first? krispos42 Mar 2013 #198

Not that it's revelant to your "stalking" charge, but you actually did, right here: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #200

ROFL krispos42 Mar 2013 #204

Again: YOU initiated this exchange, not I; you have been offered the opportunity to terminate the apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #206

We both have the opportunity;so take it, why don't you? krispos42 Mar 2013 #209

Again, just for the record: krispos42 INITIATED the current exchange; krispos42 has fared badly in apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #213

And here you are ignoring that you jumped on me unprovoked. krispos42 Mar 2013 #215

Yet again: *every* reply in this thread between us has been initated by YOU, not me. So you can apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #220

You argument became invalid as soon as you began posting 2nd and 3rd replies to me krispos42 Mar 2013 #223

Nope: but you go right on believing that if you wish, even AS you continue to post replies... apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #226

I'm sorry, but it's true. krispos42 Mar 2013 #229

Nope: the "argument" was conceded by you long ago, and any DU'er just idly scanning this sub-thread apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #233

And now you're repeating yourself... krispos42 Mar 2013 #236

"hoping that I miss one of your repetitions" - Wow; an open admission of obsession. Talk about apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #248

Are you denying it? krispos42 Mar 2013 #251

Are you denying it? apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #253

I've posted no repeat replies to anything of yours. krispos42 Mar 2013 #278

Still waiting on the person who claims they're being "stalked" to quit replying to my posts. n/t. apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #287

Still waiting for the initiator to apologize and/or walk away krispos42 Mar 2013 #309

Still waiting on the person who claims they're being "stalked" to quit replying to my posts. n/t. apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #313

Quit posting, and I'll be happy to stop replying. krispos42 Mar 2013 #318

Quit posting, and I'll be delighted to stop replying. apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #322

Ah, wrong link krispos42 Mar 2013 #328

1. That reply was to another DU'er, not to you (busted again on a falsehood!), 2. I stated a fact, apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #338

Wow, you finally admitted you posted, unprovoked, to a third party ABOUT ME krispos42 Mar 2013 #349

Wow, you are again indulging in falsehoods: a post of mine to a "third party" has never been the apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #366

Um, yes it has krispos42 Mar 2013 #381

Um, not it hasn't. Simply scrolling up puts paid to this newest diversionary silliness, and your apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #382

Your smear post about me to rdharma is, and has been, my issue krispos42 Mar 2013 #400

1. There was no "smear post" as you did indeed post "Ibid" BY YOUR OWN ADMISSION over & over apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #404

And again, a highly selective series of fact by a repetitive poster with a history of such. krispos42 Mar 2013 #440

Nope: but you go right on believing that if it makes you feel better. Anyone scrolling up and down apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #447

And again, no refutation, just an automatic denial krispos42 Mar 2013 #456

Nope: but you go right on believing that if it makes you feel better. Meantime, BUSTED: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #467

Setting that slicer on ultra-thin now, huh? krispos42 Mar 2013 #487

Nope: but you go right on believing that if it makes you feel better. Meantime, BUSTED: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #493

No, I'm super busted! krispos42 Mar 2013 #516

You have been caught multiple times telling untruths on this thread, then backpedaling. Thanks for apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #519

Your need to believe that is just adorable. krispos42 Mar 2013 #549

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #571

Your stuff is getting old. You must miss meta. CokeMachine Mar 2013 #532

"Don't even bother to respond becaues (Sic) you're off to ignore"* - LOL. apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #584

And, on a side note: did I call it, my fellow DU'ers, or did I CALL IT: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #383

Of course I mention the stalking; you admit to it krispos42 Mar 2013 #402

As there has been no "stalking" and no "admission" to same, you continue to grasp at feeble straws. apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #407

Your plan is to keep denying that Post #132 exists? krispos42 Mar 2013 #442

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #628

No, RIGHT link. See ^^^^^^. But nice try. apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #339

Also, said RIGHT link where replier above *initiates* discussion in this thread: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #341

The smears start from you. krispos42 Mar 2013 #350

1. The truth - and FACTS - cannot by definition be "smears," and that's all I've posted. apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #368

Selective facts are not truth krispos42 Mar 2013 #388

No "selective facts" were offered: you did indeed post "Ibid" over and over and over in a thread apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #390

And... another restatement of selective facts krispos42 Mar 2013 #411

Wrong. As shown. ^^^. n/t. apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #416

Yeah, that's not a rational conclusion from the evidence available. krispos42 Mar 2013 #452

And, on a side note: did I call it, my fellow DU'ers, or did I CALL IT: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #391

I like it when you post repetitively; it bolsters my case enormously. krispos42 Mar 2013 #413

Your "case" has been a lost cause since about the beginning, as shown. But keep posting such apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #415

No, that WAS in the right place. krispos42 Mar 2013 #450

You go right on believing whatever you wish. The facts weigh against you, time & again. And: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #471

But somehow, they don't weigh against you. krispos42 Mar 2013 #492

Whatever that's supposed to mean. Bottom line is, you've been BUSTED: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #513

LOL krispos42 Mar 2013 #541

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #634

So, recap time: 1. You INITIATED contact in this thread to deny doing something you clearly and apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #340

Half-facts without context are not truthful assertions. krispos42 Mar 2013 #351

Again: 1. It is a FACT, not a "smear," that you posted "Ibid" over and over and over again in a apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #369

It is a fact that you started the repetitive posting before I did krispos42 Mar 2013 #389

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #572

Check this out, folks: "they would not have known until yesterday that YOU were the person I was apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #553

Since I've already replied once to the above post krispos42 Mar 2013 #615

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #648

Thanks for conceding that you are not being "stalked," but like to trot that silliness out when the apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #271

Funny how you can't stop replying to me. krispos42 Mar 2013 #277

Still waiting on the person who claims they're being "stalked" to quit replying to my posts. n/t. apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #289

And now you see how people get locked into senseless repetition. krispos42 Mar 2013 #312

Yep. apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #314

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #605

So, so busted: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #486

So, what's it like to be wrong on the Feinstein bill? krispos42 Mar 2013 #508

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #635

*Again*: Not that it's revelant to your "stalking" charge, but you actually did, right here: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #208

And again, my stalker who can't walk away posts 2 replies to a post of mine. krispos42 Mar 2013 #212

Again: YOU initiated this exchange, not I; you have been offered the opportunity to terminate the apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #216

You should just print "Ibid"; it's much faster than copy and paste krispos42 Mar 2013 #217

Again, just for the record: krispos42 INITIATED the current exchange; krispos42 has fared badly in apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #228

Really, "ibid" is very useful when dealing with a repetitive poster. krispos42 Mar 2013 #231

And here you see it folks: the "Ibid King" is talking about how much he cherishes using "Ibid." apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #234

It's a way to be as repetitive as you, but faster. krispos42 Mar 2013 #237

At this point, you've been so totally discredited, largely by your own posts, that I'm just waiting apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #240

That's 3... krispos42 Mar 2013 #244

That's nice. n/t. apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #252

And BTW, for those interested, I just counted: that makes FIFTY-ONE replies from this poster in this apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #254

Ah, you're still beating me with over 60. krispos42 Mar 2013 #258

That's nice. n/t. apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #259

Still waiting on the person who claims they're being "stalked" to quit replying to my posts. n/t. apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #262

Still waiting for the person who claims to not be stalking me to stop double-posting n/t krispos42 Mar 2013 #276

Still waiting on the person who claims they're being "stalked" to quit replying to my posts. n/t. apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #284

Still waiting for my stalker... krispos42 Mar 2013 #307

Still waiting on the person who claims they're being "stalked" to quit replying to my posts. n/t. apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #316

And now you've run out of things to say... krispos42 Mar 2013 #320

And now you're back, still whining about being "stalked" in a sub-thread discussion YOU initiated... apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #324

Says the person who saw me discussing a point of fact with a 3rd party... krispos42 Mar 2013 #330

So, recap time: 1. You INITIATED contact in this thread to deny doing something you clearly and apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #332

Okay, let's recap krispos42 Mar 2013 #342

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #606

For the record, the following statements in Post #330 above are simply FALSE: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #333

Yeah, um, no krispos42 Mar 2013 #343

Yeah, um, here's the actual facts: 1. You did in fact post "Ibid" to me in a now-defunct forum over apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #371

You mean, the selective facts, don't you? krispos42 Mar 2013 #395

No, I mean the FACTS, facts you spent a good deal of this sub-thread first DENYING, but have now apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #397

So, again, no refutation. krispos42 Mar 2013 #419

"Facts hurt, huh?" - LOL...so, so busted: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #435

Add #419 to the list, re: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #436

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #632

And, on a side note: did I call it, my fellow DU'ers, or did I CALL IT: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #398

Senseless repetition krispos42 Mar 2013 #420

If it was "senseless" you wouldn't bother replying to it; in fact, it is NEEDED reminders of an apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #423

Check this out, folks: "they would not have known until yesterday that YOU were the person I was apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #427

And watch the Gungeon Host get caught up in the tangled web of his own disproved assertions *here*: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #536

Having trouble refuting, huh? krispos42 Mar 2013 #573

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #609

Watch our Gungeon Host* get caught up in the tangled web of his own disproved assertions *here*: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #537

Your complete lack of self-awareness is hilarous krispos42 Mar 2013 #575

Post removed Post removed Mar 2013 #587

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #577

Again, just for the record: krispos42 INITIATED the current exchange; krispos42 has fared badly in apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #192

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #568

Dammit, now you've gone and done it krispos42 Mar 2013 #640

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #652

No, what happened is in a sub-thread about the new proposed AWB you went off on a tangent apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #176

More fun with flatly contradictory statements from the Gungeon Host, aka the "Ibid King"*: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #177

Grasping at straws again? krispos42 Mar 2013 #182

They are contradictory. The "evidence" is not "gone" from your memory: you well remember what you apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #184

The evidence is gone, because the admins have hidden it krispos42 Mar 2013 #187

Continued dodging and obfuscation. You stated above my claims were mere "allegations," which apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #189

I'm astonished... krispos42 Mar 2013 #193

You are not astonished, just embarrassed. That's now (ON EDIT) *nineteen* replies to me apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #195

And yet you can't walk away, can you? krispos42 Mar 2013 #203

And here he is again, folks! The poster who complains about "stalking" yet initiated every single apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #205

And here you are again! krispos42 Mar 2013 #207

You're the one whining and crying about "stalking," even though YOU initiated every reply in this apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #210

Did you, or did you not, admit to denigrating me throughout GD? krispos42 Mar 2013 #214

Nope: telling the facts about a poster's past posting behavior is hardly "denigrating" them... apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #218

Well, *A* fact, out of context, which makes it a lie krispos42 Mar 2013 #221

Nope: you started the exchange in this sub-thread, and when you got taken to town on the facts apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #224

You lost the argument when you went over to multiple replies to a single post krispos42 Mar 2013 #227

Nope: the "argument" was conceded by you long ago, and any DU'er just idly scanning this sub-thread apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #232

Right... krispos42 Mar 2013 #235

At this point, you've been so totally discredited, largely by your own posts, that I'm just waiting apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #238

You mean this post? krispos42 Mar 2013 #242

You *did* deny it, but have now reversed course in your colossal walkback. But keep going. apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #246

You mean THIS walkback? krispos42 Mar 2013 #249

There was no "walkback" there whatsoever, of course. To the rest of DU: the text krispos42 apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #256

No shit, sherlock. krispos42 Mar 2013 #260

Still waiting on the person who claims they're being "stalked" to quit replying to my posts. n/t. apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #261

Still waiting for my stalker to apologize for unprovoked smearing. n/t krispos42 Mar 2013 #265

1. There was no "smearing" as you did indeed post "Ibid" BY YOUR OWN ADMISSION over & over apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #268

Half-truths that deceive is a smear. krispos42 Mar 2013 #274

It was 100% truth, one you first denied but then back-tracked and now admit; there was no "smear." apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #285

Scroll up, man. Not only did I never deny it, I admitted to it early our exchange. krispos42 Mar 2013 #308

So, recap time: 1. You INITIATED contact in this thread to deny doing something you clearly and apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #337

If I'm so desperate for the last word, why do you post 2:1 to me? n/t krispos42 Mar 2013 #348

If I'm so desperate for the last word, why you initiate posts to me AT ALL? n/t. apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #372

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^*Besides Which*^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #373

If your NOT so desperate for the last word, why do you keep replying? krispos42 Mar 2013 #396

If your NOT so desperate for the last word, why do you keep replying? apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #401

You talked about me before I talked TO or ABOUT you. krispos42 Mar 2013 #437

If your NOT so desperate for the last word, why do you keep replying? apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #443

You still think you have something? krispos42 Mar 2013 #470

You still think you're getting away with peddling that mendacious bilge? LOL: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #601

And, in the meantime...So, so busted: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #455

A repetitive post to a repetitive post? krispos42 Mar 2013 #466

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #603

Check this out, folks: "they would not have known until yesterday that YOU were the person I was apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #654

Check this out, folks: "they would not have known until yesterday that YOU were the person I was apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #430

My accuser, the "you don't have to post NRA talking points" repeater... krispos42 Mar 2013 #438

You have been busted point-blank - *repeatedly* - posting things you then have to "walk back," apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #451

Man, you're slicing the baloney really thin... but it's still baloney. krispos42 Mar 2013 #461

Your denials and subsequent repeated back-trackings speak for themselves: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #464

Unlike you, I deny nothing. krispos42 Mar 2013 #483

Oh yes you have, *repeatedly*: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #485

No, I haven't krispos42 Mar 2013 #507

Oh yes you have, *repeatedly*: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #517

What was your role in the Meta thread again? krispos42 Mar 2013 #544

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #589

An offer is and has been on the table for some time: you cease initiating posts to me, and I will apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #374

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^*Besides Which*^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #375

And my counter-offer is that you apologize and walk away. krispos42 Mar 2013 #399

Your counter-offer is rejected: stop replying to me, and I'll stop replying to you. You INITIATED apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #403

Sure, just as soon as you promise to end your smear campaign... krispos42 Mar 2013 #439

Your counter-offer is rejected: stop replying to me, and I'll stop replying to you. You INITIATED apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #441

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #629

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #613

Again, just for the record: krispos42 INITIATED the current exchange; krispos42 has fared badly in apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #211

You could just put me on "ignore" krispos42 Mar 2013 #219

You go right ahead and put me on *ignore*: myself, I find it laughable how you tie yourself up in apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #222

Not as funny as you krispos42 Mar 2013 #225

Uh-huh. n/t. apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #230

At this point, you've been so totally discredited, largely by your own posts, that I'm just waiting apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #239

Really, try "ibid", krispos42 Mar 2013 #243

That's your Schtick, not mine. Still waiting for final reply to me from a poster who claims he's apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #245

Still waiting for the person smearing me to walk away krispos42 Mar 2013 #247

Still waiting on the person who claims they're being "stalked" to quit replying to my posts... apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #250

Repetition #3 krispos42 Mar 2013 #280

Still waiting on the person who claims they're being "stalked" to quit replying to my posts. n/t. apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #288

So my stalker gets the first and last word? krispos42 Mar 2013 #310

Still waiting on the person who claims they're being "stalked" to quit replying to my posts. n/t. apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #317

Avoidence, denial, hypocritical behavior, no apology. krispos42 Mar 2013 #321

Still waiting on the person who claims they're being "stalked" to quit replying to my posts. n/t. apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #325

I'd be happy to stop posting, just as soon as you apologize for smearing me in this thread and other krispos42 Mar 2013 #331

So, recap time: 1. You INITIATED contact in this thread to deny doing something you clearly and apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #335

You can apologize at any time, you know. krispos42 Mar 2013 #346

Stating facts is simply speaking the truth, so there is nothing for me to apologize for. NOTHING. apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #367

No, stating facts is not speaking the truth krispos42 Mar 2013 #385

"No, stating facts is not speaking the truth" <---There you have it folks, RIGHT THERE. apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #386

Thanks for admitting I'm right krispos42 Mar 2013 #408

Thanks for admitting I'm right apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #414

Well, you've ignored a hell of a lot of them, I'll give you that. krispos42 Mar 2013 #448

False, #1-4. Further, you've been caught *AGAIN* making stuff up, and having to backtrack: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #460

Okay, if they're false, then prove it so. krispos42 Mar 2013 #480

Asked & answered, *ALL* (scroll ^ & down). Then there's this: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #482

You can't refute them! You can't refute them! krispos42 Mar 2013 #501

Watch our Gungeon Host* Spin! Spin! Spin! And get caught up in his own tangled web of mendacity: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #538

LOL krispos42 Mar 2013 #581

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #647

And, on a side note: did I call it, my fellow DU'ers, or did I CALL IT: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #387

Man, a non-reply reply AGAIN krispos42 Mar 2013 #410

I have no interest in "ending" a conversation I didn't initiate; you're the one whining about apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #412

You talked about me before I talked to or about you. krispos42 Mar 2013 #446

Not gonna happen. You initiated this exchange by posting, unsolicited, to me. You may terminate the apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #449

The fact remains that you talked about me before I talked to or about you. krispos42 Mar 2013 #459

The fact remains that you have initiated every single reply between us in this thread, all the while apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #462

You initiated the discussion of my (and your) posting habits. krispos42 Mar 2013 #481

The fact remains that you have initiated every single reply between us in this thread, all the while apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #484

You chose to smear me to rdharma krispos42 Mar 2013 #504

There was no "smear post" as you did indeed post "Ibid" BY YOUR OWN ADMISSION over & over apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #506

Yeah, it was krispos42 Mar 2013 #539

No, it wasn't. I failed to mention nothing; you, on the other hand, even denied posting "Ibid" apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #545

Yeah, you did. krispos42 Mar 2013 #585

Nope: you did indeed post "Ibid" over and over and over again in that thread, and denied doing so apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #657

There was no "smearing" as you did indeed post "Ibid" BY YOUR OWN ADMISSION over & over apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #511

Unless you give the truth, it's a smear. krispos42 Mar 2013 #540

The truth was given - and you denied it. Then backtracked. Then kept making stuff up. Then, here: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #582

Check this out, folks: "they would not have known until yesterday that YOU were the person I was apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #421

So, so busted: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #433

For the record, the following statements in Post #331 above are simply FALSE: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #336

Dude, get a grip krispos42 Mar 2013 #347

Now it's double-down time on the falsehoods: "the ibid argument was with SOMEBODY ELSE." apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #365

I think it's pretty clear that you've put far more stock into the "ibid" subthread than I have. krispos42 Mar 2013 #379

Now, yet another backtrack; another admission of falsehoods retracted; yet once more a laughable apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #380

Once again a no-response response krispos42 Mar 2013 #405

And, on a side note: did I call it, my fellow DU'ers, or did I CALL IT: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #384

Yup, I'm still noting that your stalking is stalking. krispos42 Mar 2013 #406

Yup, I'm still noting that you have INITIATED every single reply in this sub-thread, and continue to apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #409

And you keep whining about how innocent you are... krispos42 Mar 2013 #445

Yup, I'm still noting that you have INITIATED every single reply in this sub-thread, and continue to apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #453

So you talked about me, unprovoked, first... krispos42 Mar 2013 #463

*Still* noting that you have INITIATED every single reply in this sub-thread to me, and continue to apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #469

I can't reply to you unless you reply to me krispos42 Mar 2013 #490

I'm not the one whining about "stalking" - you are. Even though *you* INITIATED every single reply apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #495

No, you're the one stalking. krispos42 Mar 2013 #518

And, in the meantime...So, so busted: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #454

You need to learn how to format things to make them legible krispos42 Mar 2013 #465

You go right on believing that you can't read it if it makes you feel better. Meantime, BUSTED: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #468

Oh, I can read it krispos42 Mar 2013 #488

Then if you can read it, you know your credibility has been reduced to ZERO on DU, and by your own apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #498

You're wearing your mirrored sunglasses backwards krispos42 Mar 2013 #522

Nope: but you go right on believing that if it makes you feel better. Meantime, BUSTED: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #527

Truth always makes me better krispos42 Mar 2013 #559

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #588

I'll refer you to my other answer n/t krispos42 Mar 2013 #473

I'll refer you HERE: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #478

To the thread... krispos42 Mar 2013 #497

I refer you again to the post where your credibility has been reduced to ZERO, and by your own hand: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #503

Yeah, no. krispos42 Mar 2013 #529

Check this out, folks: "they would not have known until yesterday that YOU were the person I was apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #429

Another attempt to get 2 last words? krispos42 Mar 2013 #444

An offer is and has been on the table for some time: you cease initiating posts to me, and I will apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #457

As you are the one that posted negatively about me, first and unprovoked... krispos42 Mar 2013 #472

An offer is and has been on the table for some time: you cease initiating posts to me, and I will apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #474

All you have to do stop complaining about me replying to you... krispos42 Mar 2013 #494

And, in the meantime...So, so busted: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #475

So not busted krispos42 Mar 2013 #496

Yes, completely busted. You must think the rest of DU can't read, or know how to click a link: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #509

Oh, I'm counting on them being able to read. krispos42 Mar 2013 #535

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #607

And, in the meantime...So, so busted: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #458

Golly gee, another repetitive post! krispos42 Mar 2013 #476

And, in the meantime...So, so busted: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #479

Should you really be drawing attention to your repetitive nature? krispos42 Mar 2013 #499

And, in the meantime...So, so busted: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #505

I like that you post repetitively krispos42 Mar 2013 #531

Watch our Gungeon Host* Spin! Spin! Spin! And get caught up in his own tangled web of mendacity: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #542

You mean watch you make a fool out of yourself? krispos42 Mar 2013 #583

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #596

Check this out, folks: "they would not have known until yesterday that YOU were the person I was apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #431

And watch the Gungeon Host get caught up in the tangled web of his own disproved assertions *here*: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #533

Says the self-righteous crusader against repetitive posts? krispos42 Mar 2013 #567

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #578

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #580

And watch the Gungeon Host get caught up in the tangled web of his own disproved assertions *here*: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #554

Yup, here I am all tangled krispos42 Mar 2013 #617

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #646

1. There was no "smearing" as you did indeed post "Ibid" BY YOUR OWN ADMISSION over & over apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #272

Well, then if there was no smearing, and nothing you want to stick to me... krispos42 Mar 2013 #279

Still waiting on the person who claims they're being "stalked" to quit replying to my posts. n/t. apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #286

And watch the Gungeon Host get caught up in the tangled web of his own disproved assertions *here*: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #524

Wait... disproved assertions? krispos42 Mar 2013 #556

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #566

Oh, come on, answer the question! n/t krispos42 Mar 2013 #638

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #594

I'll try again. krispos42 Mar 2013 #255

*Still* waiting on the person who claims they're being "stalked" to quit replying to my posts... apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #257

Oh, not all night. krispos42 Mar 2013 #263

*Still* waiting on the person who claims they're being "stalked" to quit replying to my posts. n/t. apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #264

We'll pick this up later. Have a good night n/t krispos42 Mar 2013 #266

On Edit: you know what, on second thought, why the *hell* do I care if you continue to make a fool apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #270

Because you have yet to apologize to me for smearing my name. krispos42 Mar 2013 #273

Your name was not "smeared": you did indeed post "Ibid" over and over and over again in that thread apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #283

In a dialogue that was not initiated by me. krispos42 Mar 2013 #306

"But I'll be happy to re-engage during the daytime" <--- Right here, my fellow DU'ers. The same apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #267

You admit to stalking me, so calling you a stalker both reasonable and accurate krispos42 Mar 2013 #275

No, I did not. You started whining about "stalking" even though every reply in this thread was apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #282

Selective half-truths are lies. And your 3rd post in this thread was an unprovoked half-truth krispos42 Mar 2013 #305

Still waiting on the person who claims they're being "stalked" to quit replying to my posts. n/t. apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #315

Still waiting for the critic of repetitive posting to chastise himself. krispos42 Mar 2013 #319

Still waiting for the poster who INITIATED this sub-thread then started whining about "stalking" apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #323

If only I was asking for an apology for imagined offenses. krispos42 Mar 2013 #329

So, recap time: 1. You INITIATED contact in this thread to deny doing something you clearly and apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #334

How do you get a typo on a copy-and-paste? krispos42 Mar 2013 #345

An offer is and has been on the table for some time: you cease initiating posts to me, and I will apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #370

I have been, and will continue to, challenge your unprovoked smear against me krispos42 Mar 2013 #392

1. There was no "smearing" as you did indeed post "Ibid" BY YOUR OWN ADMISSION over & over apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #393

Factually incorrect, as usual. krispos42 Mar 2013 #417

Nope, quite correct, as usual, as shown^^^^^^^. Scrolling up does the trick for 99.99% of DU'ers. apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #424

Check this out, folks: "they would not have known until yesterday that YOU were the person I was apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #425

And now, embarrasingly *busted* in this very thread, doing your usual thing #425^^^ apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #426

And, on a side note: did I call it, my fellow DU'ers, or did I CALL IT: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #394

I think we're alone in this thread. krispos42 Mar 2013 #418

Of course we are: why would the rest of DU be interested in this? apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #422

LOL!!! Dr Fate Mar 2013 #608

So, so busted: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #434

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #641

Addendum: *Placeholder* reply for Bookmarked thread, re: future reference. n/t. apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #134

Post removed Post removed Mar 2013 #655

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #623

Quick! There's still time to "self-delete" your post *here*, to avoid embarrassment down-thread: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #428

So, so busted: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #432

More avoidance. krispos42 Mar 2013 #512

More avoidance: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #515

*gasp* krispos42 Mar 2013 #543

You got caught blatantly making stuff up, and the proof is here: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #548

You're caught in rank hypocracy krispos42 Mar 2013 #604

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #610

Nope: you're *caught* in "rank hypocracy" (Sic); plus repeated falsehoods, and making stuff up: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #612

Check this out, folks: "they would not have known until yesterday that YOU were the person I was apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #551

On March 15th, I did not mention the Feinstein discussion was repetitive krispos42 Mar 2013 #614

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #616

Hard to twist & explain your plainly posted words with reams of obfuscation. It's not working. n/t apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #619

Check this out, folks: "they would not have known until yesterday that YOU were the person I was apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #653

Our good friend the Gungeon Host* has made a major boo-boo in this thread, and busted himself: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #491

No, I made a super-major boo-boo! krispos42 Mar 2013 #514

You got caught blatantly making stuff up, and the proof is here: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #521

I got caught admitting to having two conversations in a subthread... krispos42 Mar 2013 #555

You got caught blatantly making stuff up, and the proof is here: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #558

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #574

You got caught blatantly making stuff up, and the proof is here: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #546

Oooo, an escalation krispos42 Mar 2013 #586

*Exposure* of sheer, brazen dishonesty doesn't get any clearer than this, my fellow DU'ers: apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #591

"Probably" isn't a fact. sylvi Mar 2013 #661

How about the "Hartford Courant"? krispos42 Mar 2013 #89

"Questions?" rdharma Mar 2013 #168

Link? n/t krispos42 Mar 2013 #170

Link rdharma Mar 2013 #175

You appear to have a reading comprehension problem. Read the post again. Jenoch Mar 2013 #107

The deniers have floated that one. lapislzi Mar 2013 #123

At least he was intelligent. If a gun is going to jam it will be in the last two or three rounds. CosmicDustBunny Mar 2013 #61

Lanza may have been intelligent Jenoch Mar 2013 #110

You lost me. I didn't read or hear anything to imply otherwise. Did I miss something? CosmicDustBunny Mar 2013 #159

Maddow used simple math to make a point Jenoch Mar 2013 #167

So, your issue is that Lanza wasn't able to kill even more children? baldguy Mar 2013 #125

That's ridiculous and insulting. Of course, Jenoch Mar 2013 #133

What's ridiculous and insulting is that no matter how many thousands of Americans are murdered baldguy Mar 2013 #138

Belittle? Jenoch Mar 2013 #139

I stand by my words, especially given your response. baldguy Mar 2013 #140

I stand by my words, which you seem to have confused with another post. Jenoch Mar 2013 #142

Well, you are waddling around in that duck suit, making those quacking noises. baldguy Mar 2013 #147

22 rounds is still more than double 10, logic is good. morningfog Mar 2013 #296

I was wrong when I used the nujmbers 7 or 8. Jenoch Mar 2013 #299

Your point is full of suspect fail. morningfog Mar 2013 #300

"...thanks to the expiraton of Dianne Feinstein�s law in 2004" Peter cotton Mar 2013 #3

Seung-Hui Cho reloaded well over a dozen times at Va Tech hack89 Mar 2013 #5

It's worth noting that Cho's handguns had 10 round magazines. Peter cotton Mar 2013 #7

9mm Glock 19s have a 15 round mag hack89 Mar 2013 #8

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe Cho was using Peter cotton Mar 2013 #10

Not really sure - you could be right. nt hack89 Mar 2013 #11

Two pistols Crepuscular Mar 2013 #40

That explains it. Peter cotton Mar 2013 #93

He was using a mix between the Glock and Walther. Clames Mar 2013 #114

Yes Glock 19's standard mag is 15 rds ..... oldhippie Mar 2013 #39

Then let's ban semi-autos, including handguns. Hoyt Mar 2013 #82

Good luck with that. Peter cotton Mar 2013 #90

Message auto-removed Homerj1 Mar 2013 #151

Hey, Australians did it in 1996, and they are a lot tougher than our gun cultists. Hoyt Mar 2013 #169

Obviously the attempt to pass the AWB is the first step to banning all semi-automatics ... spin Mar 2013 #377

Talking points from the NRA? rdharma Mar 2013 #18

Just inconvenient facts. hack89 Mar 2013 #32

Maybe, but it doesn't mean that gun deaths can't be treestar Mar 2013 #103

If a law wouldn't have prevented Va Tech hack89 Mar 2013 #119

Nothing can stop mass shootings entirely treestar Mar 2013 #158

How? hack89 Mar 2013 #160

Lets not forget that his gun was not legally an assault weapon hack89 Mar 2013 #161

Flawed assumption Crepuscular Mar 2013 #6

So you are saying we need to get rid of all guns? HangOnKids Mar 2013 #14

Well, it is the logically consistent final answer sir pball Mar 2013 #26

No Crepuscular Mar 2013 #35

I Know NO Such Thing HangOnKids Mar 2013 #48

"changing magazines adds a significant amount of time" rdharma Mar 2013 #27

changing magazines adds a significant amount of time? Crepuscular Mar 2013 #38

The responses in this thread crack me up. Robb Mar 2013 #9

I don't own guns for self defense hack89 Mar 2013 #13

One would be more inclined to conserve ammo, and not fire indiscriminately, SayWut Mar 2013 #23

Murder sprees and self defense aren't the same. Peter cotton Mar 2013 #24

"gun cuddlers believe they can't defend themselves without them" rdharma Mar 2013 #47

The strawman in your post cracks me up. Lizzie Poppet Mar 2013 #68

Yep, that and attacking a prominent progressive voice on television while they are at it. apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #72

This message was self-deleted by its author pipoman Mar 2013 #502

Message auto-removed ChineseJew Mar 2013 #15

LOL! HangOnKids Mar 2013 #17

Message auto-removed ChineseJew Mar 2013 #22

Your Post HangOnKids Mar 2013 #56

Message auto-removed ChineseJew Mar 2013 #71

Why are you asking me? HangOnKids Mar 2013 #73

Message auto-removed ChineseJew Mar 2013 #77

Sorry Dude I Am Not Becoming Defensive HangOnKids Mar 2013 #78

Looks like the gun nutters are calling up "backup"! nt rdharma Mar 2013 #28

Yep, they coordinate these swarms via PM's, I happen to know that for a fact. Looks like MIRT apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #126

Do you obsessively nitpick any and all sincere proposals for reducing gun violence? maxsolomon Mar 2013 #20

Message auto-removed ChineseJew Mar 2013 #29

Why would it be bad for Dr. Jill Biden to have a gun? ornotna Mar 2013 #34

Message auto-removed ChineseJew Mar 2013 #37

The average male gun owner in America has 6.9 guns. I read that somewhere recently. maxsolomon Mar 2013 #43

Message auto-removed ChineseJew Mar 2013 #55

I live the logic some here use nadinbrzezinski Mar 2013 #19

"it physically takes three seconds to change that magazine" rdharma Mar 2013 #30

Message auto-removed ChineseJew Mar 2013 #36

What do you shoot competitively? rdharma Mar 2013 #53

Thankfully the vast majority of shooters nadinbrzezinski Mar 2013 #41

I'd call that on the (slightly) high side of average, myself. Lizzie Poppet Mar 2013 #66

Logic? Crepuscular Mar 2013 #46

Yes, we are gun owners nadinbrzezinski Mar 2013 #49

Son? Excuse me if I don't call you Mom. Crepuscular Mar 2013 #51

So you'd rather they have drums (which have a tendency to jam) nadinbrzezinski Mar 2013 #74

Is Matronizing a word? Crepuscular Mar 2013 #79

Whatever dude nadinbrzezinski Mar 2013 #85

Ignore away, probably better if you don't want to look foolish. Crepuscular Mar 2013 #86

Message auto-removed Homerj1 Mar 2013 #152

But he was switching, that *is* the point nadinbrzezinski Mar 2013 #164

"It's not time consuming or difficult." rdharma Mar 2013 #50

Reading comprehension is a valuable talent Crepuscular Mar 2013 #54

"I said it's neither time consuming or difficult" rdharma Mar 2013 #57

Thank you. n/t. MoclipsHumptulips Mar 2013 #145

Perhaps I am naive but in my mind there is another advantage to small capacity magazines. left is right Mar 2013 #352

One shot every two seconds WilliamPitt Mar 2013 #21

I can't even fathom the terror those little children and adults felt premium Mar 2013 #25

I believe the report also said that... Tommy_Carcetti Mar 2013 #42

AWB doesn't address rate of fire One_Life_To_Give Mar 2013 #45

I suspect Crepuscular Mar 2013 #60

"kill 20 children" rdharma Mar 2013 #62

Not too good at reading, eh? Crepuscular Mar 2013 #63

"number of children that Lanza killed" rdharma Mar 2013 #64

OK, 26. dairydog91 Mar 2013 #81

"You can shoot glass with any gun" rdharma Mar 2013 #87

Message auto-removed ChineseJew Mar 2013 #75

By leaving off the "semi- auto". Works for H&k, so we're good with it. nt jmg257 Mar 2013 #83

Read it again Crepuscular Mar 2013 #84

Did Lanza buy the ammunition or did he also take that from his mother? HereSince1628 Mar 2013 #52

Unfortunately, the AWB doesn't address a gun's rate of fire. That could be a cool law. Recursion Mar 2013 #65

Kick, Rec. apocalypsehow Mar 2013 #69

The AR-15 used would not have been banned under the 1994 AWB. NutmegYankee Mar 2013 #80

Check a dictionary... Melon_Lord Mar 2013 #155

just curious backwoodsbob Mar 2013 #197

"high capacity mag prove the need for an assault weapon ban?" rdharma Mar 2013 #201

Any more details come out about his mental state? customerserviceguy Mar 2013 #202

If a shooter knows they won't have to reload as much Politicalboi Mar 2013 #241

The only reason Loughner may have fumbled and dropped that magazine was because... LAGC Mar 2013 #311

I still can't believe that people have the audacity to post 'they are sorry likesmountains 52 Mar 2013 #290

They don't want you to laundry_queen Mar 2013 #295

Some gun nuts love guns for than life. morningfog Mar 2013 #298

How about if we just keep firearms away from kids with emotional disorders? geckosfeet Mar 2013 #353

Michael Moore hinted that someone might be about to leak the crime scene photos KamaAina Mar 2013 #477

I thought CT had an assault weapons ban in place when this shooting happened sunwyn Mar 2013 #659