Sure.

;;; You now concede you should have said something else (you do realize that “rules made up against the law” is the opposite of a law right? against and opposite are synonyms) in your original sentence, which is all that I’ve wanted.;;;

That is not all you said.
You started with personal attacks claiming the supposed “frequency ” with which I am supposedly wrong when the examples you gave did not show my main points to be wrong.
And “getting me” on details, did not prove me wrong in the main points.

;;; (I’m still not sure why you told me you didn’t say the word laws, to be clear I don’t think you’ve been deliberately making things up.;;;

I truly thought I had not said the word law. I am sorry for that.

;;; I think you don’t know what you’re talking about. But that doesn’t explain how you didn’t know what you said.);;;

I say a lot of things on many blogs, it’s hard to remember every detail on everything I have ever posted.

I just knew I had not quoted any ‘specific’ law that I had claimed to exist when it didn’t so I thought I had not said “laws”, even in general.

;;;and that’s really all that I wanted here. You are fully entitled to believe Rubashkin was justified in not checking his employees status because if he had the libs would have harassed him. The fact that this doesn’t actually mitigate the immigration charges that have been made against him (Agriprocessors did ask their employees about their status and no one suggests otherwise) makes that a bizarre claim, but I have neither the time nor the patience to explain that to you.;;;;

That still shows liberal anti business bias and
in this case possible antisemitism because I have never heard of an illegal alien who employeed other illegals who was ever charged with that crime.

They get to sneak in here and undercut legtitimate businesses and when the legitiamte busineses are taxed to death and with artificially inflated “minimum wage” laws many businesses are forced to hire illegals or go out of business.

Minimum wages laws cause problems like this and this I know from personal experience since I was once fired, because of minimum wage laws.

;;;; But again, in the future, don’t claim there are laws about something unless you actually know those laws exist. It will save both of us a lot of time and agrievation.;;;

Fine, and you should stick to the subject.

If you want to tell me I am wrong about something you should do it exactky the say way you would with someone you cared about.

Also you should not bring in other issues like “you always ” this or that.
Or used name calling “inane” as it totally obliterates the message you are trying to convey.

You attract and convince more people, with sweet things (and pleasant attitudes), then with foul ones

:::It’s also fine that you didn’t keep checking an old article, but before accusing me of not responding here, why didn’t you check to see if I had? Wouldn’t that have made sense?;;;

You are right about that.

::As for the Buchanan thing, for the third time now: You compared Obama to Buchanan, not me. The fact that Buchanan has said worse things than Obama has doesn’t mean Obama is not an antisemite, and you’re free to call him one. It just means he hasn’t said some antisemtic things that Buchanan has, contrary to what you at least implied. Clear now?:::

Well if it wasn’t you, then someone else said Obama was no antisemite and I brought up Buchanon because it is easy to see antisemitism in him and yet seemingly for some, not in Obama, who is not very different in his hatred of Jews.

So perhape he never personally never denied the holocaust, but what he is doing is exactly what
anyone else would be doing in order to get the world to have another one.

If that is not antisemitism, nothing is.

;;;I’m glad you Googled the Obama quote, not so glad you keep arguing about it even after you know it didnt say what you claim it did. The Allies in Europe Obama apologized to were not Arabs, what with Arabia being a place noted for not being Europe. Israelis were also listening to that speech, does that means Obama has apologized to them? Or maybe, just maybe, you should be limiting your comments to what the man said and not what you’d like to imagine he did.;;;

He also went to the Arabs and acted very pro Arabs and extremly anti Israel, he for example never did to any
OPEC leader, what he did to Netenyahu (which no president has ever done to anyone, who had been invited to the White House.

:::Finally, really it’s weird to be accused of bias by someone who excuses Ann Coulter, who writes books about how to make political arguments, when she says she says she wants people dead,;;;

Again she simply joked about where McVeigh should have gone which is not the same and trying to actually foment such hatred as to cause someone to actually go and kill someone.

I do not endorse or support what she said, but it is not the same hate filled rant like Baldwins or like those I see on pro liberal blogs on a very regular basis.

;;; because she was making a joke (and note, I am willing to excuse her, so much for my bias.), but seems to think it’s impossible that a guy who is a professional comedian appearing on a comedy program might have been joking too.:::

Baldwin is a dranmatic actor, not a comedian.

::: And I’m sure you could tell how riled up the audience was by listening to a clip on a partisan radio show. For example you leave out the fact that after Baldwin’s speech, Conan O’Brien pulled out an air mask and put it over his face. In other words, there was a prop on stage for it, (do you think Conan O’Brien usually kept an airmask by his desk for his guest?) but no it couldn’t have been a (bad, tasteless) joke like Coulter’s. Even the Media Research Center seemed to think it was, but you know better.;;;

I did not know about the mask, but I was not accusing Conon of having said it.
Perhaps Baldwin had indicated something of what he planned to say right before and Conon quickly thought of a way to distance himself from it without actually condemning it as he surely would have if it had been an anti gay joke about how “all gays are NAMBLA loving pedophiles” for example.

If something like that had been said there is no way, Conon would have just used a gas mask.
He would have specifically said it was “homophobic” and he would never endorse such a thing”.
He might have put forth his opinion in a joking way but he would have been crystal clear that his pro gay, ‘anti homophobia’ opinion itself, was absolutely, no joke.

;;;;But all of this doesn’t matter. If you’ve seen anything from what I’ve said, it’s that I wouldn’t have said anything about what you said had you bothered to check your facts and gotten the details you got wrong, right in the first place.;;;

Based on your previous attacks on me I’d say that is not true.
You were and still are wrong both about what I said about Ritalin and about the issues I brought up as well.
You claimed I had said “you cannot learn Torah if you have taken Ritalin” which I never said.

;;;And I’m really not sympathetic to the fact that you don’t have time to make sure what you say id true. If you can’t verify what you say, don’t say it. It’s really that simple.;;;

You do not do that, certainly not in all cases as per my response above.
And it is far from “that simple”.
These articles move down the pages pretty fast and if there is something people need to think aboutthat affects Jews or peoples lives in general I think I need to point out some issues while most people are still reading the articles.

I may have to risk getting a few details wrong but people need to start thinking about certain things like misconceptions that “Democrat = good for Jews” wich at least these days, is not true.

;;; Because if there’s one thing we can both agree on, it’s that you’re not telling deliberate falsehoods, you’re just someone who knows much less about things than he thinks he does.;;;

Perhaps less about details but not about the important issuses.

If someone wants people dead, it does not matter as much which show they said it on as the fact that they certainly did say it.

;;;By the way, I also have not told a deliberate falsehood here, I did intend to not post again before when I said I wouldn’t (Why would I have said that if I didn’t?);;;

If I had said that to you after doing something like that you would not accept that as an excuse.
In fact you say things like “that does not chnage your origional statement”.

And this applies, especially since you are so medyiek on the small details.

No it’s not. Here’s where you once again seem to not understand the difference between a fact and an opinion. If you say there are racism laws, you should be able back that up with something.;;;;

And if you claim no such laws exist you should be able to back that up.
And if someone says on a radio show there is no way to prove that on a message board or blog.
You can’t post a piece of a radio show (perhaps a transcript if you can get it, but that can be forged).

;;;; You’re not entitled to believe they exist just because you feel like they should. You don’t know they exist. The only reason I can’t prove to your satisfaction that they don’t is because it’s literally impossible to do so to your satisfaction.;;;

Or yours.

;;;; (Again, what evidence would serve as proof you were wrong here?) And yeah, before you claim they do you should know that they do and not hide behind nonsense about ACORN and David Dinkins. It’s not too much to ask. ;;;

Who is “they”?
And what ‘nonsense’ (with proof that it is nonsense)?

It’s also fine that you didn’t keep checking an old article, but before accusing me of not responding here, why didn’t you check to see if I had? Wouldn’t that have made sense?

As for the Buchanan thing, for the third time now: You compared Obama to Buchanan, not me. The fact that Buchanan has said worse things than Obama has doesn’t mean Obama is not an antisemite, and you’re free to call him one. It just means he hasn’t said some antisemtic things that Buchanan has, contrary to what you at least implied. Clear now?

I’m glad you Googled the Obama quote, not so glad you keep arguing about it even after you know it didnt say what you claim it did. The Allies in Europe Obama apologized to were not Arabs, what with Arabia being a place noted for not being Europe. Israelis were also listening to that speech, does that means Obama has apologized to them? Or maybe, just maybe, you should be limiting your comments to what the man said and not what you’d like to imagine he did.

Finally, really it’s weird to be accused of bias by someone who excuses Ann Coulter, who writes books about how to make political arguments, when she says she says she wants people dead, because she was making a joke (and note, I am willing to excuse her, so much for my bias.), but seems to think it’s impossible that a guy who is a professional comedian appearing on a comedy program might have been joking too. And I’m sure you could tell how riled up the audience was by listening to a clip on a partisan radio show. For example you leave out the fact that after Baldwin’s speech, Conan O’Brien pulled out an air mask and put it over his face. In other words, there was a prop on stage for it, (do you think Conan O’Brien usually kept an airmask by his desk for his guest?) but no it couldn’t have been a (bad, tasteless) joke like Coulter’s. Even the Media Research Center seemed to think it was, but you know better.

But all of this doesn’t matter. If you’ve seen anything from what I’ve said, it’s that I wouldn’t have said anything about what you said had you bothered to check your facts and gotten the details you got wrong, right in the first place.

And I’m really not sympathetic to the fact that you don’t have time to make sure what you say id true. If you can’t verify what you say, don’t say it. It’s really that simple. Because if there’s one thing we can both agree on, it’s that you’re not telling deliberate falsehoods, you’re just someone who knows much less about things than he thinks he does.

By the way, I also have not told a deliberate falsehood here, I did intend to not post again before when I said I wouldn’t (Why would I have said that if I didn’t?)

The last word in that sentence is “laws,” right?;;;

Ok I should have said laws or rules made up against the law.

;;;I didn’t think the employeer thing was a typo. You did it every time you used the word, so I’m pretty sure you meant to do it.;;;

Well guesss what your ASSUMPTION is still wrong because I know how to spell it and if it appeared more then once that way, it was still unintentional.

I also since you bring it up, have a tendency to spell the as ‘teh’ and that sometimes appears more then once in the same post.
It hardly means I intend to spell it thatw ay.

;;And I did respond to your question about Obama and Hitler on your post at that article, shocking that you said I still had no answer without checking.;;;

I kept checking for at least two or three days after wards.
After that I figured why bother since I see no indication anyone else is readung that far back anyway.

But now that you claim to have responded there i will probably go back and answer anything you said there.

;;;;You asked why people think Buchanan has said worse things than Obama, and the answer is because he has in fact said things that are much worse than anything Obama has said. (Holocaust denial is really bad right? Or did I miss the speech where Obama suggested Holocaust survivors suffered from faulty memories?;;;

So if someone starts another holocast, that is just fine with you, as long as they did not deny the last one?

You claimed that someone is an antisemite ONLY if they deny the holocaust so anyone who says “kill all the Jews just like in the last holocaust”
Yolu are just fine with that, you could be their buddy because they are such Jew lovers?

;;;;; Probably it was in the same speech where he to quote one of your remarkably well sourced thoughts “apologized to the Arabs for America saying “America has been arrogant”.” I’ll let you Google the words “america has been arrogant”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/5101244/President-Barack-Obama-America-has-been-arrogant-and-dismissive-towards-Europe.html

“President Barack Obama: America has been ‘arrogant and dismissive’ towards Europe
President Barack Obama has declared that America has “failed to appreciate Europe’s leading role in the world” and has “shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive” towards its allies.”

so you can see what you would have learned had you bothered to make sure Obama had said that to the Arabs before claiming that he did);;;

So if he said it to the Europeans you think the Arabs weren’t listening as well?
The fact is that you had claimed he never said it at all.

;;;; I guess you may not have been asking that question rhetorically, in which case, I hope that answers your quesetion. But if you actually thought the answer was that they both have said the same things, you stand corrected. ;;;;

No actually not, as shown above.

;;;And no your point wasn’t that Alec Baldwin was on, but your point was to tar all liberals based on a very clear recollection of how the crowd reacted to what he said, a recollection that’s remarkable considering you had no idea who he threatened or who he said it to.;;;

I know he had said it to a late night TV talk show audience so your claim that “I had no idea” is just another of your liberal lies.

;;; But doubtlessly you vividly remember the rest of it. (Did you even see it? Im thinking not.);;;

I heard it when Hannity played it on his radio show.

;;; Yes, you are wrong about Alec Baldwin in the same way a liberal would be wrong to suggest that Ann Coulter actually wishes that the New York Times editorial staff had been murdered by Timothy McVeigh,;;;;

Liberals claim that anyway and when they say it in your company I’m sure you do not breate them and tell them “they have no idea what they are talking about and should get their facts straight before “spewing” anything”.

I’ll bet you never talk to your fellow liberals that way.

having pointed that out, the fact is that Counter saying “My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times Building.”

Well after the fact as a joke is far very far from yelling at an audience that “all of us together, and then yelling it again even louder “ALL OF US TOGETHER” would go down there and kill him and his family and angrily yelling at his audience to “shut up, I’m not finished” and then continued to spew how he wanted to kill his wife and children.

Coulter told a joke years after the fact with no anger.
Baldwin yelled out in anger how he wanted to get the audience with him to right now and go and commit murder.
There is a huge difference, which you obviously fail to recognize because it down not fit your liberal bias.

;;;;but all I care about is that you posted something and got the details wrong, even though three seconds of effort could have gotten them right.;;;

No you do not care about that, because I got a couple of details wrong far from “all of them”.
The fact that you can’t be honest about that proves you have some agenda other then the truth, which you obviously do not care about.

And it takes far more then 3 seconds, at least on my computer or on my work computer fromw hich I often post and have very little time to do so before by boss starts yelling about it (and I am not stealing the bioss’s time, since I work through lunch just about every day and get no overtime pay even when I work the overtime hours).

;;;Yes, I did say I wasn’t going to respond to you any more, but since you’ve started denying things you wrote on this page, I’ve felt the need to see this to its end. So you’ve got me, I’ve been wrong once on this board. It feels good to admit. You should try it some time;;;

Again that is false reasoning on your part since you still make false claims that I got “all the details wrong” for one example, obviously the truth is not what motivates you.
You just have to get the last word and be percieved as right no matter what.

I am not the one who is not telling deliberate falsehoods like those I keep catching ‘you’ in.

No it’s not. Here’s where you once again seem to not understand the difference between a fact and an opinion. If you say there are racism laws, you should be able back that up with something. You’re not entitled to believe they exist just because you feel like they should. You don’t know they exist. The only reason I can’t prove to your satisfaction that they don’t is because it’s literally impossible to do so to your satisfaction. (Again, what evidence would serve as proof you were wrong here?) And yeah, before you claim they do you should know that they do and not hide behind nonsense about ACORN and David Dinkins. It’s not too much to ask.

And I really don’t understand what’s so hard for you to get about why you shouldn’t have accused someone of lying about something, when in you were basing that on your own misreading of a news article. You seem grossly overconfident of what you know about the news. (Really you should look at Wikipedia more often and then VERIFY, like I said when I posted and you ignored in your response so that you could pretend I said Wikipedia was a trustable source) You get facts wrong constantly and it doesn’t seem to cause you the least bit of shame. I can’t understand that.

I’m not falsely accusing you of not making an effort. I don’t consider having read the article you’re commenting on sufficient effort to believe you can tell other people they don’t know what they’re lying. I’m not sure how you can given that in this case it clearly wasn’t. And I don’t think it’s unreasonable to believe that people who are interested in telling me I’m wrong about the facts of the Rubashkin case are interested enough in the case to actually use an outside source to tell me I’m wrong or find out I’m right. Can you explain why you didn’t care enough about Sholom Rubashkin to know what he’s been accused of, until last week?

Last week, I was posting here because of my secret plan to get corporations to make sure all of their employees are legal even though they don’t have to. This week, I make the same claim and it’s because I have a pro-illegal immigrant bias. It’s almost like you don’t care as long as you can attack me personally and not deal with substance of my criticism. Imagine that.

1. I made a claim about what Rubashkin was charged with. (I’m not sure why I need to cite sources for that, when my point is that before you make comments you should have a basic familiarity with the case, which would include knowing what he’s been accused of);;;;

I did and do have “a basic familiarity” with the case.
Basic does not mean every detail, look it up.

;;;;;2. You accused me of lying about what he’d been charged with, since (I think, I’m not totally clear why you didn’t know what he’d been charged with):::

Because none of these articles on YWN that I remember seeeing, ever said anything about it and I did not realize they would leave things like that, out.

::: you seem to have not known that the trial in which he’d been convicted did not involve everything he’d been charged with.;;;;

If it did not involve everything he was charged with, then obviously they must have thought they had no case on that charge (or there was a plea bargin, which from the article, seems that there was no such plea bargin) so then it would not matter, in the end.

;;;3. I suggested you made no effort to find out that I was right before you accused me of lying.;;;

You are at it again.
You did not “suggest” it, you SAID it, big difference, counselor.

;;;;(This is true. Just googling “Rubashkin identity theft” (not in quotes) would have led you to Wikipedia would have told you what he’d been charged with and you could verify that elsewhere). There wasn’t any reason for you to rely on this article alone to know what he’d been charged with, after someone else told you there were other charges.;;;;

Wikipedia is not reliable, everyone knows that.
Neo nazis have quoted wiki articles to me to ‘prove’, “the Jews are all evil”, according to their twisted idiology.

And there was no reason for me ‘not’ to rely on this article, why would they not post the whole story?

And you did not say you got that from outside sources, you simply claimed it as if we must accept it, just because ‘you’ say so.

;;;;;;;;4. You respond that you had made an effort by reading the article on this page (which honestly, I hope you did before you commented in the first place).

If that’s what happened, I’m going to repeat that in the future, you should make an effort to verify what people say before you accuse them of lying. You don’t know enough about things to assume you know everything and it’s not my job to provide sources to alleviate your ignorance..
;;;;;;;;;;;;

And I will repeat; You should do the same, since you keep falsly accusing me of not making the effort when I did.
You are the one ‘assuming’ that I made no such effort.

And it is your job to back up your claims, it certainly is not ‘my’ job to prove ‘your’ claims.

So you claim; Just like you claimed that you weren’t going to post on this article anymore then continued to do so.

;;;;;;;; or that I think my opinions on everything must be right (they’re certainly not).;;;;

Where have you ever admitted to me that you were wrong about anything?

;;;;;; It’s just in this case (and in several others) the issue here is one of fact, not opinion,;;;;

Again that is your unproven claim that you obviously expect me to blindly accept without question.
I don’t.

;;;; and one of us must be right, and yeah, since I’m the one who knows what he’s talking about;;;;

As evidenced by the fact that you ciontinue to falsly claim that I supposedly made no effort to cjheck the facts when I did and after my proving that you deliberately made false claims like yours about not posting here anymore when you obviously did after saying you wouldn’t.

Oh yeah everyone should really accept your claims of being so “right” …hahahahahahahahaha

;;; and doesn’t just spout stuff off that he vagulely remembers from Hannity or Rush;;;

I did not say vaguely or “vagulely” as you seem to think it’s spelled.
See I told you I could play your game.

;;; that conforms to his biases, in this case (as well as the others) the person who’s right is me. From reading your posts on this site you seem to be someone who isn’t all that informed about issues he talks about.;;;;

You certainly seem not to know more then you think I supposedly do.
And I am not the one who claimed to be a professional in the subject.

I’ll tell you one thing if I ever needed a lawyer in this area I’d sure want someone competent in the subject and you certainly haven’t shown yourself to be, that, not by a long shot.

;;;;;;;And as long as that’s true, either stick to offering opinions and not made-up facts, or better yet, become informed. We’d all be better off for it.;;;;;;;

Made up facts such as falsly claiming I said in my origional post (#10) there was a law when the word ‘law’ does not even appear in that post.

Really?
So just because you claim all the laws say a certain thing (with fits your liberal pro Obama (who is pro illegal alien) biases)that means everyone obeys the law?
All those ACORN pro illegal alien types and their sympathizers in the government never harass anyone, huh?

Tell me oh mr super smart lawyer with all the answers, what law says it is ok for hate filled Blacks to beat up on and kill Jews as happened in the Crown Heights riots where then mayor David Dinkins said “let them vent” which they did for 3 days?

Since you are demanding people believe that if the law does not say it’s ok then it does not happen.

Then you say;
“I know this because it’s not true and, honestly, there’s no way you can tell me you know otherwise, or tell me you know that I don’t know otherwise because I do. ”

In other words I must accept without proof anything you claim just because you claim it.

Have you tried that one in court lately, counselor?
LOL

The last word in that sentence is “laws,” right?

I didn’t think the employeer thing was a typo. You did it every time you used the word, so I’m pretty sure you meant to do it.

And I did respond to your question about Obama and Hitler on your post at that article, shocking that you said I still had no answer without checking. You asked why people think Buchanan has said worse things than Obama, and the answer is because he has in fact said things that are much worse than anything Obama has said. (Holocaust denial is really bad right? Or did I miss the speech where Obama suggested Holocaust survivors suffered from faulty memories? Probably it was in the same speech where he to quote one of your remarkably well sourced thoughts “apologized to the Arabs for America saying “America has been arrogant”.” I’ll let you Google the words “america has been arrogant” so you can see what you would have learned had you bothered to make sure Obama had said that to the Arabs before claiming that he did) I guess you may not have been asking that question rhetorically, in which case, I hope that answers your quesetion. But if you actually thought the answer was that they both have said the same things, you stand corrected.

And no your point wasn’t that Alec Baldwin was on, but your point was to tar all liberals based on a very clear recollection of how the crowd reacted to what he said, a recollection that’s remarkable considering you had no idea who he threatened or who he said it to. But doubtlessly you vividly remember the rest of it. (Did you even see it? Im thinking not.) Yes, you are wrong about Alec Baldwin in the same way a liberal would be wrong to suggest that Ann Coulter actually wishes that the New York Times editorial staff had been murdered by Timothy McVeigh, but all I care about is that you posted something and got the details wrong, even though three seconds of effort could have gotten them right.

Yes, I did say I wasn’t going to respond to you any more, but since you’ve started denying things you wrote on this page, I’ve felt the need to see this to its end. So you’ve got me, I’ve been wrong once on this board. It feels good to admit. You should try it some time

That is blatently false I did NOT in statement #10 even use the word “law”.

And since you want to play games of attacdking typos I can do that too.

;;;;;And actually the distressing frequency I was referring to was referring to was not the Ritalin conversation (that’s why I said that was inane and not wrong);;;;

Your response to me about that was both wrong and inane but you cannot even say what was supposedly so inane about something you now admit was not wrong.

;;; but our original discussion about Robert Hanssen’s current incarceration status, your belief that Pat Buchanan had never said anything more plainly antisemetic than Barack Obama has (despite his dabbling in Holocaust denial and his public accusations about the first Gulf War being waged on behalf of the Jews),;;;;

And Obama sat for years listening to his preacher say the same things.
As I said before and you still have no answer, according you Hitler was less antisemitic then Buchanon because Hitler never denied the holocaust.
In fact when Hitler was giving his antisemitic speeches in the 1920′s it hadn’t even happened yet so it couldn’t be denied.

;;;or your discussion of Alec Baldwin’s comments about Ken Starr that were made about Henry Hyde on a different program than the two you tried to guess that he’d made it on.;;;

So it wasn’t on those particular shows.
My point was not about exactly what shows it was on.
My point was that he was promoting and supporting the idea of mob rule and cold blooded murder by the mob, against anyone the liberals decided tyhey wanted silenced permanently.
I was not wrong about that and again you have no answer and in typical liberal game playing fashion you have to hide behind insignificant details that you peek out from behind and weakly scream, “I’m right about the insignificant detail”.

;;; I’d say that’s an impressive record of things that are objectively wrong.;;;;

Yes an impressive record of things you are wrong about.