D3, the Ukraine Box Set

I've explained it here before more than once.

The result is I get

A) People leveling unmerited criticism at my position
B) People using the opportunity to make personal attacks on me and my family.

I'm not bothering unless I have assurances that neither will happen.

Don't worry about it Dayton -- Liet saw one of your previous explanations and posted the argument for us.

So the whole women are chattel thing, that's why you can hit them?

Either I haven't seen it or didn't get it.

A) I promise any criticism leveled by me will be merited.

B) I promise I won't do that at all.

Umm... no you haven't You say something moral values, damaging family values and something about unthinking animals. And that's what you get criticism for. If you have explained it, where's the link?

Doesn't matter. gul already lied and then made a personal attack as well.

Assurances must be made and honored by anyone who reads or might read this thread

I'm just working with the available information. Where is the mistake in Liet's post? If you can't demonstrate how he is wrong, then I have to assume he nailed it.

How can someone who might read this thread, but hasn't done so make that assurance. And you are the one who brought up the issue, and then were called on it. And you haven't answered how premarital is the cause for the issues I mentioned.

I don't have to refute Liet point by point. I'm simply saying that he is wrong. And you have no reasons (except your routine dishonesty in misrepresenting me here) to claim that he "nailed" it.

Prove it!

Is this only for the position in question, or are you not going to defend any of your positions from here on out?

I'll deal with them on a case by case basis

In other words, only those that you can actually put any type of argument forward for other than "because I said so"?

Sounds to me like you've decided that you won't defend your positions if you, yourself, think they are indefensible...but that won't stop you from stating them.

OMFG.....

Dayton3 just makes you people run yourselves into the ground.......

Yeah yeah. You don't fall for his schtick, everybody's gullible, he's playing everyone like a stratovarious. Congratulations. You're the smartest guy in the room.

Hey, if it entertains Zombie, it's all for the good.

No I don't fall for his schtick. It's the same thing over and over and over and over. Ruining thread after thread. In fairness of course this particular one was DOA. I think he's getting bolder the more the rest of you rush to "play" with him.

I do fall too much for Garamet's schtick as she is exactly like Dayton3 being just as pathetic and annoying thread killer. But I'm working on it.

If there are two people on this board who were to meet the Grim Reaper in a thoroughly messy way I can't say this board would be worse off without them.......

I'm still praying to the Reaper.

Somebody needs a hug.

I'm willing to pray to the Reaper for three messy ends.......

And a big bowl of pasta.

Seasons don't fear the Reaper. Nor do the wind or the sun or the rain.

I repeat. Anyone who wants to debate my view that the NOVELTY president is a black man in his position just because he is a black man needs to be respectful of my view. And agree in advance that I am not trolling. And that I am not a racist.

The same does not apply in reverse, of course.

Pushing it a little, dont work so hard.

I would agree, except Dayton3 wrote almost the exact same post in another thread regarding pre-marital sex as the cause of all social problems.

Just wondering gul.

What do you think is the primary cause of social problems in the United States? And please don't say the war on drugs. Drug usage is a social problem all its own and not an underlying cause.

By the way, President Obama's approval rating has dropped to an all time low.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...ama-approval-hits-new-low-falls-in-key-areas/

Objection. Your questions assumes facts not in evidence.

Also vague, ambiguous, and lacks foundation.

True, but since the rest of us aren't Daytonesque weasels, I'll provide him with an answer.

I disagree that the war on drugs is not a major contributing factor to other social problems in the United States. What if I told you that I thought it was the primary cause of social problems? It's no less valid a claim than yours, since you have demonstrated by your own example that we don't need to explain or justify our positions.

That said, no, I don't think it's the war on drugs, nor do I think it's drugs in the larger sense. I consider poverty to be the number one cause of social problems in this country.

IIRC, as far as is known things like the crime rate was far smaller in the 1930s when widespread poverty was pretty much universal in the United States.

So don't the Great Depression years seem to rebut the concept that poverty is the number one cause of social problems in the U.S.?

Crime has fallen dramatically since the 1930s.

In fact, it has on average been declining steadily for hundreds of years - in line with reduction of poverty.