FredF said:
Megadittos means that I agree with what the previous caller had to say,
NOT what Rush had to say.
[post="183056"][/post]
Bzzzzzzzztttt!
Wrong, but thanks for playing. As a consolation prize Fred will receive a copy of our home game!
I first started listening to Rush Limbaugh back in 1989 and, even back then, the term "dittos" and, later, "megadittos" were used most often by callers expressing agreement with what Rush had just said, not just other callers.
I have not attacked anyone on these boards like you have. I have said where they were wrong, but have not attacked them.
You have got to be kidding me, Fred. From the very beginning your attacks on those who expressed opinions contrary to your own have been remarkable. Whether rambling on about "BJ Bill" and your conspiracy theories about him or attacking the rest of us as "Liberals", meaning anyone to the left of you, your attempts to turn the political process into a elementary school playground have been notable, even by the standards of the internet. It is only recently that you have begun to even appear to seem reasonable, a change that I have silently applauded.
You provide one-sided 'facts' from such august sources as the "Cybernet News Service" and declare subjects 'dealt with' but refuse to even address facts that contradict your assertions. You simply pretend to not have seen them or attack the sources and those posting them. If anyone, as I did today, posts a link that isn't completely slanted you jump on that and ask "did you even read what you posted?". Not everyone here is only willing to read what only supports their opinion, Fred.
Meanwhile, when you have argued yourself into a corner you merely change the subject and start hammering on another of your 'issues', starting another thread if necessary.
I mean really, Fred, look at the title of your thread: "For Those Of You That Contradicted and Criticized Me". Poor Fred, our self-appointed Neo-Con martyr, stuck having to defend his opinions in front of a bunch of pesky 'Liberals', your blanket term for those who don't respond with "megadittos" to your every boilerplate NeoCon diatribe. When one takes your statements in total, Fred, it seems you would prefer a one-party system of government.
Well, sorry about that, Fred, but I happen to agree with Justice William O. Douglas who said:
"A function of free speech under our system of government is to invite dispute. It may indeed best serve its high purposes when it induces a condition of unrest, creates dissatisfaction with conditions as they are, or even stirs people to anger"
and with the US Supreme Court, which ruled in its landmark decision regarding Free Speech in wartime, West Virginia Board of Education v. Barnett, 1943 that:
"Compulsory unification of opinion achieves only the unanimity of the graveyard."
If you don't like being 'criticized or contradicted', Fred, why are you here? Before you go off about how I'm 'trying to shut you up' or some other paranoid tangent, keep in mind that all I'm asking of you is that you be willing to accept what you quite obviously expect people like KCFLYER and myself to accept.
I can start if you would like.
Go back and look at your responses to those who disagree with you, Fred. You'll find you started months ago. Maybe then you can do like Zell and challenge me to a duel.