04-28-2020, 04:13 PM
(04-28-2020, 02:43 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I think personal bias leads you to take exception with the person rather than the point.
Bels and I were having a discussion about Trump only sending aid to "people he likes" and I replied "I didn't know he was such a fan of NY and Cali as he has sent them funds" instead of acknowledging that Trump has sent aid (perhaps the most to any states) to 2 states he "doesn't like". So instead of conceding the point, Bels "outstanding" retort was "He sent supplies not funds". I simply pointed out that supplies can be considered funds and it says so right in the dictionary. I then suggested it was best to end the back and forth because no ground was going to be conceded no matter how reasoned the reply.
Go try to spend PPE supplies to buy ventilators. But, you already understand the distinction you're just looking for something to argue about.
Quote:So you take exception with one pointing to the semantics of funds versus supplies more so than the acknowledging the overall point. So much like my back and forth with Bels this one has ran it's course.
Matt made an observation about how aid was distributed to the states by the federal government which most likely prompted your funds vs. supplies smoke and mirrors tangent.
Quote:Do you call me Skip Bayless as a complement? Yes or no will suffice.
If I see the color blue and say "that looks blue" it is neither a compliment or an insult. It's an observation. A comparison. Like I wrote, feel free to look up the definition. If you feel insulted by comparing your arguments to Skip Bayless' arguments that's because of your bias towards Skip Bayless, not mine.
So what's your complaint about a tagline?