Tiggs Posted September 7, 2012 #426 Share Posted September 7, 2012 Why do you insist that people that do not support Obama are all republicans or biased. Some of us just do not like his resume. Where, exactly, do you believe that I've done that? - The only people not offended are those that watch the mainstream media and are told that it is not offensive. - The people watching the speech were, of course, not ofended as they are leftists like yourself and fully agree with the premise that big daddy government is the single most improtant thing in a person's life. - Thankfully there is a Fox news that brings these momentary glimpses of the real Obama to light instead of hiding the ugliness from the bright light of public scrutiny. I rest my case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiggs Posted September 7, 2012 #427 Share Posted September 7, 2012 Pro-Republican? Why can't someone feel a certain way without being labled? I won't vote for Obama or Romney. That doesn't mean I belong to the same party as the 3rd choice I vote for. If you consistently support a single party's positions - then for all intents and purposes you are pro that party. Obama said something stupid and offensive. Get over it. Obama said something that's offensive only if you willfully take it out of context. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michelle Posted September 7, 2012 #428 Share Posted September 7, 2012 So if I change "Screamingly Republican" to "People that are obviously biased against Obama" - how about that? So your plan is to take another one of his quotes out of context in order to justify why you took his first quote out of context? Don't try and put me into one of your little boxes. I don't live in a black and white world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiggs Posted September 7, 2012 #429 Share Posted September 7, 2012 Don't try and put me into one of your little boxes. I don't live in a black and white world. So now you're claiming not to be biased against Obama? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michelle Posted September 7, 2012 #430 Share Posted September 7, 2012 So now you're claiming not to be biased against Obama? So because I don't support Obama I'm a "screaming Republican"? You are obviously a Democrat, who is always going to vote the party line, instead of voting for who you think would be the best person for the job. If that wasn't the case, you could acknowledge there are other people that can actually think for themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiggs Posted September 7, 2012 #431 Share Posted September 7, 2012 So because I don't support Obama I'm a "screaming Republican"? No. That's not what I said, at all. I modified my original claim of "Screamingly Republican" to "People that are obviously biased against Obama", thus broadening the category. You are obviously a Democrat, who is always going to vote the party line, instead of voting for who you think would be the best person for the job. If that wasn't the case, you could acknowledge there are other people that can actually think for themselves. I'm neither a Democrat, nor am I even eligible to vote in the Presidential election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michelle Posted September 7, 2012 #432 Share Posted September 7, 2012 No. That's not what I said, at all. I modified my original claim of "Screamingly Republican" to "People that are obviously biased against Obama", thus broadening the category. I'm neither a Democrat, nor am I even eligible to vote in the Presidential election. I know you aren't eligible to vote yet, but you've made it abundantly clear which side you are on because you support Obama, I can't be a Republican because I'm a pro choice, pro gay marriage, tree hugger...and as we all know Republicans can be none of those things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merc14 Posted September 7, 2012 #433 Share Posted September 7, 2012 I rest my case. You do? Good, I like beating you so easily and quickly. Most arguments with you become endless boring slogs through syntax, nuance, strawman arguments and just plain dopey, libreal doggerel that only a zealot could believe in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiggs Posted September 7, 2012 #434 Share Posted September 7, 2012 I know you aren't eligible to vote yet, but you've made it abundantly clear which side you are on because you support Obama, Would you like a little box with that? I made it abundantly clear here which side I'm on. I can't be a Republican because I'm a pro choice, pro gay marriage, tree hugger...and as we all know Republicans can be none of those things. Sure they can. They're just not electable Republicans. You do? Good, I like beating you so easily and quickly. Your post single-handedly proved my position. As does your continuing attitude towards me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michelle Posted September 7, 2012 #435 Share Posted September 7, 2012 Would you like a little box with that? Good, you did catch that. I happen to be a right leaning Libertarian. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merc14 Posted September 7, 2012 #436 Share Posted September 7, 2012 Your post single-handedly proved my position. As does your continuing attitude towards me. Yawn. No I proved how empty your arguments are, how meaningless your hyperbole is and if you had a lick of sense you'd know that without my having to explain it to you. BTW, I argue with you only to dissaude people on the fence from falling into the hypnotic trance of liberalism. I have no illusions of ever changing what you think because, as I said, you are a zealot. So, what is your plan for November 7th after the disaster that is going to hit the democrats on November 6th? Will you cry "They cheated!!" or something else? Better start planning because armageddon is only 60 days away, I gauarantee that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiggs Posted September 7, 2012 #437 Share Posted September 7, 2012 Yawn. No I proved how empty your arguments are, how meaningless your hyperbole is and if you had a lick of sense you'd know that without my having to explain it to you. BTW, I argue with you only to dissaude people on the fence from falling into the hypnotic trance of liberalism. I have no illusions of ever changing what you think because, as I said, you are a zealot. So, what is your plan for November 7th after the disaster that is going to hit the democrats on November 6th? Will you cry "They cheated!!" or something else? Better start planning because armageddon is only 60 days away, I gauarantee that. Again. I rest my case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiggs Posted September 7, 2012 #438 Share Posted September 7, 2012 I happen to be a right leaning Libertarian. Presumably you'll be voting for Gary Johnson, then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merc14 Posted September 7, 2012 #439 Share Posted September 7, 2012 Again. I rest my case. Weak. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michelle Posted September 7, 2012 #440 Share Posted September 7, 2012 Presumably you'll be voting for Gary Johnson, then? I'm leaning heavily in that direction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiggs Posted September 7, 2012 #441 Share Posted September 7, 2012 Weak. Strong. Since we're obviously playing the childish game of just repeating the opposite of what the other person says to form a polarized partisan argument. And you'd have got away with it, too, if it wasn't for all those pesky neutral fact checkers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merc14 Posted September 7, 2012 #442 Share Posted September 7, 2012 Strong. Since we're obviously playing the childish game of just repeating the opposite of what the other person says to form a polarized partisan argument. And you'd have got away with it, too, if it wasn't for all those pesky neutral fact checkers. Neutral fact checkers? LMAO. You want to make a little bet on the outcome of the election? I'll bet the republicans take the senate, kep the house and win the Presidency. If they don't, I won't post here for two months after taaking my deserved whipping the 7th. If I am right you leave for two months after taking the same whipping the 7th. Come on, you are so sure of yourself, put it on the line. I'm the one out on a limb here so man-up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiggs Posted September 7, 2012 #443 Share Posted September 7, 2012 Neutral fact checkers? LMAO. You want to make a little bet on the outcome of the election? What makes you think that I think the Democrats are going to win? And what do neutral fact checkers have to do with the outcome of an election? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
questionmark Posted September 7, 2012 #444 Share Posted September 7, 2012 What makes you think that I think the Democrats are going to win? And what do neutral fact checkers have to do with the outcome of an election? Directly nothing, but if the vice candidate and the candidate keep on spurting boolcrappy then indirectly a lot. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiggs Posted September 7, 2012 #445 Share Posted September 7, 2012 Directly nothing, but if the vice candidate and the candidate keep on spurting boolcrappy then indirectly a lot. Well, that I can see, but it's not as if Facts will change dependent on whichever candidate wins. They just are. For example - If the Democrats win, it's not as if Romney actually meant "I like being able to fire people" in the context that the Democrats are claiming he did. If the Republicans win - it doesn't make "You didn't build that" any more contextual, either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merc14 Posted September 7, 2012 #446 Share Posted September 7, 2012 (edited) What makes you think that I think the Democrats are going to win? And what do neutral fact checkers have to do with the outcome of an election? You're the one that mentioned neutral fact checkers, not me. I have no idea what you were talking about but you referring to any info you use as neutral is laugahable. So you think I am right then and the dems lose the exec and senate. Good, glad you agree. Edited September 7, 2012 by Merc14 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myles Posted September 7, 2012 #447 Share Posted September 7, 2012 And you'd have got away with it, too, if it wasn't for all those pesky neutral fact checkers. Who are these nuetral fact checkers you speak of? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+OverSword Posted September 7, 2012 #448 Share Posted September 7, 2012 dang is this thread still active???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
questionmark Posted September 7, 2012 #449 Share Posted September 7, 2012 Well, that I can see, but it's not as if Facts will change dependent on whichever candidate wins. They just are. For example - If the Democrats win, it's not as if Romney actually meant "I like being able to fire people" in the context that the Democrats are claiming he did. If the Republicans win - it doesn't make "You didn't build that" any more contextual, either. Absolutely. For about 82% of those who are going to go to vote the arguments are of very little influence, they will make their cross (or whatever method is used in that state) where they always did or where their "cool friends" put it. The restant 18% is what matters. And they actually have the fate of the country in their hand. This year it is in fashion to be libertarian so most are "libertarian". and many of those who are could hardly explain what a "libertarian" is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tapirmusic Posted September 7, 2012 #450 Share Posted September 7, 2012 Well, that I can see, but it's not as if Facts will change dependent on whichever candidate wins. They just are. For example - If the Democrats win, it's not as if Romney actually meant "I like being able to fire people" in the context that the Democrats are claiming he did. If the Republicans win - it doesn't make "You didn't build that" any more contextual, either. It's called Doublethink. You should know that.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.png.0332af9e78f2251ae24e5aa89207b58c.png){kind=tracking}
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now