Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: loco on November 12, 2013, 02:31:28 PM
-
...a testament to Obamacare's success and to Obama's honesty? :-\
-
That's because they can't argue the failed issues from the past 51/2 years. What they will do is come on here and name call and demonize.
-
...a testament to Obamacare's success and to Obama's honesty? :-\
this board has always been a right wing echo chamber
-
They're all working on the Christie 2016 campaign.
They're well aware of the possibility of him stealing the nomination from conservatives that will actually make good changes for America.
If dems have hilary, or if they have christie, they're happy! They are NOT happy with a Rand or Cruz, who will really fck up liberal policies.
-
this board has always been a right wing echo chamber
nah, in 2008 the board was pretty even.
-
Don't worry, loco, all the retarded liberals on this board will come back once the government website is "glitch free" and millions of people start enrolling in crapcare.
They will proclaim victory. As if it somehow a working website erases the fact that it was a disastrous roll out, that it's going to cost 3 times as much as was indicated by democrats to implement crapcare, that for many people premiums will increase because they are the ones paying the subsidies for others to have lower rates, and that the president still lied about americans keeping the coverage and doctors they liked. "PERIOD".
All that will be forgotten. They will be back pointing out how each day millions sign up. All the while ignoring the broken promises and continuing economic decline of the nation.
HEY LIBTARDS! THIS NATION DOESN'T HAVE THE RESOURCES TO PAY FOR ALL THE ENTITLEMENTS THAT YOU THINK CITIZENS SHOULD HAVE.
Our end will be that of Greece and of most of the european nations.
-
...a testament to Obamacare's success and to Obama's honesty? :-\
Maybe its because liberals is way more honest than repub and dont try to lie and spin the facts?
Obamacare's rollout has been a mess.
Obama is a liar.
No argument here.
But its stil way better than what came before and the lie he has been caught in is nothing compared to the lies the GOP spout everyday.
For the lie that you can keep your current plan the GOP has 30 lies about its costs its damage to the economy etc..
Regards A lib.
-
Don't worry, loco, all the retarded liberals on this board will come back once the government website is "glitch free" and millions of people start enrolling in crapcare.
They will proclaim victory. As if it somehow a working website erases the fact that it was a disastrous roll out, that it's going to cost 3 times as much as was indicated by democrats to implement crapcare, that for many people premiums will increase because they are the ones paying the subsidies for others to have lower rates, and that the president still lied about americans keeping the coverage and doctors they liked. "PERIOD".
All that will be forgotten. They will be back pointing out how each day millions sign up. All the while ignoring the broken promises and continuing economic decline of the nation.
HEY LIBTARDS! THIS NATION DOESN'T HAVE THE RESOURCES TO PAY FOR ALL THE ENTITLEMENTS THAT YOU THINK CITIZENS SHOULD HAVE.
Our end will be that of Greece and of most of the european nations.
Yea this sums it up
-
They're all working on the Christie 2016 campaign.
They're well aware of the possibility of him stealing the nomination from conservatives that will actually make good changes for America.
If dems have hilary, or if they have christie, they're happy! They are NOT happy with a Rand or Cruz, who will really fck up liberal policies.
Haha very true
-
Maybe its because liberals is way more honest than repub and dont try to lie and spin the facts?
Obamacare's rollout has been a mess.
Obama is a liar.
No argument here.
But its stil way better than what came before and the lie he has been caught in is nothing compared to the lies the GOP spout everyday.
For the lie that you can keep your current plan the GOP has 30 lies about its costs its damage to the economy etc..
Regards A lib.
horse shit its way better.... more people have lost coverage than gained it. People were bettter off before the ACA.... and the lies about the cost and hurting the economy seems to be coming true, arent they? Man, you clearly didnt think out your post.
-
They're all working on the Christie 2016 campaign.
They're well aware of the possibility of him stealing the nomination from conservatives that will actually make good changes for America.
If dems have hilary, or if they have christie, they're happy! They are NOT happy with a Rand or Cruz, who will really fck up liberal policies.
Why would Dems want to help Christie?
He's the Repubs only hope of winning the White House in 2016
-
Why would Dems want to help Christie?
He's the Repubs only hope of winning the White House in 2016
Because the dems love when a RINO gets the nomination. They know it will be a cakewalk for them
-
Because the dems love when a RINO gets the nomination. They know it will be a cakewalk for them
it would be even easier if Cruz were the nominee
how many times do I have to explain this to you
we don't want Christie
that's our last choice
just like you
ironic, isn't it ?
-
this board has always been a right wing echo chamber
sure
but obamacare and obama are fucked...
i hope you folks think that living under religious crackpot rule will be fun because it's coming
obamacare has sunk the democratic party... maybe permanently
-
Cruz has been vindicated 10x over
it would be even easier if Cruz were the nominee
how many times do I have to explain this to you
we don't want Christie
that's our last choice
just like you
ironic, isn't it ?
-
it would be even easier if Cruz were the nominee
how many times do I have to explain this to you
we don't want Christie
that's our last choice
just like you
ironic, isn't it ?
These far-right nutbags think everybody thinks like them.
If they want to give the presidency away they should just nominate Cruz or Paul.
Dem would love it.
-
Ah no we don't..u diots elected Obama...twice. Not everybody thinks like us, nor should they, however they should recognize failure when they see it.
-
Ah no we don't..u diots elected Obama...twice. Not everybody thinks like us, nor should they, however they should recognize failure when they see it.
And you idiots elected Bush twice and nominated uber-goofy Romney.
They make Obama look good and thats pretty fucking hard to do.
Obama is not a succes. His opposition is a failure.
-
This hasn't a thing to do with Bush...u stated we all think alike....I pointed out that we do not think like that, nor should we. You people continue to back a failure soley because he's black and cool.
-
it would be even easier if Cruz were the nominee
how many times do I have to explain this to you
we don't want Christie
that's our last choice
just like you
ironic, isn't it ?
You can explain it, but you are just being disingenuous. You mention him because he will not win. He can't run on anything.
Christie is in the same boat as McCain and Romney. A RINO. He is not a conservative.
If moderates or RINOs are so great how come democrats don't vote for them? How come the liberal media turns on them. They prop them up 2 years before elections but once they are the nominee, the media turns on them.
A solid conservative is the key here. If Cruz or Rand represent the party in 2016, we can present a huge contrast to the libtard nominee. We can't run another person who can not condemn wasteful spending, big government and can not condemn crapcare.
-
This hasn't a thing to do with Bush...u stated we all think alike....I pointed out that we do not think like that, nor should we. You people continue to back a failure soley because he's black and cool.
You think he is cool?
I think his a lying career politician who is lucky the GOP is total shit.
-
U libs do...u voted for him, you love..u now own him.
-
U libs do...u voted for him, you love..u now own him.
Lib dont love other men. We vote for the best candidate. Closet homos belong in the GOP.
The GOP is crap. Easy choice.
But keep believing this. You will lose once again because you dont fix your problems.
-
When u can actually debate a real point about anything, please let me know. Your grasp of politics, policy and history is poor at best.
-
When u can actually debate a real point about anything, please let me know. Your grasp of politics, policy and history is poor at best.
Look at all your posts in this thread. You could be talking about yourself.
Try and read them.
-
Why would Dems want to help Christie?
He's the Repubs only hope of winning the White House in 2016
I don't trust Christie either.
-
Lib dont love other men. We vote for the best candidate. Closet homos belong in the GOP.
The GOP is crap. Easy choice.
But keep believing this. You will lose once again because you dont fix your problems.
No, libs vote for the best politician not the best candidate. There's a difference. Coming into the last election Obama didn't have one successful policy, high UE, no plan for job creation, just failed all the way around. Romney destroyed him in every way EXCEPT politics. The dumb ass people who voted for Obama (multiple times by the same persons) fell for the rhetoric. Obama knew who he was going after, poor, uninformed, in most cases, lazy oppressed demographic who wanted the free shit from a black president...the main reason why they voted for him (multiple times by the same persons....oh wait, did I already mention that!)
I still can't find on supposed liberal on here or damn near any where that can honestly say why they voted for him....twice!
Whork, care to take a shot at that question?
-
You're all idiots for thinking one side is better than the other.
Hope this helps.
-
He's not even american, he doesn't have a clue of what he's talking about. All his 'info' on american politics comes from european liberal news outlets.
-
Cruz has been vindicated 10x over
Try that Cruz shit and another dem will take it...Best bet is Christie....Whom i like.
I see Cruz has you fucked in the head like Palin did.
Christie will beat out Hilary in the closest Race in history.
Cruz wont make it out of primarys.
Not a prediction like "landslide coming"
Just my opinion.
-
Try that Cruz shit and another dem will take it...Best bet is Christie....Whom i like.
I see Cruz has you fucked in the head like Palin did.
Christie will beat out Hilary in the closest Race in history.
Cruz wont make it out of primarys.
Not a prediction like "landslide coming"
Just my opinion.
::)
-
Try that Cruz shit and another dem will take it...Best bet is Christie....Whom i like.
I see Cruz has you fucked in the head like Palin did.
Christie will beat out Hilary in the closest Race in history.
Cruz wont make it out of primarys.
Not a prediction like "landslide coming"
Just my opinion.
LMFAO!!!!
Cruz was 100% correct on obamacare.
Deal with it
-
LMFAO!!!!
Cruz was 100% correct on obamacare.
Deal with it
Oh ok...well Maybe its "Landslide Coming"???
-
Oh ok...well Maybe its "Landslide Coming"???
Yeah landslide in Obama's popularity - he is where GWB was at this time
-
He's not even american, he doesn't have a clue of what he's talking about. All his 'info' on american politics comes from european liberal news outlets.
Yup only americans no make that right-wingers have ANY clue about american politics ::)
-
No, libs vote for the best politician not the best candidate. There's a difference. Coming into the last election Obama didn't have one successful policy, high UE, no plan for job creation, just failed all the way around. Romney destroyed him in every way EXCEPT politics.
What you say here is actually very true however Romney didnt run on this.
He ran on a platform of: "Get rid of the commie dictator" stuff, catering to the low-iq who voters who decide the GOP nominee. Sad actually he might have done a way better job on the economy than Obama, who knows?
The dumb ass people who voted for Obama (multiple times by the same persons) fell for the rhetoric. Obama knew who he was going after, poor, uninformed, in most cases, lazy oppressed demographic who wanted the free shit from a black president
If you keep believing this your party will never evelvo. Thats a shame for us all. Dem and Repub alike.
...the main reason why they voted for him (multiple times by the same persons....oh wait, did I already mention that!)
I still can't find on supposed liberal on here or damn near any where that can honestly say why they voted for him....twice!
Whork, care to take a shot at that question?
Sure as bad as he is the GOP is a a disastor.
-
You can explain it, but you are just being disingenuous. You mention him because he will not win. He can't run on anything.
Christie is in the same boat as McCain and Romney. A RINO. He is not a conservative.
If moderates or RINOs are so great how come democrats don't vote for them? How come the liberal media turns on them. They prop them up 2 years before elections but once they are the nominee, the media turns on them.
A solid conservative is the key here. If Cruz or Rand represent the party in 2016, we can present a huge contrast to the libtard nominee. We can't run another person who can not condemn wasteful spending, big government and can not condemn crapcare.
Again, Christie is your only hope (at this point in time) and he has some accomplishments which Repubs like such as giving huge tax breaks to businesses, slashing funding for teachers, cops and firefighters (you guys like that right) and he's also got the advantage of not appearing to be crazy, unlike EVERY teabagger.
you're right that he may not be able to win but he has a better chance than anyone else on your side
-
LMFAO!!!!
Cruz was 100% correct on obamacare.
Deal with it
go find all of Cruz's claims and see which ones are actually true
its not even close to 100%
-
go find all of Cruz's claims and see which ones are actually true
its not even close to 100%
LOL!!!!!
-
LOL!!!!!
I see you are not capable of complying
here is one but there are many more
your claim about your messiah is 100% wrong as usual
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2013/oct/17/ted-cruz/sen-ted-cruz-says-premiums-have-gone-virtually-eve/
-
:D
-
:D
I see you have no intelligent response which makes sense given that your statement is false
what else can you do
-
I see you have no intelligent response which makes sense given that your statement is false
what else can you do
Read a damn newspaper - o-FAG is out there today trying to delay obamascam another year for people
-
I see you have no intelligent response which makes sense given that your statement is false
what else can you do
This is SoulC last to responses:
LOL!!!!!
&
:D
The man is a child maybe if we ignore him he will go away and some intelligent conservatives might join?
-
So now these libtards are claiming that Cruz, Rand and the Republicans were wrong.
Now it's clear which party is delusional. This is why I say Democrats are retards.
-
So now this libtards are claiming that Cruz, Rand and the Republicans were wrong.
Now it's clear which party is delusional. This is why I say Democrats are retards.
Has the US disappeared from the face off the earth in the time sice Obamacare took effect?
If no then they were wrong.
-
Read a damn newspaper - o-FAG is out there today trying to delay obamascam another year for people
read the link I provided and for fucks sake come out of the closet
-
Has the US disappeared from the face off the earth in the time sice Obamacare took effect?
If no then they were wrong.
When did they say that it would instantly disappeared?
Hey, nitwit. I answered this very same question on another thread. It is not my fault that you insist on being stupid.
-
Yup only americans no make that right-wingers have ANY clue about american politics ::)
Pretty much yea...you are trying to tell actual americans 'how it is' in their own country while you live in a foreign country thousands of miles away. Your knowledge of american politics is extremely limited and skewed and it shows every time you post. Its ok though, I just don't know why you are so much more fired up over a different country's political battles rather than your own. Focus on your own nation first
-
When did they say that it would instantly disappeared?
Hey, nitwit. I answered this very same question on another thread. It is not my fault that you insist on being stupid.
They said it would destroy the US, that is was the worst law since slavery etc.
-
They said it would destroy the US, that is was the worst law since slavery etc.
Do you know how to read?
When did they say that it would INSTANTLY destroy the US?
Do you understand the concept of "long term repercussions"?
-
Again, Christie is your only hope (at this point in time) and he has some accomplishments which Repubs
Again, you don't know what you are talking/posting about.
All RINOS/moderates of the ilk of Christie, like Romney and McCain have ALL LOST because they can't seperate themselves from the dumocrats' policies. The media points out their hypocrisy like supporting or implementing crapcare type medical legislations, etc....
Only a true conservative will be able to totally differentiate himself from the democrats' party idiocy and ridicule liberal policy which will show the people that the democrats are far to the left and not right center, like obamatheclown fooled the nation into believing.
-
They're all working on the Christie 2016 campaign.
They're well aware of the possibility of him stealing the nomination from conservatives that will actually make good changes for America.
If dems have hilary, or if they have christie, they're happy! They are NOT happy with a Rand or Cruz, who will really fck up liberal policies.
absolutely true.
-
You're all idiots for thinking one side is better than the other.
Hope this helps.
If you don't think one is better then you're not paying attention. The repubs that are in now are RINO's but now their starting to wake up and fight back. Not even Carter was this extreme or clueless.
-
...a testament to Obamacare's success and to Obama's honesty? :-\
I came here to drop a line to Strawman but this...
The word is 'testimony' not 'testament'.
Second, the ACA is at heart a republican idea and the only reason the republicans hate it is b/c it's put forth by a jigaboo.
Third, there is no debate on this forum. Posting link after link after link with 'Boom' or 'LMFAO' is not debate. That is a personality disorder.
Finally, this:
Will Sen. Rand Paul, misunderstanding the voices of the undead, block the appointment of Janet Yellen to head the Federal Reserve Board?
No joke. Tea Party fave Paul told The Wall Street Journal he would have preferred Milton Friedman, the free-market fanatic, to the liberal-ish Yellen. But, as a stunned Journal reporter informed the senator, Milton Friedman is, alas, some years dead.
Unbowed, Paul contends he is channeling Friedman from beyond the grave, invoking the Nobel Prize economist to support the senator's quest against Yellen's well-known commitment to easy money policies at the Fed.
Paul has written, "One need not be an economist or mathematician to wonder whether printing money out of thin air is a sound way to help the economy."
You're more than correct, Senator. If you don't know why America is printing more dollar bills, then you definitely are not an economist nor a mathematician.
As a former student of the late professor Friedman, I'm quite certain that Milty would have been thrilled by Yellen's push to mainline more greenbacks into the US economy.
If you return to your séance, Senator, and ask Friedman's ghost about "printing money out of thin air," you'd find out he all but invented the idea. Or, throw away the Ouija Board and read Friedman's A Monetary History of the United States 1867-1960, his Nobel-winning work, in which he argued convincingly that the Federal Reserve could have prevented the Great Depression had it radically pumped up the money supply.
Friedman's - and Yellen's - greatest fear is not inflation, but deflation, a disastrous fall in prices because of starving the economy of dollars.
Senator Paul moans that, since the market crash of 2008, the Federal Reserve has printed $3.6 trillion and dumped these dollar bills, ink still wet, into the financial system. Paul is waiting for the day when the printing of all these dollars suddenly will cause the price of a can of tuna to soar to $7,000.
But despite the Fed's smoking-hot printing press, the price of tuna is perilously close to falling. Price inflation today stands at a teeny-weeny 1.2 percent.
It's time for Senator Paul and daddy Congressman Ron Paul and their followers in gold-foil hats to admit that adding trillions to the money supply has not caused hyper-inflation. After a quarter-century of hysterical warnings from the two Pauls, the hyperinflation spaceship never landed and little green dollar men did not eat up the planet.
An Idiot's Guide to Gold-Buggery
The Pauls have told us horror stories of the German hyper-inflation of the early 1920s, when you had to schlep a wheelbarrow full of currency to buy a loaf of bread. The cure Paul père hawks, is a return to the gold standard, raising zombie economic theories from the grave, where Friedman buried them.
As Friedman warned, there's something far worse than having to pay for a loaf of bread with bags of currency, and that's having to pay for a loaf of bread with a bag of gold.
Notably, the Tea Party, not the guys in the goofy wigs on Fox TV, but the real one in Boston in 1773, was formed principally to protest King George's reimposing the gold standard on the colonies.
The colonies faced a crisis. Bricks of gold don't have babies; and so, when an economy grows rapidly as did early America, there simply is not enough money to represent that new trade and wealth because the currency is limited by a fixed and arbitrary amount of metal.
Here's why. When the money stock stays flat as production and work force grows, each dollar buys more of that production. Sounds good? No way. A monstrous fall in prices and wages means workers and businesses get less for their output and can't pay off old loans. To simplify: When a farmer borrows $100 for land and seed then sells his corn for $50, the farmer goes bust.
The American colonies faced such ruin when gold-backed currency was insufficient to fund our massive expansion. A revolutionary leader of the time explained the insurgent solution, "Happy for us that we fell upon the Project of giving a Credit to Paper."
Happy days ended when the British Parliament counterattacked with the Currency Act of 1764 that, "renders our Paper Money no legal Tender." King George, to shackle the States to the crown's metal-based currency, required purchasing a tax-stamp for each case of tea, which had to be paid for in His Majesty's "pounds sterling."
So the dissidents threw the tea into the ocean.
A century and a half later, after World War I, the British Parliament did it again, reimposing the gold standard. The United States and most of the world joined Britain in the golden noose. Economies strangled and dangled. The Great Depression eased only when FDR, in one of his first acts of office, rescued the United States, setting the dollar free of gold and letting fly the "Federal Reserve Note," created out of thin air - just like America itself.
And while your beloved Friedman did not care for the government caring for people's welfare via New Deal programs, my professor did praise FDR's printing press for expanding the money supply.
In today's hearing, Janet Yellen might remind the Senate of economist J.M. Keynes warning about, "Madmen in authority, who hear voices in the air, distilling their frenzy from some academic scribbler of a few years back."
Senator Paul, if you are going to listen to the voices of deceased economists, at the least, listen carefully.
http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/20034-rand-pauls-zombie-nomics-versus-janet-yellen
Why that? B/c the rightwing filth on this board is just like its wig-wearing frontman...long on mouth and short on brains
-
LMFAO - so the liberal messiah implemented a GOP plan which SUCKS and that is the left wing defense of this scam?
-
LMFAO - so the liberal messiah implemented a GOP plan which SUCKS and that is the left wing defense of this scam?
Ring the ass bell and look what shows up.
You need help. I mean that with all of my heart.
Your observations are the epitome of propagandized brainwashing and you play that role to the hilt. Please tell me you are acting. Otherwise the personality disorder observation is real.
-
Ring the ass bell and look what shows up.
You need help. I mean that with all of my heart.
Your observations are the epitome of propagandized brainwashing and you play that role to the hilt. Please tell me you are acting. Otherwise the personality disorder observation is real.
-
With each post Soul Crusher digs his psychological hole a little deeper.
But I'll play.
The ACA is not good. It is better than any other republican plan out there. Obama is a center right politician. Sops to big insurance and promises to cut Socail Security are not hallmarks of a left winger.
So the 'liberal messiah' note is funny, very, very funny. But it's not really accurate, is it?
-
I came here to drop a line to Strawman but this...
The word is 'testimony' not 'testament'.
Second, the ACA is at heart a republican idea and the only reason the republicans hate it is b/c it's put forth by a jigaboo.
Third, there is no debate on this forum. Posting link after link after link with 'Boom' or 'LMFAO' is not debate. That is a personality disorder.
Finally, this:
Will Sen. Rand Paul, misunderstanding the voices of the undead, block the appointment of Janet Yellen to head the Federal Reserve Board?
No joke. Tea Party fave Paul told The Wall Street Journal he would have preferred Milton Friedman, the free-market fanatic, to the liberal-ish Yellen. But, as a stunned Journal reporter informed the senator, Milton Friedman is, alas, some years dead.
Unbowed, Paul contends he is channeling Friedman from beyond the grave, invoking the Nobel Prize economist to support the senator's quest against Yellen's well-known commitment to easy money policies at the Fed.
Paul has written, "One need not be an economist or mathematician to wonder whether printing money out of thin air is a sound way to help the economy."
You're more than correct, Senator. If you don't know why America is printing more dollar bills, then you definitely are not an economist nor a mathematician.
As a former student of the late professor Friedman, I'm quite certain that Milty would have been thrilled by Yellen's push to mainline more greenbacks into the US economy.
If you return to your séance, Senator, and ask Friedman's ghost about "printing money out of thin air," you'd find out he all but invented the idea. Or, throw away the Ouija Board and read Friedman's A Monetary History of the United States 1867-1960, his Nobel-winning work, in which he argued convincingly that the Federal Reserve could have prevented the Great Depression had it radically pumped up the money supply.
Friedman's - and Yellen's - greatest fear is not inflation, but deflation, a disastrous fall in prices because of starving the economy of dollars.
Senator Paul moans that, since the market crash of 2008, the Federal Reserve has printed $3.6 trillion and dumped these dollar bills, ink still wet, into the financial system. Paul is waiting for the day when the printing of all these dollars suddenly will cause the price of a can of tuna to soar to $7,000.
But despite the Fed's smoking-hot printing press, the price of tuna is perilously close to falling. Price inflation today stands at a teeny-weeny 1.2 percent.
It's time for Senator Paul and daddy Congressman Ron Paul and their followers in gold-foil hats to admit that adding trillions to the money supply has not caused hyper-inflation. After a quarter-century of hysterical warnings from the two Pauls, the hyperinflation spaceship never landed and little green dollar men did not eat up the planet.
An Idiot's Guide to Gold-Buggery
The Pauls have told us horror stories of the German hyper-inflation of the early 1920s, when you had to schlep a wheelbarrow full of currency to buy a loaf of bread. The cure Paul père hawks, is a return to the gold standard, raising zombie economic theories from the grave, where Friedman buried them.
As Friedman warned, there's something far worse than having to pay for a loaf of bread with bags of currency, and that's having to pay for a loaf of bread with a bag of gold.
Notably, the Tea Party, not the guys in the goofy wigs on Fox TV, but the real one in Boston in 1773, was formed principally to protest King George's reimposing the gold standard on the colonies.
The colonies faced a crisis. Bricks of gold don't have babies; and so, when an economy grows rapidly as did early America, there simply is not enough money to represent that new trade and wealth because the currency is limited by a fixed and arbitrary amount of metal.
Here's why. When the money stock stays flat as production and work force grows, each dollar buys more of that production. Sounds good? No way. A monstrous fall in prices and wages means workers and businesses get less for their output and can't pay off old loans. To simplify: When a farmer borrows $100 for land and seed then sells his corn for $50, the farmer goes bust.
The American colonies faced such ruin when gold-backed currency was insufficient to fund our massive expansion. A revolutionary leader of the time explained the insurgent solution, "Happy for us that we fell upon the Project of giving a Credit to Paper."
Happy days ended when the British Parliament counterattacked with the Currency Act of 1764 that, "renders our Paper Money no legal Tender." King George, to shackle the States to the crown's metal-based currency, required purchasing a tax-stamp for each case of tea, which had to be paid for in His Majesty's "pounds sterling."
So the dissidents threw the tea into the ocean.
A century and a half later, after World War I, the British Parliament did it again, reimposing the gold standard. The United States and most of the world joined Britain in the golden noose. Economies strangled and dangled. The Great Depression eased only when FDR, in one of his first acts of office, rescued the United States, setting the dollar free of gold and letting fly the "Federal Reserve Note," created out of thin air - just like America itself.
And while your beloved Friedman did not care for the government caring for people's welfare via New Deal programs, my professor did praise FDR's printing press for expanding the money supply.
In today's hearing, Janet Yellen might remind the Senate of economist J.M. Keynes warning about, "Madmen in authority, who hear voices in the air, distilling their frenzy from some academic scribbler of a few years back."
Senator Paul, if you are going to listen to the voices of deceased economists, at the least, listen carefully.
http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/20034-rand-pauls-zombie-nomics-versus-janet-yellen
Why that? B/c the rightwing filth on this board is just like its wig-wearing frontman...long on mouth and short on brains
So the GOP hates it because Obama is black? lol. K
-
"Obama is center right"
We have a live one here folks.
-
Again, you don't know what you are talking/posting about.
All RINOS/moderates of the ilk of Christie, like Romney and McCain have ALL LOST because they can't seperate themselves from the dumocrats' policies. The media points out their hypocrisy like supporting or implementing crapcare type medical legislations, etc....
Only a true conservative will be able to totally differentiate himself from the democrats' party idiocy and ridicule liberal policy which will show the people that the democrats are far to the left and not right center, like obamatheclown fooled the nation into believing.
I'll try to make this easier for you to understand
If Christie loses it will by a lesser margin than Cruz or Rand Paul
Try also to keep in mind that Christie just won re-election in a blue state
Look at his demographics in this election compared to his last election
He got 51% of the Hispanic vote, 21% of the black vote and 49% of voters 18-29
This is the ONLY guy (at the present time) who can win a National Election for your party but you (and no doubt many in your party are just too stupid to understand it)
http://www.nytimes.com/projects/elections/2013/general/new-jersey/exit-polls.html
I'm actually glad that you don't agree with this and I hope your party chooses Cruz or Rand as the nominee
It will be a guaranteed win for the Dems and you and the other Repubs will be left scratching their heads the day after the election, dumbfounded and wondering why the country didn't want to vote for the Tea Bay wing nut
-
Obama is a center right politician. Sops to big insurance and promises to cut Socail Security are not hallmarks of a left winger.
This is 100% correct but I never read this on this board so I've just stayed away from saying it.
TBH, the people who parrot that ignorant crap about how Obama is the most extreme socialist blah, blah, blah only means that they are only listening to Fox news and are doing no thinking of their own.
The people who correctly make the observation that Obama is actually center-right in political orientation are most commonly people from other countries where left means left and right means right.
-
"Obama is center right"
We have a live one here folks.
No, Coach. He's correct. Believe it or not, and I know you won't hear that on Fox, but he's right.
When you disagree you're showing that you haven't studied politics seriously nor have you even really followed it for very long.
I am not trying to put you down.
Look at Reagan's policies and ask yourself, how would he be characterized (in terms of political orientation) these days?
-
This is 100% correct but I never read this on this board so I've just stayed away from saying it.
TBH, the people who parrot that ignorant crap about how Obama is the most extreme socialist blah, blah, blah only means that they are only listening to Fox news and are doing no thinking of their own.
The people who correctly make the observation that Obama is actually center-right in political orientation are most commonly people from other countries where left means left and right means right.
Absurd. He's about as far left as you can get and still be elected in DC, both socially and fiscally. Class warfare, bigger government, spending, taxing, etc. Socially, he's a liberal down the board.
-
Absurd. He's about as far left as you can get and still be elected in DC, both socially and fiscally. Class warfare, bigger government, spending, taxing, etc.
Post some sources or GTFO.
You are a Mod and cant even abide to this? WTF??
No wonder this board i going to shit sometimes.
Socially, he's a liberal down the board.
-
(https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQcJ3H2CFzpIVvim0Li-sVqfDIjdgwzZJZwU-SNwd5E05ReJljD)
-
(https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQcJ3H2CFzpIVvim0Li-sVqfDIjdgwzZJZwU-SNwd5E05ReJljD)
Where is your source or links for the above statements?
-
Absurd. He's about as far left as you can get and still be elected in DC, both socially and fiscally. Class warfare, bigger government, spending, taxing, etc. Socially, he's a liberal down the board.
you have chosen to forget that the government expanded under Bush (and Reagan) but has actually shrunk under Obama.
No lack of class warfare or out of control spending with Bush either.
Obama wins on drone strikes though (which I suspect you would have no problem with if he were a Republican)
-
Where is your source or links for the above statements?
(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRH-5RD3_qP78MNg-1Vj1cEKvXlO3qBxF5lfbzQN7sqsRnVbipnEQ)
-
(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRH-5RD3_qP78MNg-1Vj1cEKvXlO3qBxF5lfbzQN7sqsRnVbipnEQ)
Forum Rules:
Quoting Sources: If your thread or post uses material created from another source, you must provide a link to the source. Do not post full articles; only copy a portion of the source material with a link to read the rest.
But im the troll ??? Is this the twilight zone or something?
-
...a testament to Obamacare's success and to Obama's honesty? :-\
People think I am a liberal and I have been posting.
I don't believe Obama has been dishonest with regards to people being able to keep their substandard current coverage. I think he promised something he had no ability to deliver on. I would suggest that he was ill advised. I know the medical insurance industry is going to do everything they can to ensure Obamacare doesn't work.
At this point there are so many problems with the rollout of Obamacare, I am not sure it will be successful, unfortunately. Something about how healthcare is delivered in the U.S. needs to change. We currently rank the worst of all developed nations when it comes to universal healthcare.
If I were younger, I would seriously consider moving to a different country, such as Germany where the healthcare system covers everyone, the medical costs are lower and one can become a doctor without having to spend nearly $1,000,000. on their advanced education achieve this because, guess what, Germany has a educational system which is also available to all, unlike here where it is for the rich or those willing to go into debt for most of the rest of their working lives.
-
Forum Rules:
Quoting Sources: If your thread or post uses material created from another source, you must provide a link to the source. Do not post full articles; only copy a portion of the source material with a link to read the rest.
But im the troll ??? Is this the twilight zone or something?
(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSdXnDMhEr6sSGGFxhObXooJwLj5TDsz0uJ1-RM3FX1uilLPZ8ybA)
-
People think I am a liberal and I have been posting.
I don't believe Obama has been dishonest with regards to people being able to keep their substandard current coverage. I think he promised something he had no ability to deliver on. I would suggest that he was ill advised. I know the medical insurance industry is going to do everything they can to ensure Obamacare doesn't work.
At this point there are so many problems with the rollout of Obamacare, I am not sure it will be successful, unfortunately. Something about how healthcare is delivered in the U.S. needs to change. We currently rank the worst of all developed nations when it comes to universal healthcare.
If I were younger, I would seriously consider moving to a different country, such as Germany where the healthcare system covers everyone, the medical costs are lower and one can become a doctor without having to spend nearly $1,000,000. on their advanced education achieve this because, guess what, Germany has a educational system which is also available to all, unlike here where it is for the rich or those willing to go into debt for most of the rest of their working lives.
I hope it collapses. We can address problems with the system without socializing the system.
-
Absurd. He's about as far left as you can get and still be elected in DC, both socially and fiscally. Class warfare, bigger government, spending, taxing, etc. Socially, he's a liberal down the board.
Bum - I'm going to help you so you won't have to keep repeating that particular lie anymore
http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2012/05/24/who-is-the-smallest-government-spender-since-eisenhower-would-you-believe-its-barack-obama/
-
No, Coach. He's correct. Believe it or not, and I know you won't hear that on Fox, but he's right.
When you disagree you're showing that you haven't studied politics seriously nor have you even really followed it for very long.
I am not trying to put you down.
Look at Reagan's policies and ask yourself, how would he be characterized (in terms of political orientation) these days?
Coach will not answer you in a trillion years. He can't change his stance and years of 'the left, the left, liberals, the left, liberals, liberals, liberals, the left, liberals, the left, the left, liberals, liberals, the left, liberals, liberals, the left, the left, the left the left, liberals, the left'. His standard answer.
He'll ask you a question in return to skirt the issue or at most, parrot headlines. Want an in depth conversation. He can't.
He's not a bad guy. I quite like his posts and humour. He's just not politically minded.
-
People think I am a liberal and I have been posting.
I don't believe Obama has been dishonest with regards to people being able to keep their substandard current coverage. I think he promised something he had no ability to deliver on. I would suggest that he was ill advised. I know the medical insurance industry is going to do everything they can to ensure Obamacare doesn't work.
At this point there are so many problems with the rollout of Obamacare, I am not sure it will be successful, unfortunately. Something about how healthcare is delivered in the U.S. needs to change. We currently rank the worst of all developed nations when it comes to universal healthcare.
If I were younger, I would seriously consider moving to a different country, such as Germany where the healthcare system covers everyone, the medical costs are lower and one can become a doctor without having to spend nearly $1,000,000. on their advanced education achieve this because, guess what, Germany has a educational system which is also available to all, unlike here where it is for the rich or those willing to go into debt for most of the rest of their working lives.
Sweden is apparently a good one for immigrants, too. (And, simmer down, not just for Muslims.)
Immigrants in both Sweden and Germany, at least ones who come over as a result of marriage to a citizen, are given free language classes and other benefits in an effort to integrate the newcomer into society.
I hear about this from my Thai wife who has internet friends that have married guys from those countries. She tells me that in Sweden, they actually pay immigrants to take the language classes (and I joke that they have to because that language is a bitch to learn). She also talks to women who've emigrated from Thailand to middle eastern countries and, unless the guy is really rich, their life SUCKS.
-
Why would Dems want to help Christie?
He's the Repubs only hope of winning the White House in 2016
I gotta disagree.
Christie is a RINO. Policy-wise, he's just like Romney and Mccain.
The only difference? Romney looked like President, and Mccain was a war hero. Christie looks like a fat office clerk with an anger problem... he looks like shit and he's not on the campaign trail 17 hours a day. He's probably got a WORSE chance than mccain or romney.
No, the repubs CAN win with a far-right conservative, because their base will show up & donate like CRAZY. they'll be like, FINALLY we have a true conservative again!!! Most repubs on getbig hated romney. They didn't campaign and donate to him as much, because of it. Now, if they had a Rand/Cruz ticket... whew... look out! Donate like crazy, volunteering - they'll realize they have a candidate that REALLY WILL chance things.
Christie ain't gonna chance much... he's a RINO, no denying it, not even up for debate.
-
"Obama is center right"
We have a live one here folks.
Obama is a liberal on domestic policy, and a neoconservative on foreign policy.
He's bush II when it comes to wars, economic issues, etc. Nothing all that different. Foreign leaders shit on Bush and they shit on Obama now too. Obama kept all his policies and his new ones sure look a lot like they too. We can nitpick details, but when you have 333386 condemning obama for too many people killedin pakistan with drone strikes lol... well, obama isn't a dem on foreign policy ;)
Obama's damage has come from the welfare state he's embraced INSIDE our borders.
-
I don't trust Christie either.
Dems LOVE Christie. MSNBC is on his nuts so hard they might get pregnant.
It's GOOD that you don't trust Christie. He's pretty liberal. He practically handed the 2012 election to dems by posing with Obama in the Sandy aftermath and giving the "I dont care about the election or Romney, this is about NJ..."
-
Dems LOVE Christie. MSNBC is on his nuts so hard they might get pregnant.
It's GOOD that you don't trust Christie. He's pretty liberal. He practically handed the 2012 election to dems by posing with Obama in the Sandy aftermath and giving the "I dont care about the election or Romney, this is about NJ..."
Im w rand
-
I came here to drop a line to Strawman but this...
The word is 'testimony' not 'testament'.
Second, the ACA is at heart a republican idea and the only reason the republicans hate it is b/c it's put forth by a jigaboo.
Third, there is no debate on this forum. Posting link after link after link with 'Boom' or 'LMFAO' is not debate. That is a personality disorder.
Finally, this:
Will Sen. Rand Paul, misunderstanding the voices of the undead, block the appointment of Janet Yellen to head the Federal Reserve Board?
No joke. Tea Party fave Paul told The Wall Street Journal he would have preferred Milton Friedman, the free-market fanatic, to the liberal-ish Yellen. But, as a stunned Journal reporter informed the senator, Milton Friedman is, alas, some years dead.
Unbowed, Paul contends he is channeling Friedman from beyond the grave, invoking the Nobel Prize economist to support the senator's quest against Yellen's well-known commitment to easy money policies at the Fed.
Paul has written, "One need not be an economist or mathematician to wonder whether printing money out of thin air is a sound way to help the economy."
You're more than correct, Senator. If you don't know why America is printing more dollar bills, then you definitely are not an economist nor a mathematician.
As a former student of the late professor Friedman, I'm quite certain that Milty would have been thrilled by Yellen's push to mainline more greenbacks into the US economy.
If you return to your séance, Senator, and ask Friedman's ghost about "printing money out of thin air," you'd find out he all but invented the idea. Or, throw away the Ouija Board and read Friedman's A Monetary History of the United States 1867-1960, his Nobel-winning work, in which he argued convincingly that the Federal Reserve could have prevented the Great Depression had it radically pumped up the money supply.
Friedman's - and Yellen's - greatest fear is not inflation, but deflation, a disastrous fall in prices because of starving the economy of dollars.
Senator Paul moans that, since the market crash of 2008, the Federal Reserve has printed $3.6 trillion and dumped these dollar bills, ink still wet, into the financial system. Paul is waiting for the day when the printing of all these dollars suddenly will cause the price of a can of tuna to soar to $7,000.
But despite the Fed's smoking-hot printing press, the price of tuna is perilously close to falling. Price inflation today stands at a teeny-weeny 1.2 percent.
It's time for Senator Paul and daddy Congressman Ron Paul and their followers in gold-foil hats to admit that adding trillions to the money supply has not caused hyper-inflation. After a quarter-century of hysterical warnings from the two Pauls, the hyperinflation spaceship never landed and little green dollar men did not eat up the planet.
An Idiot's Guide to Gold-Buggery
The Pauls have told us horror stories of the German hyper-inflation of the early 1920s, when you had to schlep a wheelbarrow full of currency to buy a loaf of bread. The cure Paul père hawks, is a return to the gold standard, raising zombie economic theories from the grave, where Friedman buried them.
As Friedman warned, there's something far worse than having to pay for a loaf of bread with bags of currency, and that's having to pay for a loaf of bread with a bag of gold.
Notably, the Tea Party, not the guys in the goofy wigs on Fox TV, but the real one in Boston in 1773, was formed principally to protest King George's reimposing the gold standard on the colonies.
The colonies faced a crisis. Bricks of gold don't have babies; and so, when an economy grows rapidly as did early America, there simply is not enough money to represent that new trade and wealth because the currency is limited by a fixed and arbitrary amount of metal.
Here's why. When the money stock stays flat as production and work force grows, each dollar buys more of that production. Sounds good? No way. A monstrous fall in prices and wages means workers and businesses get less for their output and can't pay off old loans. To simplify: When a farmer borrows $100 for land and seed then sells his corn for $50, the farmer goes bust.
The American colonies faced such ruin when gold-backed currency was insufficient to fund our massive expansion. A revolutionary leader of the time explained the insurgent solution, "Happy for us that we fell upon the Project of giving a Credit to Paper."
Happy days ended when the British Parliament counterattacked with the Currency Act of 1764 that, "renders our Paper Money no legal Tender." King George, to shackle the States to the crown's metal-based currency, required purchasing a tax-stamp for each case of tea, which had to be paid for in His Majesty's "pounds sterling."
So the dissidents threw the tea into the ocean.
A century and a half later, after World War I, the British Parliament did it again, reimposing the gold standard. The United States and most of the world joined Britain in the golden noose. Economies strangled and dangled. The Great Depression eased only when FDR, in one of his first acts of office, rescued the United States, setting the dollar free of gold and letting fly the "Federal Reserve Note," created out of thin air - just like America itself.
And while your beloved Friedman did not care for the government caring for people's welfare via New Deal programs, my professor did praise FDR's printing press for expanding the money supply.
In today's hearing, Janet Yellen might remind the Senate of economist J.M. Keynes warning about, "Madmen in authority, who hear voices in the air, distilling their frenzy from some academic scribbler of a few years back."
Senator Paul, if you are going to listen to the voices of deceased economists, at the least, listen carefully.
http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/20034-rand-pauls-zombie-nomics-versus-janet-yellen
Why that? B/c the rightwing filth on this board is just like its wig-wearing frontman...long on mouth and short on brains
Simply awesome.
-
Coach will not answer you in a trillion years. He can't change his stance and years of 'the left, the left, liberals, the left, liberals, liberals, liberals, the left, liberals, the left, the left, liberals, liberals, the left, liberals, liberals, the left, the left, the left the left, liberals, the left'. His standard answer.
He'll ask you a question in return to skirt the issue or at most, parrot headlines. Want an in depth conversation. He can't.
He's not a bad guy. I quite like his posts and humour. He's just not politically minded.
You can't be serious. You must not pay attention to my post as much as you think. Youmight not think I'm politically minded, but you can't deny my record of being right about my predictions and Obama have been more dead on than any lib that has posted 9n here since that clown started to run for presidents. What I say stands, the left can't argue progressive policy nor defend it without demonizing or name calling, ironically thats how Obama "won" (I use that word loosely)the election. He got destroyed on policy and saying he's a criminal would be an understatement. So tell me, what is it about him that makes you want to defend him?
-
I don't trust Christie either.
Trust? You're the guy who recently made a post about how the "Republic of Kenya" birth certificate proved Obama was not a citizen (a document that was proven to be fake over a year ago), and the guy who buys the shit that Joe Arpaio and Orly Taitz peddle.
If you "trust" the sun rises in the East, the safe bet is that it rises in the West.
And remember: don't accuse me of being a leftist or a liberal; you tried that last time and got your ass handed back to you on a platter.
-
Absurd. He's about as far left as you can get and still be elected in DC, both socially and fiscally. Class warfare, bigger government, spending, taxing, etc. Socially, he's a liberal down the board.
You call yourself a moderator you sonofabitch?
You certainly don't have to respond like an adult pal. 'Cause the good news is -- you're fired. Oh, have I got your attention now? Good. You get the picture? You're laughing now? You can't moderate, you can't close shit, you ARE shit, hit the bricks pal and beat it 'cause you are going out!!!
(see Mamet)
Anyway, you really are a disgrace as a moderator old man and just because you put on a smiley face next to your comments does not dull the shine from the evil underneath. Look at your comment above. Total wishful thinking supported by nothing.
-
Sounds like a whiny bitch to me.....do somebody hurt your poor widdle feelings lib douche.....
-
You call yourself a moderator you sonofabitch?
You certainly don't have to respond like an adult pal. 'Cause the good news is -- you're fired. Oh, have I got your attention now? Good. You get the picture? You're laughing now? You can't moderate, you can't close shit, you ARE shit, hit the bricks pal and beat it 'cause you are going out!!!
(see Mamet)
Anyway, you really are a disgrace as a moderator old man and just because you put on a smiley face next to your comments does not dull the shine from the evil underneath. Look at your comment above. Total wishful thinking supported by nothing.
(http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRw6xbAATkbv-m4qouMu27jYsUhx6yUCFuZr_9pDAn-ZB2MzGxBoNxYQgcKVg)
-
That post should be the wiki example of meltdowns..but then he's hving a very bad couple of weeks.
-
Forum Rules:
Quoting Sources: If your thread or post uses material created from another source, you must provide a link to the source. Do not post full articles; only copy a portion of the source material with a link to read the rest.
But im the troll ??? Is this the twilight zone or something?
Just to help out here......
What BB posted was his opinion not material from an article.
Absurd. He's about as far left as you can get and still be elected in DC, both socially and fiscally. Class warfare, bigger government, spending, taxing, etc. Socially, he's a liberal down the board.
Now, BB can choose NOT to back up his opinion like some on the board often do. But what he posted was his opinion none the less and it wasn't an material from another source
What we don't want is people posting articles claiming things without a link to back it up. For example Thread title: "Obama lied about blah blah blah" and then something that looks like an article with no link. (Sometimes people even mislead with the thread title as it is not what the article says)
-
Trust? You're the guy who recently made a post about how the "Republic of Kenya" birth certificate proved Obama was not a citizen (a document that was proven to be fake over a year ago), and the guy who buys the shit that Joe Arpaio and Orly Taitz peddle.
If you "trust" the sun rises in the East, the safe bet is that it rises in the West.
And remember: don't accuse me of being a leftist or a liberal; you tried that last time and got your ass handed back to you on a platter.
Like I said, I'm right most of the this MIGHT be one of the times I'm wrong. Don't get your panties in a wad. I'm still not 100% convinced. Hes underhanded, a liar, a cheat, a communist and a criminal. I trust him in no way shape or form nor do I have one ounce of respect for this fraud
-
Besides, last I checked I'm not the one running for office.
-
Just to help out here......
What BB posted was his opinion not material from an article.
Now, BB can choose NOT to back up his opinion like some on the board often do. But what he posted was his opinion none the less and it wasn't an material from another source
What we don't want is people posting articles claiming things without a link to back it up. For example Thread title: "Obama lied about blah blah blah" and then something that looks like an article with no link. (Sometimes people even mislead with the thread title as it is not what the article says)
Bums claim of "bigger government, spending" is not an opinion but a provably false statement
-
I gotta disagree.
Christie is a RINO. Policy-wise, he's just like Romney and Mccain.
The only difference? Romney looked like President, and Mccain was a war hero. Christie looks like a fat office clerk with an anger problem... he looks like shit and he's not on the campaign trail 17 hours a day. He's probably got a WORSE chance than mccain or romney.
No, the repubs CAN win with a far-right conservative, because their base will show up & donate like CRAZY. they'll be like, FINALLY we have a true conservative again!!! Most repubs on getbig hated romney. They didn't campaign and donate to him as much, because of it. Now, if they had a Rand/Cruz ticket... whew... look out! Donate like crazy, volunteering - they'll realize they have a candidate that REALLY WILL chance things.
Christie ain't gonna chance much... he's a RINO, no denying it, not even up for debate.
do you also believe in leprechauns and fairies too because the idea that there is this secret army of teabagger just sitting on their hands until a sufficiently hard right candidate shows up is a fairy tale that your side likes to tell each other
They don't exist and you've watched more than enough teabaggers win in the primary only to get crushed in the general election to learn this point by now
I hope that Repubs nominate Cruz or Paul or fuck, why not Santorum or Bachmann. For every wing nut you get off the couch you'll lose 2 or 10 sane Republicans who will not put a loon into the most powerful position on planet earth
Nothing will please me more than than to see the confused and bewildered teabaggers on November 9th trying to figure out why that elusive teabagger vote didn't show up to save the day
-
You call yourself a moderator you sonofabitch?
You certainly don't have to respond like an adult pal. 'Cause the good news is -- you're fired. Oh, have I got your attention now? Good. You get the picture? You're laughing now? You can't moderate, you can't close shit, you ARE shit, hit the bricks pal and beat it 'cause you are going out!!!
(see Mamet)
Anyway, you really are a disgrace as a moderator old man and just because you put on a smiley face next to your comments does not dull the shine from the evil underneath. Look at your comment above. Total wishful thinking supported by nothing.
(http://static.giantbomb.com/uploads/scale_super/13/139245/2111117-snob_you_seem_angry_why_u_mad_brah_.jpg)
-
Just to help out here......
What BB posted was his opinion not material from an article.
Now, BB can choose NOT to back up his opinion like some on the board often do. But what he posted was his opinion none the less and it wasn't an material from another source
What we don't want is people posting articles claiming things without a link to back it up. For example Thread title: "Obama lied about blah blah blah" and then something that looks like an article with no link. (Sometimes people even mislead with the thread title as it is not what the article says)
That was way too much effort. I like my pictures better. :)
-
I gotta disagree.
Christie is a RINO. Policy-wise, he's just like Romney and Mccain.
The only difference? Romney looked like President, and Mccain was a war hero. Christie looks like a fat office clerk with an anger problem... he looks like shit and he's not on the campaign trail 17 hours a day. He's probably got a WORSE chance than mccain or romney.
No, the repubs CAN win with a far-right conservative, because their base will show up & donate like CRAZY. they'll be like, FINALLY we have a true conservative again!!! Most repubs on getbig hated romney. They didn't campaign and donate to him as much, because of it. Now, if they had a Rand/Cruz ticket... whew... look out! Donate like crazy, volunteering - they'll realize they have a candidate that REALLY WILL chance things.
Christie ain't gonna chance much... he's a RINO, no denying it, not even up for debate.
Exactly!!!!
-
Exactly!!!!
I'll be looking forward to your confusion and disappointment on November 9th
-
Obama is a liberal on domestic policy, and a neoconservative on foreign policy.
He's bush II when it comes to wars, economic issues, etc. Nothing all that different. Foreign leaders shit on Bush and they shit on Obama now too. Obama kept all his policies and his new ones sure look a lot like they too. We can nitpick details, but when you have 333386 condemning obama for too many people killedin pakistan with drone strikes lol... well, obama isn't a dem on foreign policy ;)
Obama's damage has come from the welfare state he's embraced INSIDE our borders.
Mixed bag, for sure. But isn't it even more complicated than this (domestic issue lib, foreign policy conservative)?
When the NSA spies on folks (correction: EVERYONE) in the USA, that would seem to be a domestic issue but it sure isn't what you'd expect from a liberal.
The lack of prosecution of the folks in the finance industry for grave injuries to our economy also doesn't seem like the (in)action of the liberal that Fox would like you to believe that Obama is.
Of course right-wing media sources aimed at the more simple-minded among us uniformly say that Obama is a socialist. If you take a look at what the smarter conservatives are saying, though, this is not the case. (This is not to say that you won't find any intelligent conservatives saying that Obama is a strict leftist, however.)
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/is-barack-obama-a-republican-realist/ (http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/is-barack-obama-a-republican-realist/)
...
In a way, much of what Obama has been advocating on domestic policy is not very different from what a Bush I administration (or Nixon, Ford or Eisenhower) would be doing, ranging from raising taxes, reforming immigration policy, or protecting the environment. Obama, in short, is not a socialist or a even a social-democrat, just a good old centrist Republican.
-
That post should be the wiki example of meltdowns..but then he's hving a very bad couple of weeks.
Righties here should be grateful when AndreaRyc posts angrily vs. when he just posts his analysis (of politics, this board, whatever).
Maybe I'm too partial to objectively comment but from what I've seen, his analytic posts have absolutely brutalized some of y'all.
-
You guys are still arguing this shit?
Wow...
Obviously Obama hasn't been the big government spender that people say he is... That's bullshit. He is however raising some taxes... I don't appreciate it of course, but I'm not rich, so they aren't affecting me so much.
If the worse thing people have to bitch about is that their healthcare in the wake of a system overhaul, then you must be doing ok.
The thing Obama pisses me off about is civil liberties... He's every bit the crusher of those as any Republican Neo-Con ever was.
That is the ONLY thing I can't stand about him... Another dislike is his continuous military intervention... Don't like it.
Didn't like it under Bush II, don't like it now.
-
Health Care is massive because it affects everyone. My costs are skyrocketing due to this shit and so are millions and soon to be tens of millions.
It deserves all the attention is it getting.
Obama belongs in jail.
You guys are still arguing this shit?
Wow...
Obviously Obama hasn't been the big government spender that people say he is... That's bullshit. He is however raising some taxes... I don't appreciate it of course, but I'm not rich, so they aren't affecting me so much.
If the worse thing people have to bitch about is that their healthcare in the wake of a system overhaul, then you must be doing ok.
The thing Obama pisses me off about is civil liberties... He's every bit the crusher of those as any Republican Neo-Con ever was.
That is the ONLY thing I can't stand about him... Another dislike is his continuous military intervention... Don't like it.
Didn't like it under Bush II, don't like it now.
-
Health Care is massive because it affects everyone. My costs are skyrocketing due to this shit and so are millions and soon to be tens of millions.
It deserves all the attention is it getting.
Obama belongs in jail.
Possibly, but only die-hard right wingers seem to be saying it's TERRIBLE... The rest of the country must think it's a good idea.
I mean, he did win re-election on it, didn't he?
-
Possibly, but only die-hard right wingers seem to be saying it's TERRIBLE... The rest of the country must think it's a good idea.
I mean, he did win re-election on it, didn't he?
In spite of the horrible roll out (I call it trying to build the plane while it's in the air) the approval of the ACA has actually gone up since August
http://www.gallup.com/poll/165548/approval-affordable-care-act-inches.aspx
-
Possibly, but only die-hard right wingers seem to be saying it's TERRIBLE... The rest of the country must think it's a good idea.
I mean, he did win re-election on it, didn't he?
Are you trolling? He won re-election based on his lies and cover ups and now that SHTF he is below 40% approval and majority want this stupid ass law repealed.
-
Sounds like a whiny bitch to me.....do somebody hurt your poor widdle feelings lib douche.....
You better be holding a mirror when you type that son. Don't you recognize the greatest monologue in movie history? I guess you don't.
-
You better be holding a mirror when you type that son. Don't you recognize the greatest monologue in movie history? I guess you don't.
yep, even in spite of your hint for the uninformed
-
(http://static.giantbomb.com/uploads/scale_super/13/139245/2111117-snob_you_seem_angry_why_u_mad_brah_.jpg)
Glengarry Glenross old man. Get a grip
Turn off FOX news's fair and balanced coverage. There is life. There is truth. And life is its own reward. Turn from the dark stain on what's left of your soul. William Golding's conception of good and evil can be summarized in a deceptively simple definition: Good is what you do for the benefit of others and Evil is what you do for yourself. That definition embraces many of the complexities of life.
-
Forum Rules:
Quoting Sources: If your thread or post uses material created from another source, you must provide a link to the source. Do not post full articles; only copy a portion of the source material with a link to read the rest.
But im the troll ??? Is this the twilight zone or something?
Axvo posted no links to his arguments, I posted links to all of mine and yet Ozmo chose to let it go. Needs to make up his mind. Very Obama-esk!
-
Trust? You're the guy who recently made a post about how the "Republic of Kenya" birth certificate proved Obama was not a citizen (a document that was proven to be fake over a year ago), and the guy who buys the shit that Joe Arpaio and Orly Taitz peddle.
If you "trust" the sun rises in the East, the safe bet is that it rises in the West.
And remember: don't accuse me of being a leftist or a liberal; you tried that last time and got your ass handed back to you on a platter.
Great post avxo.
Looks like you wrote all those words your self and They weren't from some article.... Meaning you didn't have to link it. If you had pasted an article to support your claim I know you would have linked it.
Imagine some ignorant punk Birther might stupidly think otherwise.
-
Besides, last I checked I'm not the one running for office.
So its cool for you to lie?
-
Just to help out here......
What BB posted was his opinion not material from an article.
Now, BB can choose NOT to back up his opinion like some on the board often do. But what he posted was his opinion none the less and it wasn't an material from another source
What we don't want is people posting articles claiming things without a link to back it up. For example Thread title: "Obama lied about blah blah blah" and then something that looks like an article with no link. (Sometimes people even mislead with the thread title as it is not what the article says)
So your own Mods lie and dont back up what they say.
No wonder this board is going to shit.
-
Bums claim of "bigger government, spending" is not an opinion but a provably false statement
This!!
And from a Mod no less.
How can you expect to run a POLITICAL board when the Mods act like this? Fire his ass already.
-
Mixed bag, for sure. But isn't it even more complicated than this (domestic issue lib, foreign policy conservative)?
When the NSA spies on folks (correction: EVERYONE) in the USA, that would seem to be a domestic issue but it sure isn't what you'd expect from a liberal.
The lack of prosecution of the folks in the finance industry for grave injuries to our economy also doesn't seem like the (in)action of the liberal that Fox would like you to believe that Obama is.
Of course right-wing media sources aimed at the more simple-minded among us uniformly say that Obama is a socialist. If you take a look at what the smarter conservatives are saying, though, this is not the case. (This is not to say that you won't find any intelligent conservatives saying that Obama is a strict leftist, however.)
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/is-barack-obama-a-republican-realist/ (http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/is-barack-obama-a-republican-realist/)
...
In a way, much of what Obama has been advocating on domestic policy is not very different from what a Bush I administration (or Nixon, Ford or Eisenhower) would be doing, ranging from raising taxes, reforming immigration policy, or protecting the environment. Obama, in short, is not a socialist or a even a social-democrat, just a good old centrist Republican.
Good post.
-
That post should be the wiki example of meltdowns..but then he's hving a very bad couple of weeks.
Even in a meltdown he posts something way more useful and intelligent than you.
Read his posts again and then read yours.
Something to think about Soldier.
-
Axvo posted no links to his arguments, I posted links to all of mine and yet Ozmo chose to let it go. Needs to make up his mind. Very Obama-esk!
I have never been on your ass on posting links or sources. I respect that you do this it lifts the conversation up from a bunch of people shouting their opinions to a conversations that actually contain some merit and fact thereby makes us a little smarter and informed.
The fact BB doesnt and on top of it him being a Mod is a damn shame.
-
So your own Mods lie and dont back up what they say.
No wonder this board is going to shit.
Everyone at some point or another will choose not to back up what they say or their opinion. Some do it because they dont want spend the time it takes to back up their argument while some do it because they can't and refuse to consider changing their position.
In any event your charge against BB was incorrect because the rules are clear. He was stating opinion. He wasnt quoting sources without linking them.
If we required everyone to back everything little thing say with links and sources......it would be silly.
If you challenge a persons claim and they refuse to back it up and you inturn use legit linked sources to back your challenge up that essentially settles it. But don't expect the opponent to concede. They will either deflect, ad hom, ignore or just run away. Or cry like a little bitch.
-
Glengarry Glenross old man. Get a grip
Turn off FOX news's fair and balanced coverage. There is life. There is truth. And life is its own reward. Turn from the dark stain on what's left of your soul. William Golding's conception of good and evil can be summarized in a deceptively simple definition: Good is what you do for the benefit of others and Evil is what you do for yourself. That definition embraces many of the complexities of life.
That is some deep commentary brosef. Deep. You should write a book.
-
Everyone at some point or another will choose not to back up what they say or their opinion. Some do it because they dont want spend the time it takes to back up their argument while some do it because they can't and refuse to consider changing their position.
In any event your charge against BB was incorrect because the rules are clear. He was stating opinion. He wasnt quoting sources without linking them.
If we required everyone to back everything little thing say with links and sources......it would be silly.
If you challenge a persons claim and they refuse to back it up and you inturn use legit linked sources to back your challenge up that essentially settles it. But don't expect the opponent to concede. They will either deflect, ad hom, ignore or just run away. Or cry like a little bitch.
Well said. :)
-
Are you trolling? He won re-election based on his lies and cover ups and now that SHTF he is below 40% approval and majority want this stupid ass law repealed.
What "Majority"?
Show me... Every poll seems to say otherwise except among republicans.
-
Axvo posted no links to his arguments, I posted links to all of mine and yet Ozmo chose to let it go. Needs to make up his mind. Very Obama-esk!
I wrote what I wrote myself, no quoting of any article. So beyond what I wrote, I don't know what else I had to include, or what links I could have posted with it. What sort of links did you expect me to post? Links to your posts, which I was referencing (and to my replies, which, by the way, contain links to support everything I said in them)?
P.S.: You really shouldn't challenge someone who writes academic papers to provide citations, because let me tell you... academia takes citations and proper attribution and quoting very seriously, and I'm a fucking expert at it.
-
I wrote what I wrote myself, no quoting of any article. So beyond what I wrote, I don't know what else I had to include, or what links I could have posted with it. What sort of links did you expect me to post? Links to your posts, which I was referencing (and to my replies, which, by the way, contain links to support everything I said in them)?
P.S.: You really shouldn't challenge who writesacademic papers to provide citations, because let me tell you... academia takes citations and proper attribution and quoting very seriously, and I'm a fucking expert at it.
Even the best writers have to list their resources. When I write and submit an article, I'm required to list my references and sources. (No, I'm not comparing myself to the best writers)
-
Even the best writers have to list their resources. When I write and submit an article, I'm required to list my references and sources. (No, I'm not comparing myself to the best writers)
When I quote someone else, I provide either a link or a reference, and I've done this on most of my posts; however, posting links to the same thing fifty times, because you keep copy-pasting articles about the same topic seems counterproductive, especially when your posts are culled from some kind of echo chamber and consist of widely discredited information that a simple Google search can debunk.
Tell me, which references and sources would I "list" in support of my own words? They stand on their own merit. When I reference outside sources, I link them - prodigiously. Perhaps you are complaining because I did not provide links to the multiple (http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=481005.msg6825446#msg6825446) silly (http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=498938.msg7083811#msg7083811) birther (http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=417231.0) posts (http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=481005.msg6826486#msg6826486) and threads (http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=481005.msg6827308#msg6827308) of yours, I guess. Or some of the numerous (http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=481005.msg6827751#msg6827751) brutal smackdowns (http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=498938.msg7087916#msg7087916) you received?
It wouldn't help anyways. We both know that no matter how I quote my posts and reference my sources, nothing that I say gets through to you. You have the intellectual capacity of a rock - and not the rolling kind either. You do not see reality, you do not care to rationally examine facts and you regurgitate whatever others stuff, prechewed and predigested, into your mouth.
So don't act all smart and sassy to me, because I'll slap you back so hard that you and your single brain cell will think you're back at the three hour coach training seminar you attended back in 1973.
-
This!!
And from a Mod no less.
How can you expect to run a POLITICAL board when the Mods act like this? Fire his ass already.
Apparently both Ozmo and Bum are working off a new definition of the word "opinion" that includes making provable false declarative statements
-
Everyone at some point or another will choose not to back up what they say or their opinion. Some do it because they dont want spend the time it takes to back up their argument while some do it because they can't and refuse to consider changing their position.
In any event your charge against BB was incorrect because the rules are clear. He was stating opinion. He wasnt quoting sources without linking them.
If we required everyone to back everything little thing say with links and sources......it would be silly.
If you challenge a persons claim and they refuse to back it up and you inturn use legit linked sources to back your challenge up that essentially settles it. But don't expect the opponent to concede. They will either deflect, ad hom, ignore or just run away. Or cry like a little bitch.
Apparently some peeps cant read and just want to whine like little wanna be spin doctor bitches.
-
When I quote someone else, I provide either a link or a reference, and I've done this on most of my posts; however, posting links to the same thing fifty times, because you keep copy-pasting articles about the same topic seems counterproductive, especially when your posts are culled from some kind of echo chamber and consist of widely discredited information that a simple Google search can debunk.
Tell me, which references and sources would I "list" in support of my own words? They stand on their own merit. When I reference outside sources, I link them - prodigiously. Perhaps you are complaining because I did not provide links to the multiple (http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=481005.msg6825446#msg6825446) silly (http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=498938.msg7083811#msg7083811) birther (http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=417231.0) posts (http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=481005.msg6826486#msg6826486) and threads (http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=481005.msg6827308#msg6827308) of yours, I guess. Or some of the numerous (http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=481005.msg6827751#msg6827751) brutal smackdowns (http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=498938.msg7087916#msg7087916) you received?
It wouldn't help anyways. We both know that no matter how I quote my posts and reference my sources, nothing that I say gets through to you. You have the intellectual capacity of a rock - and not the rolling kind either. You do not see reality, you do not care to rationally examine facts and you regurgitate whatever others stuff, prechewed and predigested, into your mouth.
So don't act all smart and sassy to me, because I'll slap you back so hard that you and your single brain cell will think you're back at the three hour coach training seminar you attended back in 1973.
It must be really tough going through life thinking you're a know-it-all and thinking your job, business or whatever is more important than someone else's. Check yourself, son. Seriously, you get on my last fucking nerve with your pompous attitude. Not even joking.
-
It must be really tough going through life thinking you're a know-it-all
I don't think I know it all; quite the opposite in fact. I know in which fields and how far my knowledge extends and I don't talk about stuff I don't know or understand.
and thinking your job, business or whatever is more important than someone else's.
I do think my job is very important - it certainly is to me, or I wouldn't be doing it. Whether it's important to others, that's up to them but it's not my concern. As for what I think, my position is that every job has a purpose - or almost every job anyways - and all of them are important in some way. Some are, no doubt, more important than others, but few are unimportant.
Check yourself, son.
I've already been done checked myself.
Seriously, you get on my last fucking nerve with your pompous attitude.
There's not much I can do about your feelings, nor am I particularly interested in knowing about them; save that for your psychologist or your girlfriends. All I can say is that demolishing your arguments† - and doing it with gusto - doesn't make one pompous.
Not even joking.
I can tell. You will forgive me if I chuckled a bit anyways.
† I am using the term argument loosely here. Unhinged, incomprehensible, unsupported rants don't really count as arguments. Also, check it out! Footnotes! Like in a proper academic paper. Coming soon, a bibliography. BOOM!
-
Apparently some peeps cant read and just want to whine like little wanna be spin doctor bitches.
Everyone at some point or another will choose not to back up what they say or their opinion. Some do it because they dont want spend the time it takes to back up their argument while some do it because they can't and refuse to consider changing their position.
In any event your charge against BB was incorrect because the rules are clear. He was stating opinion. He wasnt quoting sources without linking them.
If we required everyone to back everything little thing say with links and sources......it would be silly.
If you challenge a persons claim and they refuse to back it up and you inturn use legit linked sources to back your challenge up that essentially settles it. But don't expect the opponent to concede. They will either deflect, ad hom, ignore or just run away. Or cry like a little bitch.
apparently that doesn't settle it because that's exactly what I did and then you proceeded to proclaim that Bums lie was actually just an opinion
Bum - I'm going to help you so you won't have to keep repeating that particular lie anymore
http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2012/05/24/who-is-the-smallest-government-spender-since-eisenhower-would-you-believe-its-barack-obama/
-
apparently that doesn't settle it because that's exactly what I did and then you proceeded to proclaim that Bums lie was actually just an opinion
and....
But don't expect the opponent to concede. They will either deflect, ad hom, ignore or just run away. Or cry like a little bitch.
If you feel you addressed his inaccuracy then its on him to defend, ignore, or whatever.
What we will not do is create some sort of judging panel that removes inaccurate statements. I am thinking you are not suggesting something as fucking stupid as that for a forum because that would show you take this crap way to serous, are not living in reality, and should spend some time out side away from your computer.
-
and....
If you feel you addressed his inaccuracy then its on him to defend, ignore, or whatever.
What we will not do is create some sort of judging panel that removes inaccurate statements. I am thinking you are not suggesting something as fucking stupid as that for a forum because that would show you take this crap way to serous, are not living in reality, and should spend some time out side away from your computer.
my point is that you claimed Bums statement was an opinion when it was not and you claimed that AFTER I pointed out it was false and with supporting documentation
I don't expect Bum to ever acknowledge his lies because he never does
I do expect you to know the definition of the word opinion
-
my point is that you claimed Bums statement was an opinion when it was not and you claimed that AFTER I pointed out it was false and with supporting documentation
I don't expect Bum to ever acknowledge his lies because he never does
I do expect you to know the definition of the word opinion
I understand what you are getting at. But no one has the time to verify every statement made by each poster.
I realize some here will just say stuff knowing its not true simply to argue and also not want to pursue the argument and back up what they said.
-
I understand what you are getting at. But no one has the time to verify every statement made by each poster.
I realize some here will just say stuff knowing its not true simply to argue and also not want to pursue the argument and back up what they said.
If i told you about a Political board where the Mods flat out lie and when called upon it, instead of posting sources/links they posted pictures of trolls.
Would you visit it?
-
If i told you about a Political board where the Mods flat out lie and when called upon it, instead of posting sources/links they posted pictures of trolls.
Would you visit it?
If someone is making a statement, false or not, that has been challenged to be false and doesn't defend it they are either choosing to not defend it for what ever reason or cannot defend it.
Whether that person is a mod or not wouldn't matter to me.
If i was the one challenging it, i might make a plethora of threads/posts containing arguments with linked material supporting my position (don't confuse this with spam cut and paste lameness). And I would enestly retort and counter arguments presented. (many posters just ignore legit counter arguments and jump to another aspect or subject like retarded cowards)
If what you are saying is that black and white, it should be a breeze to construct a nearly airtight obvious retort that exposes its falsity. Or not. :)
-
apparently that doesn't settle it because that's exactly what I did and then you proceeded to proclaim that Bums lie was actually just an opinion
Ridiculous. They didnt include the 2009 fiscal year and stim bill correct? That is no 1. And guess why spending in down? The 2010 gop midterm election forced obama into he sequester which he did not wa t to do.
-
If i told you about a Political board where the Mods flat out lie and when called upon it, instead of posting sources/links they posted pictures of trolls.
Would you visit it?
for fucks sake Oz, tell a bold faced lie so this retard will go away
-
Ridiculous. They didnt include the 2009 fiscal year and stim bill correct? That is no 1. And guess why spending in down? The 2010 gop midterm election forced obama into he sequester which he did not wa t to do.
Why wouldn't they include FY2009?
Oh... because that budget is under Bush isn't... Well, yes. of course they would not charge him for a budget he had no control over.
-
If someone is making a statement, false or not, that has been challenged to be false and doesn't defend it they are either choosing to not defend it for what ever reason or cannot defend it.
Whether that person is a mod or not wouldn't matter to me.
If i was the one challenging it, i might make a plethora of threads/posts containing arguments with linked material supporting my position (don't confuse this with spam cut and paste lameness). And I would enestly retort and counter arguments presented. (many posters just ignore legit counter arguments and jump to another aspect or subject like retarded cowards)
Im glad we can agree your co-Mod Beach Bum is a coward.
Nice to have an intelligent Mod my hopes for this site just sky-rocketed :)
If what you are saying is that black and white, it should be a breeze to construct a nearly airtight obvious retort that exposes its falsity. Or not. :)
-
for fucks sake Oz, tell a bold faced lie so this retard will go away
Can you now see the retards sites like that attract? ;D
-
Why wouldn't they include FY2009?
Oh... because that budget is under Bush isn't... Well, yes. of course they would not charge him for a budget he had no control over.
Bush is to blame to for the stim bill. I forgot.
-
I actually look like my avatar as the result of reading some of the bullshit in this thread and in the "Politics and Political Issues Board" more generally. The thought that some of you people vote is just terrifying.
-
Why wouldn't they include FY2009?
Oh... because that budget is under Bush isn't... Well, yes. of course they would not charge him for a budget he had no control over.
Why shouldn't FY09 be included?
He was a Senator. He voted for the joint resolution to provide the overall architecture (I don't know if he voted every single related resolution or not).
This is not a President who had no say in previous budgets. To me, trying to argue that his time as a senator should not count is absurd.
Now, I believe he's repeatedly stated (and I won't look it up for you), that he wants to cut spending, but he wants to do it very slowly and ease the pain. I think he's done a fairly decent job of keeping to that - whether it be on his own or being forced by Congress, I don't really care - I think it's still fair to credit him.
-
How was I calling BB a coward?
-
I actually look like my avatar as the result of reading some of the bullshit in this thread and in the "Politics and Political Issues Board" more generally. To thought that some of you people vote is just terrifying.
What do you expect from people who flat out lie, then just post troll images when called upon it.
And thats from the Mods.
-
How was I calling BB a coward?
If i was the one challenging it, i might make a plethora of threads/posts containing arguments with linked material supporting my position (don't confuse this with spam cut and paste lameness). And I would enestly retort and counter arguments presented. (many posters just ignore legit counter arguments and jump to another aspect or subject like retarded cowards)
Actually you called him a retarded coward my bad :)
-
for fucks sake Oz, tell a bold faced lie so this retard will go away
Obama was born in Kenya. ;D
-
Obama was born in Kenya. ;D
;)
-
If i was the one challenging it, i might make a plethora of threads/posts containing arguments with linked material supporting my position (don't confuse this with spam cut and paste lameness). And I would enestly retort and counter arguments presented. (many posters just ignore legit counter arguments and jump to another aspect or subject like retarded cowards)
Actually you called him a retarded coward my bad :)
No, you are taking what I said completely out of context similarly like you did when you quoted the rules about linking sources.
In that statement I was talking in general about what I would do in response to counter arguments to my original argument all of which was a response to your question directed at me.
In ealier posts, I provided reasons why some would not defend their statements. I will list them for you:
1. They can't back it up
2. They can but They choose not to beucase they don't want to for what ever reason
Also....Those reasons for choosing not to back it up might be:
1. They feel you are not worth the time
2. They are trolling
Hope this is clear enough for you. ;)
-
So whork, instead bickering with me over stupid shit like this,
WHY AREN'T YOU SHOWING EVERYONE HOW WRONG Beach IS WITH An AIRTIGHT SOLID CASE COMplEtE WITH SUPPORTING LINKS AND SOuRCES ???????? ( not lame cut and paste crap)
-
If i was the one challenging it, i might make a plethora of threads/posts containing arguments with linked material supporting my position (don't confuse this with spam cut and paste lameness). And I would enestly retort and counter arguments presented. (many posters just ignore legit counter arguments and jump to another aspect or subject like retarded cowards)
Yeah... we've seen how well this works when people here make thoughtful and nuanced posts, citing sources, providing facts and logically debunking the "arguments" of those they are debating with. Because the kind of people they're dealing with with would never respond to a post by:
- linking YouTube video after YouTube video; or
- posting silly meme-style picture after silly meme-style picture; or
- googling for and posting pages and pages of drivel - perhaps even the same drivel that was just debunked; or
- launching ad-hominem attacks.
And, of course, they would not rinse, lather and repeat until the cows came home.
P.S.: I am more than happy to edit this post to make every item in that list a clickable link to a post (or ten) demonstrating that exact behavior. And I have no compunction about doing it either - idiots should be shamed.
-
Which begs the question...... Do you really expect someone like a Birther to intelligently respond to a good well crafted argument?
-
Which begs the question...... Do you really expect someone like a Birther to intelligently respond to a good well crafted argument?
You voted for Obama in 2008 - STFU moron
-
You voted for Obama in 2008 - STFU moron
And people like you got him reelected. Thanks.
(ad-hom shot :D)
-
Which begs the question...... Do you really expect someone like a Birther to intelligently respond to a good well crafted argument?
No but i expect it from a Mod of a Political forum.
Maybe we have higher standards in Europe ;)
-
So whork, instead bickering with me over stupid shit like this,
WHY AREN'T YOU SHOWING EVERYONE HOW WRONG Beach IS WITH An AIRTIGHT SOLID CASE COMplEtE WITH SUPPORTING LINKS AND SOuRCES ???????? ( not lame cut and paste crap)
bump
-
No but i expect it from a Mod of a Political forum.
Maybe we have higher standards in Europe ;)
Wait. The troll is from Europe? Really?
-
bump
:D
-
So whork, instead bickering with me over stupid shit like this,
WHY AREN'T YOU SHOWING EVERYONE HOW WRONG Beach IS WITH An AIRTIGHT SOLID CASE COMplEtE WITH SUPPORTING LINKS AND SOuRCES ???????? ( not lame cut and paste crap)
Only if he prommises to respond intelligently and not with troll pictures :)
-
Only if he prommises to respond intelligently and not with troll pictures :)
That's not what i was asking. WHY AREN'T YOU SHOWING EVERYONE HOW WRONG Beach IS....
Do you have a reading comprehension problem?
That's 3 in a row now. :(
-
That's not what i was asking.
Do you have a reading comprehension problem?
That's 3 in a row now. :(
I have called him out several times in this thread if thats not trying to show the GB users he is wrong i think YOU are the one with the reading comprehension problem.
-
I have called him out several times in this thread if thats not trying to show the GB users he is wrong i think YOU are the one with the reading comprehension problem.
I have shown how you have misread what i have posted in detail 3 times now.
What are you hoping BB will do? Perhaps you are living in some fantasy world.
Let's try again:
WHY AREN'T YOU SHOWING EVERYONE HOW WRONG Beach IS...with An AIRTIGHT SOLID CASE Complete WITH SUPPORTING LINKS AND Sources?
I am beginning to suspect that you really just want to cry and complain about BB not agreeing with you or bicker back and forth with me.
Don't you get it? Some posters will not agree with you regardless of how well you make your case. And they are free not to, just like you are. So what can you do? Show everyone how wrong that person is with an airtight case with supporting links. (not cut and paste lameness)