You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Go to Page...
Thank you for crosschecking our sponsors!
About This Page: This is a discussion on Politics within the LetsGoKings.com forums, at Los Angeles Kings Hockey Fan Forum. Originally Posted by irisher
Here's your concept of the day, kiddo--learn it:
Straw man - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Here's your concept of the day, kiddo--learn it:
Sarcasm - Wikipedia,
One question requires a simple fact check and McCain said he would do that and provide an answer. The other question shouldn't require any fact check other than Obama checking the polls to see how he should answer. He should have done his homework.
You're the one with your panties in a bunch over how much money McCain makes. Could it be just jealousy on your part that the man and his wife's family have been very successful financially?
I'm sorry that those kind of rewards aren't available in your chosen profession where job security is the number one goal.
I'll repeat:
FACT: "How many houses do you own?" is a much simpler question to answer than "When does life begin?" or "When does a fetus attain human rights?" or whatever rhetorical theological conundrum your panties are bunched over.
Your inability to grapple with that and your subsequent retreat into childish insults (a frequent tactic of yours) just shows how ideologically subservient you are.
A man ought to know how many houses he owns, particularly if he attacks other people for being elitist and out of touch with the plight of common Americans.
No amount of insults, distractions, or subject changes is going to alter that.
Thanks for not responding to #'s 1 and 2 in my post above K17. Everytime you go on a rant and avoid an argument or question you prove again the weakness and sloppiness of your "thinking." Your "arguments" amount to little more than the constant reiteration of "because I said so."
__________________
"For if once a man indulges himself in murder, very soon he comes to think little of robbing; and from robbing he comes next to drinking and Sabbath-breaking, and from that to incivility and procrastination." Thomas DeQuincey, 1700's
FACT: "How many houses do you own?" is a much simpler question to answer than "When does life begin?" or "When does a fetus attain human rights?" or whatever rhetorical theological conundrum your panties are bunched over.
Your inability to grapple with that and your subsequent retreat into childish insults (a frequent tactic of yours) just shows how ideologically subservient you are.
A man ought to know how many houses he owns, particularly if he attacks other people for being elitist and out of touch with the plight of common Americans.
No amount of insults, distractions, or subject changes is going to alter that.
Wow!! This coming from the master and a condescending bore like yourself is really quite amusing.
Neither Obama or McCain have the day to day worries of common Americans. There, satisfied. It's your boy OMR that has tried to change the subject of the thread, but don't let that stop you from getting on your high horse.
Obama's "bitter" comments were elitist.
__________________ Hockey's original bad boy. The "Cowboy" Howie Young
Link? Evidence? When was he ever convicted of taking a bribe?
Feel free to continue stating your opinions as if they are facts though.
I never said McCain was convicted of taking bribes, merely that he accepted them. The key to accepting bribes is not being convicted. McCain is pretty good at that. Keating 5 for example.
But here's a recent example too: John McCain on the Georgia Conflict. The only 2 people I've heard blame the recent conflict on Russia (when Georgia fired the first shot) are Sakaashvili and John McCain. Why is that?
Thanks for not responding to #'s 1 and 2 in my post above K17. Everytime you go on a rant and avoid an argument or question you prove again the weakness and sloppiness of your "thinking." Your "arguments" amount to little more than the constant reiteration of "because I said so."
I did respond. You didn't like the answer.
Because I said so? LOL!!!!
The man didn't answer the question, but if you think he did, well then both of you are too smart by half.
__________________ Hockey's original bad boy. The "Cowboy" Howie Young
Wow!! This coming from the master and a condescending bore like yourself is really quite amusing.
Yeah, I know I'm in your head.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KINGS17
Neither Obama or McCain have the day to day worries of common Americans. There, satisfied.
No, of course not. Why should I be satisfied with the most elementary of intellectual observations? There's nothing enlightening about it. Also, it rings a bit hollow when read against your obedient recitation of the right-wing's talking points in this forum the last few months. I'm beginning to wonder if you wake up each morning and check your email for the latest instructions from Limbugh/Hannity/O'Reilly/Hewitt/Ingraham/etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KINGS17
It's your boy OMR that has tried to change the subject of the thread.
Probably because the thread wasn't worth a ****. It's far more interesting now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KINGS17
don't let that stop you from getting on your high horse.
All the better to trample your arguments with....of course, it's easy, seeing how you never have any evidence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KINGS17
Obama's "bitter" comments were elitist.
Nah, they were just correct. People got so upset because a nerve got touched--the truth often does that. Obama unfortunately backed off from all of that. As soon as we have a candidate ready to speak truth to empty dogma (i.e. God, guns, & gays) like that on a consistent basis, I'll be all for him.
Last edited by irisher; August 21st, 2008 at 12:59 PM.
Wow!! This coming from the master and a condescending bore like yourself is really quite amusing.... It's your boy OMR that has tried to change the subject of the thread, but don't let that stop you from getting on your high horse.
You're accusing irisher of being a condescending bore? Listen you're in a political exchange with him and he's trying to make himself understood to you and it's a challenge for you to keep up. He doesn't want to act like your special ed teacher, he just has to help you out.
OMR changed the subject? You can't even remember what you originally posted can you?? You are slow. McCain not knowing how many houses he owns goes directly to the point of his defining rich as 5 million in income a year! Remember how you originally brought that up and hoped it wouldn't be talked about? Was McCain avoiding talking about his wealth to Rick Warren or not?
Notice too that according to McCain's definition of rich...Obama isn't rich! I guess you can quit hiding behind the "they're both the same" argument. I think you should just stick to the "because I said so" line of argument.
Last edited by Leonidas; August 21st, 2008 at 01:06 PM.
No, of course not. Why should I be satisfied with the most elementary of intellectual observations? There's nothing enlightening about it. Also, it rings a bit hollow when read against your obedient recitation of the right-wing's talking points in this forum the last few months. I'm beginning to wonder if you wake up each morning and check your email for the latest instructions from Limbugh/Hannity/O'Reilly/Hewitt/Ingraham/etc.
Probably because the thread wasn't worth a ****. It's far more interesting now.
All the better to trample your arguments with....of course, it's easy, seeing how you never have any evidence.
Nah, they were just correct. People got so upset because a nerve got touched--the truth often does that. Obama unfortunately backed off from all of that. As soon as we have a candidate ready to speak truth to empty dogma (i.e. God, guns, & gays) like that on a consistent basis, I'll be all for him.
Seriously, don't flatter yourself. You have never said much that isn't right out of the far left talking points posted at moveon.org, the huffington post, or the daily kos.
You haven't trampled anything sport. Four or five of you have been trying your best to say that a non-answer is an answer. It doesn't get more intellectually dishonest than that.
People that have faith and own a gun are dogmatic? You should try reading your own rhetoric. Obama made that comment thinking that it wouldn't get out into the mainstream media. Oops, his real opinion slipped out there.
I wonder, did Obama really join Wright's church because he had a religious awakening or was it simply politically expedient.
__________________ Hockey's original bad boy. The "Cowboy" Howie Young
nosoupforyou
