McCain's VP: Gov. Palin is chosen

[J8300]

Originally Posted by Pa. Patriot

Lol, same place you read about the "navy boats?"

Are you going to start this again? Youve lost it twice already.

[Pa. Patriot]

Originally Posted by J8300

Are you going to start this again? Youve lost it twice already.

LoL! Yeah, you won the navy boats thread Denial is a bitch.

[NineseveN]

Originally Posted by J8300

You are all over the place.

You can easily see she misspoke but you cant put together pro-life and pro-death penalty? You can assume I have some agenda but I cant assume that she fits the conservative mold? You dont have the skills, or you do? Make up your mind, really.

Her second quote "evidence disputing evolution should be presented". Since she was talking about schools she must have have meant teach by "presented". Care to talk about the totality of her statements again or are YOU just talking out of YOUR ass?



Ya I already knew that. It's not our first waltz. I cant bait an agnostic about religion now can I? Go back to the original point I made about her wanting creationism taught and how I said it wasnt positive. Now put that together with someone who believes there is some non existent evidence that disputes evolution and you should now be able to see why I said its not positive. And you claim you believe her when she said she hasnt thought about it? Shes xtian, they all think about it. Name me one that doesnt. This is just intellectual dishonesty on your part and an outright lie on hers. The totality of her statements sums up to -teach creationism-, not some bullshit excuse of "misspeaking" or some politically corrected crap re-spoken the next day that is totally at odds with her previous statements. And since you claim I am making definitive statements while being ignorant on the issue, where exactly did SHE claim she misspoke? Or are you just making your own definitive statements without having the complete picture? Since you already admitted you dont have the skill to do it, stop.

Ding! Fries are done.


That's about all I have left to say at this point, you're simply all over the place now, claiming I said what I haven't, purposely misconstruing what I actually did post and continuing with your arrogant rhetoric and grossly sweeping generalizations, now to include "xtians" and how they think and what their motives are, as you said, "they all". No agenda? This just smells like LMAO. Carry on, the peanut gallery is waiting on the encore.

[J8300]

Nine you are funny.

Again with saying I have an agenda and when I ask again you will say you dont and cant know.

You claim I misquote and misconstrue, yet limboed under the bar even tho you were quick to ask for a source when I DID misquote Palin.

You claim I cant know the generalizations I make but provide no evidence to the contrary. The one time you tried you ended up proving me right.

And finally you talk about the peanut gallery, but then claim you were leaving. (cuz I knew your agenda posts ago, go back to where I said I knew you were agnostic...if I knew that I knew you didnt disagree with me on principle and if I knew that...silly boy)

[str8shooter]

Originally Posted by ShakeyDad

I didn't read the entire thread, sorry. If this has been stated before, I apologize. But, it is my opinion McCain only grabbed this woman for his ticket in some feeble ass attempt to snag up the women voters who feel pissed that Obama didn't pick Hillary.

Get some popcorn and a six pack, and read the thread, it's a real page turner. I knew you must've been out of the loop, and your follow up post proved it.

I didn't even need to see your sig. Just seeing the words "grabbed the woman", "ass" "snag up the women" in the same sentence and I thought, Shakey's here. I had to do a double take and read your post a little more carefully cuz personally, when I saw her photo for the first time, those words came to mind too, but not necessarily in the same context as yours.

But of course, as was kindly pointed out in post #108, most of the PAFOA members are incapable of independent thought, so it's no wonder we're on the same wave length.


'Scuse me now, I have Aaron Sorkin on the line talking to him about a great plot for his next hit political TV series and telling him some great one-liners he should use. At the moment we're discussing who plays the part of the Gorilla. Any request for the who gets the role of the down trodden guy who can't escape from the city of nutterly love? He's got a call into Oliver Platt for the role of the single dad living a double life out in the burbs of Philly in an upper middle class anti-gunner community, while raising his 3 kids to be a post-apocolyptic mini-militia in the mountains of the PA wilds.

Let me make sure I got all these right.

"aren't you the Alex Jones leghumper?"
"Um, talk from your ass much?"
"Doesn't she have like 5 kids and a baby with downsyndrom?... She's a little pre-occupied don't you think?"
"I don't know, I don't hold the skill to make a determination from so little...of course, I can't tell what one had for lunch just by the qualities of the stench emanating from their asshole either."
"If you want me high jumping that bar you better quit limboing."

Oh man, you should here him laughing, he says people obviously don't really talk like this, but the whole concept is too good for just TV. Now he's thinking big screen, then maybe a TV spinoff.

Whoa, wait a minute, he said he could get Adam Sandler for that guy trapped in Philly, what do ya think?

[J8300]

But of course, as was kindly pointed out in post #108, most of the PAFOA members are incapable of independent thought, so it's no wonder we're on the same wave length.

As proven by the Milgram experiment and many peer follow ups most people are incapable of independent thought when confronted with an authority figure (~90%). Sorry no offense intended. My statement was based on observation and science.

[str8shooter]

Originally Posted by J8300

As proven by the Milgram experiment and many peer follow ups most people are incapable of independent thought when confronted with an authority figure (~90%). Sorry no offense intended. My statement was based on observation and science.

Oh no, it should be me apologizing. I didn't recognize you as an authority figure so I went off thinking on my own for a minute there. Please let us now what it is that your an authority on so we can bow down and do as we're told. I don't have any scientific study to back it up, but through observation your clearly not an authority on forensics, politics and social psychology.

Trying to relate a study designed to see if Nazi war criminals were psychologically incapable of defying orders to online forum members having similar interests and political views is absurd. You dare claim your statements are based on science? You spout rhetoric about a subject without refering to any credible resource, yet beride others who voice their opposing position if they can't offer up irrefutable evidence.

Maybe you're an authority on being argumentative, but you've completely misinterpretied Milgram and his peers studies when forming your own Hypothesis. If you observe 90% of the people you confront as seemingly incapable of independent thought, maybe it's because they disagree with you so vehemently, your conclusions are flawed and in fact it's only 10% that aren't thinking independently. Thinking independently doesn't make you right, just as agreeing with the majority doesn't make you wrong.

[RugerNiner]

Originally Posted by J8300

So she is tough on corruption that isnt her own? Seriously how can someone be touted as tough on corruption and then be on the brink of being charged themselves? And does one example qualify one as tough?

Your original post said you hadn't seen an example so I posted an example. It was late and I stopped my research.

What exactly has she been convicted of?
Every politician it seems has been accused of or charged with something.

[ChamberedRound]

Originally Posted by StealthBeast

Don't give me any of that, "Oh i didn't call you stupid i said stop acting stupid" lol

Whatever dude. I don't know you, and I thought your comment deserved to be challenged, but just because you made one post on this site that I took issue with doesn't mean I'm going to pass judgement on you. It would be different if you had made numerous posts that were similar, as that would more specifically speak to your character, but not one post.

I can seperate a single comment from an individual for the purposes of debate; if you can't, then that's your problem to deal with.

Originally Posted by J8300

As proven by the Milgram experiment and many peer follow ups most people are incapable of independent thought when confronted with an authority figure (~90%). Sorry no offense intended. My statement was based on observation and science.

Nice try. Don't think that citing Milgram is going to give you carte blanche to crap all over this or any other thread on the site becuase you have to "fight the power". The mods here are not yours or anyone else's overlords, no one's forcing anyone to stay here. If you don't like what's being said, don't want to debate civilly, don't want to cite examples, or don't want to follow forum rules, then do what a overload WOULDN'T let you do: leave.

[stevieb92]

Originally Posted by StealthBeast

She's a little pre-occupied don't you think?

I believe Clinton was a little pre-occupied too... cheating on his wife.