i'm not going to argue with you about your wife's importance, etc

but dont act like you've been together for 20 years...i'm sure you had a pretty good understanding of your outlook on life and who you were before you met your wife...obama is still trying to find himself

5/16/2008 3:52:37 PM

Twista, it appears to me as if you are not entirely in tune with reality. I won't argue what you will either not understand or choose not to admit, so thats time saved. Lets stick to things clear cut and simple, since that appears best for you. Please post a link to where obama said he would give savings accounts to everyone with money already in them. This should attest to credibility, with a high probability of you turning out to be delusional, or a liar. perhaps both.

5/16/2008 3:52:54 PM

Quote :

"i'm sure you had a pretty good understanding of your outlook on life and who you were before you met your wife...obama is still trying to find himself"

how in the world can you make either one of those assertions?

^as far as that goes i remember somethign about obama setting up something about a 401K (or something) that would be automatically enabled for workers in the united states (but that you could opt out). i don't remember anything about a savings acct. with money in it. but i'd be interested to see the details about that.

[Edited on May 16, 2008 at 3:55 PM. Reason : .]

5/16/2008 3:53:30 PM

^^i already said i was looking for the link and i heard it in a speech on the news yesterday

but if i do produce the link whats it going to do? you're already convinced that i'm completely making it up

the big question is, why wouldnt you think obama would offer bank accounts with money in them to everyone? what previous position on an issue has he taken that would lead you to believe other wise? he already has admitted giving healthcare to everyone...why not give a savings account to anyone? you're acting like its inconsistent with his politics

but you guys would rather give me shit instead of questioning the almighty obama

btw i'm still waiting for people to produce one single flaw with obama...Boone was the only one who came up with anything, and it was simply Obama's stance on late term abortions, which I'd hope most people would disagree with, regardless of your overall views on choice/life

Quote :

"neither of the people you've associated with obama have changed anything. they had ideas and voiced them"

back to your philosophical argument that thoughts cant hurt anyone...while being willfully ignorant of the people who have in fact changed something...the way obama views life, the US, etc

[Edited on May 16, 2008 at 3:57 PM. Reason : .]

5/16/2008 3:55:28 PM

Quote :

"btw i'm still waiting for people to produce one single flaw with obama."

he believes in god. he's a bad bowler. he's not ambidextrous with the rock.

he doesn't support gay "marriage" (though i assume this is just a semantic distinction, but one that annoys the crap out of me)

[Edited on May 16, 2008 at 3:58 PM. Reason : .]

5/16/2008 3:57:08 PM

do you really think believing in god is a flaw?

i mean i'm an agnostic myself but i'm not going to think someone is flawed because of their religious choice, as long as they don't commit acts of violence in the name of that religion

thanks for answering though...yesterday somebody said nobody was saying obama was perfect...i asked for some obama supporters to come up with a single flaw...last i checked Boone was the only one who came up with anything...so thanks

[Edited on May 16, 2008 at 3:59 PM. Reason : .]

5/16/2008 3:58:26 PM

someone's belief in god won't affect me all that much. i don't think it matters all that much in politicians as long as their morals are in tune with mine. but yeah i think ascribing to a faith without any proof is flawed. but if it helps some people get through the day, then fine.

5/16/2008 4:00:46 PM

Quote :

"but if i do produce the link whats it going to do? you're already convinced that i'm completely making it up"

perhaps, i don't know, assume you're not just trolling and that you actually have a valid and decisive opinion on something that has been formed based on something reliably informative?

also, obama hasn't said he'd give free health care to everyone, and if you really think that is what he said then you haven't taken a moment to actually enlighten yourself by taking an unbiased look at his policies. regardless of which, providing assistance for the inalienable right of life, is in no ways synonymous with giving out free wealth.

that aside i have plenty of issues with obama's policies and have noted that many times in various threads, but what i do not have tolerance for is ignorance; thus, my issues with what you have to say regardless if it involves someone i completely agree with or not.

5/16/2008 4:05:19 PM

Quote :

"Things must be pretty good in this country when people want to bitch about being called "sweetie.""

5/16/2008 4:05:35 PM

Quote :

"what i do not have tolerance for is ignorance; thus, my issues with what you have to say"

thats a pretty ignorant statement

gg hypocrite

5/16/2008 4:11:42 PM

Quote :

"Drunknloaded would have said "look broad""

5/16/2008 4:15:40 PM

Quote :

"thats a pretty ignorant statement"

if you want to make claims without substance, feel free to do so, but it only weakens your position. if you would like, you're more than welcome to point out how my statement was ignorant.

5/16/2008 4:27:09 PM

Because doing so would take force away from his tu quoque

5/16/2008 4:31:18 PM

Quote :

"what i do not have tolerance for is ignorance; thus, my issues with what you have to say regardless if it involves someone i completely agree with or not."

you're saying you have issues with anything i say

thats ignorant

no further explanation is necessary unless you would like for me to post a dictionary definition of what the word 'ignorant' means

^yeah because nobody on TSB is a hypocrite, right? Or is it just not ok with you when I point it out

5/16/2008 4:37:29 PM

only if you presupposed that all which you say is based out of ignorance. if there was a comment you made that was intelligent then I would have no issue with it, but I have as of yet to see any of that in this thread. sure you can say that "well i guess you haven't been looking and thats even more proof" but that too would be ad homiem. Once you begin actually focusing on positions and debating them reasonably following genuine consideration of both sides, i likely will have no issues with what it is that you have to say.

5/16/2008 4:41:20 PM

you're the only one presupposing anything (i prefer to say assuming)

i dont know who you are, so i base my opinion of anything you say on that individual post

you on the other hand ignorantly assume anything i say is going to be incorrect or biased

so once again, unless you want me to post the definition of ignorant, its pretty clear that your previous quoted statement was the epitome of ignorant

5/16/2008 4:55:11 PM

Quote :

"you on the other hand ignorantly assume anything i say is going to be incorrect or biased"

i'd say that's technically pretty close to the truth. just because nearly everything anyone says is biased in some way. splitting hairs i know. but this whole exchange seems to be splitting hairs.

why don't you two just argue the thing you actually disagree about rather than the minutia of what the other said.

5/16/2008 4:56:55 PM

i'll find and post the link to obama's "free savings accounts" section of his speech before i attempt to argue it anymore

5/16/2008 5:02:15 PM

cool

5/16/2008 5:04:08 PM

Quote :

"you on the other hand ignorantly assume anything i say is going to be incorrect or biased"

this is not correct. While you haven't proved to the contrary at all, I do expect that you are capable of making an unbiased and well thought out statement; however, more often that not you make it seems s if you take a blind political view when it comes to this situation. mostly since you assume everyone who disagrees with you automatically must find obama to be holier than thou and argue your points based on their blind faith and support towards him rather than reason. in some ways, this would make you the hypocrite. (tu quoque)

5/16/2008 5:08:26 PM

i'm simply going off what you said...you assume that what i say will be ignorant based on your own perception of my previous posts..."regardless if it involves someone (you) completely agree with or not."

so i'll find the link to obama's speech and let you see/hear it for yourself so maybe you don't preassume that i'm ignorant for pointing out that some people actually dont find any flaws with Obama, which is evidence by the fact that now only 2-3 Obama supporters have responded to my request to point out flaw

5/16/2008 5:13:10 PM

so was the reporter hot? if she was ugly i dont get what the big deal is

5/17/2008 1:23:38 AM

Quote :

"haha IIRC, hooksaw was very adamantly defending that guy."

BobbyDigital

WTF are you babbling about?

5/17/2008 4:09:52 AM

Obama did come across as dismissive when he used the term.

I'm saddened by how some of y'all responded to this topic with misogyny.

5/17/2008 2:29:51 PM

just for this, i'm voting for mccain.

5/17/2008 2:45:08 PM

wheres the quote?

Quote :

"."regardless if it involves someone (you) completely agree with or not." "

actually, what i was saying that i don't support when you do present discussion with ignorance despite if the person whom you're discussing (Obama- not me) is someone whose [policy] i completely agree with or not. it was a very simple quote; however, you could have a great job as a republican pundit one day with the way you take and bend things out of context.

5/19/2008 9:21:58 AM