Quote:

---

Originally posted by HKCavalier:
I told you your bias was showing, Admiral, and then that you were repeating a racist talking point and you come back with, "So dismiss me as a racist." No, honestly, I see you as the flunky of racists, perhaps a de facto racist 'cause you don't understand the origin and purpose of your guff, which is even sadder.

You don't understand what you read, Admiral--you exploit it. You gather up some prejudicial b.s. inferred from my post and smugly warn me not to underestimate you. Now that is funny. Expecting simple reading comprehension is overestimating you.

So, you dismiss your own libelous remarks about the President, defend them not at all, expecting me to do the same, and proceed to your first, however vaguely, substantive generalizations about actual policy.

Quote:

---

Obama strikes me as the sort of politician who feels that money and government can solve all problems.

I think that they just cause new ones.

---

You think that one up all by yourself? You want a cookie?

It doesn't work like that. You don't come in here being a jackass, polluting the forum with your dad's hand-me-down talking points, then expect people to take you seriously when you realize that your b.s. doesn't fly.

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by HKCavalier:
It doesn't work like that. You don't come in here being a jackass, polluting the forum with your dad's hand-me-down talking points, then expect people to take you seriously when you realize that your b.s. doesn't fly.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Hmm, Let's see...
In no particular order, just random stuff off the top of my head.


Patriot act, NOT sunsetted, and radically expanded, check.

We WERE torturing people, check.

No WMDs, and our so-called investigations were a ruse to make sure the victim was defenseless as possible before we invaded, which we were gonna do no matter what, check.

Taser abuse would become widespread, check.

Osama is almost certainly dead since Dec 2001, check.

Wholesale dragnet surveillence, a claim might I remind you was laughed off at the time, check.

Abusive conduct by our Alphabet goons, check.

Blackwater malfeasance, check.

Democrats rolling over like bitches the instant they got a majority, check.

Active duty troops deployed here with crowd control packages, check.

ADS Pain Beam *NEVER* intended for theatre deployment, *ALWAYS* intended for citizen pacification, check.

Neocon Cabal members heading for the hills, often other countries, check.

Doesn't include satellite/non political stuff, like the FLDS and Gardasil fiascos, which I called chapter and verse all the way down the line either.

Oh yeah, and this administration not stopping the abuses cause they didn't wanna cut the leash so much as just change who was holding it, check.

You might have noticed a pattern here, of said predictions falling in the 85-90% range if you've been watching, some of which was admittedly by "cheating" via having information or hints thereof not commonly available by mainstream sources at the time.

Dunno about you, but thems betting odds to me.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by whozit:
Thank you Barney Frank? Why, he's scum. Are you libs proud to have Frank in your fold? You can have that FAGGOT! Yes I yelled FAGGOT! You libs can keep Frank and all the wierd dirtbags he brings with him......he's all your's.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Sure. It's all right there at the bottom of the RWED thread page, under a link that says "Read threads that have been archived."

Go see what you can find while you're looking up "Bush is silly" threads. Run, boy - FETCH!

---

Gee, Frem, how about you find what I was asking about and I will respond in turn. How does that sound, Frem?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AdmiralDigby:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

Quote:

---

I just think the man is grossly inexperienced for the most important job in the world .

Not unlike the last guy .

---

What kind of on-the-job training do you recommend for "most important job in the world"? How does one get the experience for that? Is there a "second-most important job in the world" that you get promoted from? How'd that work out for Ford? How'd it work out for HW Bush? Or Gore, for that matter?



Mike

---

Experience is just that , experience .

Your guy is inexperienced .

Not saying he's not going to do a good job .
I hope he does .
What's good for the USA is generally good for the world .

( as opposed to China or Russia or any other big dog )

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by dreamtrove:

But I want to hear, so fire away, conservative platform you'd actually vote for...

---

Quote:

---

I still stand by my assertion that throwing away money and growing an already obese government is not the way out of the current mess we are living with

---

Quote:

---

Hell, even I can predict that if a drunk gets behind the wheel of a car, bad things could happen.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AdmiralDigby:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by whozit:
Thank you Barney Frank? Why, he's scum. Are you libs proud to have Frank in your fold? You can have that FAGGOT! Yes I yelled FAGGOT! You libs can keep Frank and all the wierd dirtbags he brings with him......he's all your's.

---

To be fair , Mr Franks sexuality is irrelevant to his dubious political maneuvers .

By calling him a faggot you simply invalidate anything else you have to offer on the subject .

And you unmask yourself as a hate filled little man . Perhaps you should look to God and ask for His forgiveness . Or you could just join Fred Phelps at his next demonstration at a military funeral .

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AdmiralDigby (to HKCavalier):

Your towering intellect is awesome .
I bow to your superiority .

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:

Quote:

---

Hell, even I can predict that if a drunk gets behind the wheel of a car, bad things could happen.

---

BWAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!

BUT YOU DIDN'T!

YOu couldn't even see there was a problem when the drunk was crashing the car into every solid object he could find!

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:

Quote:

---

I still stand by my assertion that throwing away money and growing an already obese government is not the way out of the current mess we are living with

---

So, I take it take you're against tax laws that favor corporations, allowing them not to pay their fair share? Subsidies and laws written to fatten their profits? Bailouts and rescues to big business?


***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AdmiralDigby:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

Quote:

---

I just think the man is grossly inexperienced for the most important job in the world .

Not unlike the last guy .

---

What kind of on-the-job training do you recommend for "most important job in the world"? How does one get the experience for that? Is there a "second-most important job in the world" that you get promoted from? How'd that work out for Ford? How'd it work out for HW Bush? Or Gore, for that matter?



Mike

---

Experience is just that , experience .

Your guy is inexperienced .

Not saying he's not going to do a good job .
I hope he does .
What's good for the USA is generally good for the world .

( as opposed to China or Russia or any other big dog )

---

"Experience is experience." Experience AT WHAT? Experience at being President? How do you get that experience if you can't get elected because you have no experience? I mean, will it really make you feel better if I say, "Oh, don't worry - he'll do better his second term, because he'll have experience." Of course, by your own words, you WOULD vote for him for a second term, right? After all, at that point he WILL be the most experienced candidate running for the office...

Mike

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AdmiralDigby:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by whozit:
Thank you Barney Frank? Why, he's scum. Are you libs proud to have Frank in your fold? You can have that FAGGOT! Yes I yelled FAGGOT! You libs can keep Frank and all the wierd dirtbags he brings with him......he's all your's.

---

To be fair , Mr Franks sexuality is irrelevant to his dubious political maneuvers .

By calling him a faggot you simply invalidate anything else you have to offer on the subject .

And you unmask yourself as a hate filled little man . Perhaps you should look to God and ask for His forgiveness . Or you could just join Fred Phelps at his next demonstration at a military funeral .

---

Well, thanks for that, Admiral. Sorry you had to be introduced to one of your fellow conservatives in that manner.

Mike

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Don't despair, Admiral - neither Reagan nor Goldwater could get elected as conservatives today; both would be seen as FAR too liberal for the evangelicals who've taken over the conservative movement here in the U.S.

Oh, and as a side order of snark:

Canada has culture?

(Oh, lighten up, ya bunch of hosers up there - if I can make fun of my own country, surely I can poke a little fun at yours, right?)

Mike

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AdmiralDigby:
Oh , and Reagan was a good POTUS .

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AdmiralDigby:
Oh , and Reagan was a good POTUS .

---

You mean for one so inexperienced?

What was it that you found so "good" about him, by the way?

Mike

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Niki2:
GO Digby!! (I know, you hate me; maybe someday that will change...meanwhile I will give you the respect I've always suspected you deserved, so THERE!)

---

Please , stop ascribing emotions on me .

I do not hate you .
Never have .

Do you annoy me at times ?


Yes .

Not hate babe .

Quote:

---

Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Oh, pointless partisan infighting. How quaint.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
You were challenging Frem to refresh your memory on the SERIOUS criticisms about Bush.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Is it that you can't find any evidence to deny Frem's words, or do your lips just get tired from all that reading?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Of course, by your own words, you WOULD vote for him for a second term, right? After all, at that point he WILL be the most experienced candidate running for the office...

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:

Quote:

---

Hell, even I can predict that if a drunk gets behind the wheel of a car, bad things could happen.

---

BWAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!

BUT YOU DIDN'T!

YOu couldn't even see there was a problem when the drunk was crashing the car into every solid object he could find!

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Hell, BDN, in this analogy, not only didn't you call it, but Frem did, AND he also told you WHERE the drunk would hit something, and WHAT he would hit.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
A "prediction" wouldn't be saying that "bad things *could* happen". A "prediction" would involve saying WHAT was going to happen, HOW it was going to happen, and WHEN. Seems Frem has a very much better track record around here than you, when it comes to predictions.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Weren't you one of the ones who said Bush was going to be remembered as a "great" President?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
See if you can dig up where you said that, okay?

---

Quote:

---

Since when is it incumbent upon me to find evidence to back up Frem's words?

---

Quote:

---

And when did you crawl so far up Frem's ass...

---

Quote:

---

Since when are Canadians allowed to vote for the POTUS?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

Quote:

---

Since when is it incumbent upon me to find evidence to back up Frem's words?

---

Weren't you the one questioning his accuracy? As you said, "Do your own homework."

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

Quote:

---

And when did you crawl so far up Frem's ass...

---

And there you go ascribing your desires to others.
So is agreeing with someone now "crawling up their ass"? Is that your official position on it? How long have you been in Rappy's ass? Or Hero's? Can you tell what they had for breakfast?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

Quote:

---

Since when are Canadians allowed to vote for the POTUS?

---

Comprehension really isn't your strong suit, is it? You'll note that I asked him if he "WOULD" vote for Obama (as in, WOULD you vote for him if you could?), not if he "WILL" vote for him. Since he's a Canadian, he obviously can't vote for our President.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
But it's nice of him to tell us who we should and shouldn't have for our leader.

---

Quote:

---

You were challenging Frem to refresh your memory on the SERIOUS criticisms about Bush.-SIGNY

No, I was asking Frem to refresh my memory in regards to the predictions of fascist practices by the past administration.-bdn

---

Quote:

---

Signy,You already agreed with me that there was a lot of silliness directed at Bush. Why go back on that now?

---

Quote:

---

Nice save.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:

Quote:

---

You were challenging Frem to refresh your memory on the SERIOUS criticisms about Bush.-SIGNY
No, I was asking Frem to refresh my memory in regards to the predictions of fascist practices by the past administration.-bdn

---

You took the bait.
Okay, so then why the CLUMSY attempt at re-direction???

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
This wasn't about silliness. Never was.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
And, I noticed, that you never DID answer Frem's list of predictions... The basis of which was: Whatever illegal act Bush does now which you support will be used by another President whom you do NOT support. Seems. actually, to be straightforward. But you still haven't gotten it.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
Hell, you can't even admit when things are goin' seriously wrong AT THE MOMENT.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
Time to remove your blinders, BDN. Wake up an' smell the coffee.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
Oh, BTW... everyone but you sees this as the pathetic attempt that it is to cast YOUR error on Kwicko. You made the same mistake in the other thread about FDLS... constantly misunderstanding me due to your simple FAILURE TO READ ACCURATELY, missing all of the "ifs" and "seems to be" which I had included in my posts to indicate that I had simply not made up my mind either way on the topic.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
Now, I don't claim to be as smart as Kwicko or as world-wise as Frem, as fact-rich as Rue or as empathetic as HK, but everyone knows that any of them can think circles around you, and it would suit your purposes NOT to try making them look stupid over YOUR mistakes, because it makes you look even more irrelevant.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
So a word to the wise (if you can deal with it): READ CAREFULLY AND RESPOND DIRECTLY. You'll get into far less trouble that way, and you'll represent your viewpoint a whole lot more effectively.

---

Quote:

---

Nice save.

---

Quote:

---

It is incumbent on the person making the claims to back them up when asked, IMHO.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko (to Wulfenstar):
And since when do you consider standing up for your rights "going all ghetto"? I thought you were a fan of standing up for one's rights! I guess that view changes when it's black folk doing it, eh?

---

I'm a fan of not mentioning the Officer's Mother.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:

Besides, I never really got off on that kind of false sense of superiority.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Of course, by your own words, you WOULD vote for him for a second term, right? After all, at that point he WILL be the most experienced candidate running for the office...

Since when are Canadians allowed to vote for the POTUS?

---

Quote:

---

Why engage what I feel to be the more articulate Poster's when I could simply be trolling PN or correcting Whozit's grammar. When does that get fun?

---

Quote:

---

And furthermore, I predict again that the more than comes out about the Bush admin the worse and worse it will look.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
It wasn't a "save" - I wrote what I meant. That you were unable or unwilling to comprehend it as I wrote it is your bad, not mine.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Or were you willingly distorting and misunderstanding my intention in hopes of trying to score a couple cheap points in an argument you're clearly outmatched in?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Well, in that case, Frem's already done that. If you're claiming that he DIDN'T lay the stuff out chapter and verse, then isn't it incumbent ON YOU to back up your claim, and show us all where he got it so horribly wrong?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
As you said, do your own homework. Make your case, or admit that you have none.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
As for why I responded instead of Frem, well, maybe it's because something about you just rubs me the wrong way. Know what I mean?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Also, I was under the impression that when you post on an open forum, you open your posts up for responses from all comers. If you wanted to speak ONLY to Frem, maybe you should try PMing him.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Oh, look - here's a post with YOU responding to a question I'd asked directly of Wulfie:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko (to Wulfenstar):
And since when do you consider standing up for your rights "going all ghetto"? I thought you were a fan of standing up for one's rights! I guess that view changes when it's black folk doing it, eh?

---

I'm a fan of not mentioning the Officer's Mother.

---

So how far up Wulf's ass ARE you, anyway?]

---

Quote:

---

I do like to enter the water when the 'blue' sharks are circling the Wulf though.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
RRRRREEEEEAAAAALLLLLLYYYYY...
So you weren't trying for that "false sense of superiority" when you made this quip?

Since when are Canadians allowed to vote for the POTUS?

That wasn't you going for a false sense of superiority, assuming I hadn't gleaned that Digby is a Canadian?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
And when I pointed that out, your response?

"Nice save "

Again, seems like you're desperate for a "false sense of superiority".

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Ah, so when you point out any grammatical errors that I might make, that's just you angling for a false sense of superiority again, right? So it's not that you don't enjoy a false sense of superiority, it's that you just want to make sure it's your particular brand.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
By the way, you misspelled "separate" in your post.

---

Quote:

---

Cool. Now go through every other post in this thread and prove how impartial you are.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:

Quote:

---

I do like to enter the water when the 'blue' sharks are circling the Wulf though.

---

Ah, so you DO base your responses on ideology (blue v red) not whether something is true or false, supported by evidence or fabricated?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
I would appreciate a direct response to my prediction, and to my request for a single instance of where you criticized the Bush administration or made a single prediction about where his policies would lead. Because for someone who keeps sayin' ANYONE could have predicted that! the problem is... you didn't.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
I would appreciate a direct response to my prediction, and to my request for a single instance of where you criticized the Bush administration or made a single prediction about where his policies would lead. Because for someone who keeps sayin' ANYONE could have predicted that! the problem is... you didn't.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Right after you prove how impartial YOU are. Good luck with that.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Do I really have to go through EVERY post, or can I just start with yours? That should keep me busy for quite a while. You tend to misuse your "apostrophe-s" an awful lot, referring to multiple posters as "other's" when you're not trying to imply ownership.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
By the way, you freely admit your partisanship - only coming around when "the blue sharks" are circling - yet you seem to want the rest of us to be nonpartisan. Does that seem right to you? I've never seen one single instance of you pointing out the errors of those on YOUR side of the argument. Why is that, do you think? Shouldn't you be proving to us all how impartial you are?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Right after you prove how impartial YOU are. Good luck with that.

---

Never said I was impartial. Can you make the same claim regarding the targets of your grammar finger waggings?

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Do I really have to go through EVERY post, or can I just start with yours? That should keep me busy for quite a while. You tend to misuse your "apostrophe-s" an awful lot, referring to multiple posters as "other's" when you're not trying to imply ownership.

---

Check. We already know your tactics for Posters who disagree with you. Now show us all how you can point out errors in the posts of those you agree with and we're onto something.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
By the way, you freely admit your partisanship - only coming around when "the blue sharks" are circling - yet you seem to want the rest of us to be nonpartisan. Does that seem right to you? I've never seen one single instance of you pointing out the errors of those on YOUR side of the argument. Why is that, do you think? Shouldn't you be proving to us all how impartial you are?

---

Please see my response to Signy regarding this matter.

---

Quote:

---

I'd like to thank you for starting a pit of hell thread. The forum always needs one around just to swallow the partisan bickering, and keep it away from everyone else. Judos. I mean Kudos.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
So you gang up with others because you don't like it when others "gang up"? How very... ironical of you.

---