Leilin

KCMO: Do you understand why the stats that you provided are irrelevant to my post? They literally do absolutely nothing to refute anything in the post I made. Analogy: Me: The sky is blue during the day! You: Nuh-uh! The sky was black last night!

So... you still haven't bothered to read that post, eh? Here's a LINK in case your memory doesn't extend to one page ago. You have yet to address the facts of the situation and have instead (for the third time) provided a complete nonsequitur to those facts. Care to try again? (Not even one insult. Let's see if you can respond in kind and even maybe use a relevant fact this time)

You mean Kitten?

You do realize that you have yet to actually respond to the facts as they have been presented to you, right? If you have no intention of reading the posts which address your flawed points in this debate, feel free to stop posting, as it's making you look like a drooling moron. If you choose to keep posting without addressing the facts, you shouldn't be surprised when people think you're an idiot and treat you like one.

If you can't bother to read, just quit posting, unless you like looking like a drooling moron.

Are you talking to kitten or me? I have no desire to feed your trolls. Kitten might. I'm also not a sissy. Perhaps you should take some time to read the name of the person who you are addressing?

Well that settles it. Your post on a forum is OBVIOUSLY more reliable than the CBO. If you can't bother to read, just quit posting, unless you like looking like a drooling moron. (Yes, I will post that phrase every single time one of you displays your lack of willingness to read by responding to a post without addressing a single iota of its content)

Wrong. This was disproven earlier in this thread. If you can't bother to read, just quit posting, unless you like looking like a drooling moron. *yawn* You have yet to demonstrate why Obama fits the definition of Marxist and until then your insane ranting is worth less than what I scraped off of my sandals before I entered my house this morning. BotoX: You should be ashamed to be defending this twit, and I'm not talking about Bush. The reason why I compare Bush to Obama is thus: Obama has added, thus far, slightly less than 1/3 of what Bush did to the debt. Since Obama doesn't control the purse strings, it might surprise you that he cannot just instantly cancel the programs that Bush and the Congress (of both parties) signed into law. It is borderline idiotic to criticize Obama for something that is the direct responsibility of Congress, especially when Congresses controlled by either and both parties have contributed so ardently to the problem. Any candidate, ANY candidate, must be looked at in relief to his competition. If the Republican candidates had offered any differentiation between their policies and those of Bush, it would be reasonable NOT to compare them to his, but since they're nearly identical to many the policies that caused this mess (Tax cuts for the rich, two wars, constant useless expansion in defense spending), it's perfectly reasonable to compare them. If you can find a way in which any of the competing candidates, save one who I will address momentarily, has differentiated himself from Bush, then I welcome you to provide it with citation. The exception is Paul, who believes that States should have carte blanche to violate individual rights without any sort of judicial or congressional interference. He's not just a kook. He's an antifederalist. That discussion was had during the civil war, remember? The states don't get to decide to violate human rights or institute racist or sexist policies and the courts exist specifically to protect the individual in cases precisely like that. RDB has gone off the derp end, and unless he decides to discuss anything with even a modicum of fact is perfectly worth ridiculing for the waste of electrons that his posts merit at every opportune turn. The problem here isn't that Obama is above reproach. The problem is that the ways in which you have chosen to reproach him aren't based in a little thing called reality.

If you're not going to bother reading the links in the post that you're quoting, don't bother posting. Unless, of course, you really love looking like a drooling moron.

Honestly, I like that they're providing new options. I give them credit for that. It seems like a new direction to go in and, even if I disagree with their history, that is ALWAYS a good thing. New ideas are better than NOT new ideas, and even if it does fail, which I find to be unlikely, as long as they actually deliver, at least they try.

Botox: Who has added more to our debt. Bush or Obama? Show your work. Do you realize what taxes those fully half of Americans DO pay? You use them as an excuse to say you're doubletaxed, so not counting them for others who pay them is disengenuous. Here's a breakdown of what those households DO pay: http://www.taxpolicy...-households.cfm It's also important to realize who is actually not being taxed. Comparing the US to what is essentially a third-world country is disingenuous and silly. The rest is your usual anti-tax drivel. I'm just giving you a chance to sound less uninformed here, but once again I doubt you will take it.

Hi I'm like the only other Vegas person who talks here regularly. I'm attached but am always willing to make friends. I just buy online.

Good to know that you have no interest in facts or being taken seriously.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt just this once: Kitty is a she.

New turntables.

Honestly, I don't see how it won't become three people immune to facts vs. the rest of reality thread number three after a few more posts. There's really no point to this thread.

I'm sure we'll know by December when they start delivering on this product. Or, who knows, they may have learned from their mistake after the first second third fourth time

First time I've ever seen thread necrophilia in an active thread.

See previous posts. Speaking only of my own opinions. I have no right to dictate yours. Interestingly, it is perfectly possible to believe that there are points where a person deserves death without making it a gleeful event.

To clarify, Kitten: I was providing my own opinion. You can celebrate whatever you like. Similarly to me not wishing death on people is me supporting people to do whatever does not harm other people, so have fun with whatever it is that you do.

I am not okay with celebrating the death of another person, no matter how much I disliked them.

Yeah! What's with that government? Why aren't we counting infants in unemployment, those lazy lumps!? What about retired people!? They have to be counted too!

Please see the earlier parts of this same thread for the response to this statement. It is not based in fact.

I have many conservative friends. We discuss the facts and then disagree, openly, on them. Because we are working within the realm of facts, however, we disagree respectfully. Nobody ignorantly spouts the terms "Marxist" or "Hitler." Speaking of which, you surely realize how ironic it is criticizing someone else's call for "civil debate" immediately after posting a video calling someone "Hitler Junior," right, RDB? You're quickly approaching the realm of unintentional self-parody. I'm laughing, and it's not with you.

What most people call civil debate is primarily three things. 1. Facts are used. Unproven statements or statements that cannot be backed up with valid citation are not. If your statements are contested, burden of proof is respected. 2. Logical fallacies are not used. 3. Insults are not used. You utterly failed to work within the first two realms on a consistent basis. Therefore, people responding do you assumed that you had no interest in civil debate, and responded in kind, including the third as your utter lack of respect for reality, fact, and good taste merited derision.