@Snovvy: Do you seriously expect me to dignify this wall of babble with a response? Alright, I will. You're a hypocrite, and I honestly should have stopped when I caught you in that one lie (the one how you NEVER watch Fox news, and are yet so well versed in "their segments" that you can somehow call me out for "parroting" them.)
In this page of.. something. You've said absolutely nothing at all worth reading, and I'm sad to say that I had to waste my time reading it to find that out. The points I made are still valid, and you aren't going to admit that. You didn't even acknowledge that Grayson's attack ad was one of the most overtly dishonest ads in recent history... And no, most political ads these days have not sunk as low as Alan tried to drag that one.
By the way, you once again you agreed with me in the guise of disagreeing with me (Your response to my pointing out his overt dishonesty was to point out his "progressiveness"... [code word for "Liberal", because "Liberal" has too many negative connotations.]) which was otherwise completely off topic, and how much you agreed with it. I associate Liberalism and dishonesty with eachother, and it would appear that you do as well.
Moving on to the rest of your post, all you really did was attack my statements for being opinions or ad hominims as if those were bad things, and then voice opinons of your own, and yeah there were some ad hominims in your last post too (mainly your tangent about fox news). You're reminding me exactly why I don't even bother debating your ilk anymore... You guys don't debate, you just pick apart the points that other people make without making any real ones of your own, and more often than not you do the very things you accuse others of doing.. (Because it's ok when you do it, but not when anyone else does. ) So yeah, we're done here.
I will leave you with this though: I would LOVE to see Alan Grayson on the Democrat ticket this year. He has less than a snowballs chance in hell of winning ANY office ever again, let alone President, and as VP he would be a weak link of any ticket he was a part of... even with a headliner as weak as Obama.
All one would have to do is post videos of what a nasty guy he was and still is... How he outright lied on the house floor saying that Republicans wanted to kill people (a claim so laughably easy to disprove it should be a joke, only it isn't funny), how grossly he lied in that reelection ad (and that wasn't even the only time he fought dirty in a political ad, just the most disgusting example, ) his frequent temper tantrums... many of them on film, how barged into a republican gathering in a family restaraunt to CUSS THEM OUT (this is also on film) and acted like a general jackass to people who were just having a meeting, oh and let's not forget: How he tried to sue and have a woman thrown in jail for saying that he was nuts. With Grayson on the ticket, even a limp noodle like Romney looks like a halfway decent candidate.
[quote=Snovvy] Except I don't watch mainstream media. I pay attention to historians, scientists, economists, read the bills in congress, underground news, and watch C-Span. I know that you parroted their talking points because I've seen plenty of Fox news segments stating the very phrase you said.
No, I don't think Alan Grayson is mature. He's got a pretty nasty personality, but I like that he's outspoken and actually sincere in doing his job. I'm not shocked that a deep south
MSNBC has a liberal bias, Fox news has a conservative bias, and CNN has an American/corporate bias. In studies, people who watched MSNBC and Fox were the 2nd least informed and least informed, respectively.[/quote]
You're full of [expletive deleted]. Not only have you yet to refute anything I said (actually you pretty much agreed with most of it), you're making this about Fox news (a common tactic I've seen Liberals use when they don't want to put a lot of effort into an argument). I don't watch Fox news. I don't watch ANY television. Hell, I don't even have CABLE so yeah... Spot on observation there. Odd though that you say you "dont watch main stream news" yet you seem to know enough to claim I'm "parroting it". (For the record, all I did was state facts.. if any news organization also happened to say the same things then they got it right for once).
Alan Grayson is an uncultured thug with absolutely zero class. He was a disgrace to everyone in his district, and the audit the fed bill is not enough to make up for the childish temper tantrums he threw on the house floor on a constant basis. He was unpopular in his own district almost from the beginning, and only sunk lower when his true colors came out... (namely that he would tell any lie he could to keep his position)... He actually paid for a campaign add that... You know what, I'll post it here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWdyf9eSkqQ What he ACTUALLY said was: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kS2V_VQWb5Y the exact opposite of what was presented in that attack ad.
Alan Grayson is dishonest, and disgusting... Basically, an unashamed practitioner of Liberal way. Which is exactly why I think he would make the perfect vice presidential nominee, in fact the perfect presidential nominee. Time and time again, whenever America sees the *true* face of Liberalism, presented as it ACTUALLY is, without fancy words like "hope" and "change" to dress it up, they turn and run away from the kookiness screaming.
@Snovvy: And I'm seeing some very blatant parroting of MSNBS rhetoric from you, now can we can the platitudes or are you going to quote the same talking points Liberals use any time they get cornered: (i.e. oh you watch fox[in some misspelled way to make it look less than legitimate] news! that makes your argument inferior somehow!)
Moving on, Alan Grayson actually was MY representative during his (thankfully short) tenure in office. Yes I lived in floridas 8th for those 2 years and was forced to watch as he repeatedly made an ass out of himself and made out entire district look bad by acting in a way that no grown man should, especially an elected representative. I also got so see his reelection campaign ads on television and saw first hand how low he sunk.. Taking his opponent, Daniel Webster, out of context to the point of making it seem like he said the exact opposite of what he actually said, and calling him "Taliban Dan".. That's real mature don't you think?
Thank god for news organizations like "Faux" news who reported what Daniel Webster ACTUALLY said, and that what Grayson was saying about him was an utter lie. God knows MSNBC wouldn't report the actual news if it made a Democrat look bad.
[quote=Snovvy]@FightTheWar: The comment about liberals. And you're right, though, I over-reacted to that one. It gets frustrating when the crux of your arguments almost always fall upon blaming the left, even if it means ignoring all the nuance, or cherry picking influences.
-We didn't have to bail out the banks. Iceland proved that bailing out the people is a stronger plan. -Look at the Ryan plan. Does nothing for like 6 years, doesn't target our biggest problems (corporate welfare and military,) and does a great job on worsening the stratification of our society (which is a bad thing y'know.) Look at who finances him, and look at who finances Romney.. Look at the inconsistency in Romney (I don't know as much about Ryan.) To think they're even close to trustworthy is horribly naive semi-partisanship. -I agree on Obama being a sketchy person. I guess you can say he's moderately sincere, but then again, so are most politicians. maybe 1/3 of politicians are "pants on fire corrupt,:" 11/18 politicians are "moderately sincere," and 1/18 are actually sincere.
I'm recognizing some very blatant parroting of Faux news rhetoric![/quote]
Therein lies the problem: we both believe there are different issues with the military. You believe we're spending too much, and I believe (well, know) we don't have enough manpower for the current amount of work that needs to be done. Therefore I agree with Paul Ryan's plan because I see the necessity for the United States to remain untouchable militarily.
Also, good luck against Laguniroth, you won't beat him in a debate. He knows a lot about Alan Grayson (Grayson was his Congressman). Laguniroth is an expert on politics, his criticisms of Grayson are far more in depth than simple 'Fox News Rhetoric' (he's just blunt about how he feels).
Jobs: agree, funny statement. Chains: The Republicans started talking about banks in chains, and Biden flipped it back around as people in chains. Has nothing to do with the like 50% black crowd. Extremely out of context. Indian accent: Don't know of this quote.
Alan Grayson is one of the only people who pushed for auditing the fed, alongside Sanders and Paul. Hopefully he can get back in because while he's brash, he's sincere and actually tries to do his job.
EDIT: Messed up quote.[/quote]
Alan Grayson is actually an EXCELLENT choice for a running mate for Obama. An irrelavant whack job like that would do nothing but emphasize what a whack job Obama himself is, and his propensity to put his foot in his own mouth is at least as good as Joe Bidens... Honestly moreso sinc he's proven he's willing to scrape the bottom of the barrel, utterly lying and taking people completely out of context in his fail reelection ads... (luckily he was seen to be the lunatic that he is and likely won't be elected for so much as dog catcher any time soon)
[quote=Snovvy]@FightTheWar: Oh, except when it comes to Wars, the Drug War, and corporate welfare. Paul Ryan is totally into that! Oh wait.. isn't that like 60% of our budget? oh wait it is. Somehow he's going to lower taxes and carry those on? Hahaha.
We can keep our social welfare programs if we spend more on them. Simple as that. I've seen many conflicting arguments over whether medicare or social security will actually crash. From the sounds of it, it's the right cherry picking information and ignoring factors to get nonsensical statistics.
Can you go through an argument without mindlessly trashing the left?[/quote]
Mindlessly trashing the left? The only comment I had trashing the left was on Alan Grayson (look it up, he tried to have a woman imprisoned) and pointing out that I hear a lot more people complain about Paul Ryan's efforts to amend medicare but don't point out that it will collapse soon unless it's reformed. Paul Ryan may have voted for the bailouts, but that is a very touchy subject; I don't believe anyone in Congress (except the extremely corrupt) wanted to see bailouts, but the reality was if all those companies collapsed then the recession would have been a lot worse. What do you do if you know millions of people who had no involvement will lose their jobs if you don't prop up their companies? I believe Paul Ryan is sincere when he says he will work to reduce the deficit and if I'm wrong I will admit it (though Obama through his actions has proven he is not). Granted, most of the blame should go to the federal government, Fannie/Freddie, and yes, the Fed, for setting up and enforcing what was nothing more than a government-backed ponzi scheme which never should have existed to begin with.
Jobs: agree, funny statement. Chains: The Republicans started talking about banks in chains, and Biden flipped it back around as people in chains. Has nothing to do with the like 50% black crowd. Extremely out of context. Indian accent: Don't know of this quote.
Alan Grayson is one of the only people who pushed for auditing the fed, alongside Sanders and Paul. Hopefully he can get back in because while he's brash, he's sincere and actually tries to do his job.
EDIT: Messed up quote.[/quote]
Alan Grayson was also the guy who tried to have a woman imprisoned for creating a website that was critical of him (mycongressmanisnuts.com). So much for respect for the first amendment. As for auditing... someone needs to audit the federal government. Paul Ryan at least understands the seemingly basic concept of not spending money you don't actually have. It also seems like no liberals ever seem to realize that if left alone Medicare and Social Security will completely collapse relatively soon, which will REALLY screw over old people.
Well I hear he's just a benchwarmer, because his purpose was to make Obama look like he had more 'experience' since Biden was in the legislative branch for a long time while Obama might have been to young back in '08.
I wish he did something more interesting though... like shoot someone's face, hahaaa.
13 Comments • Newest first
@Snovvy: Do you seriously expect me to dignify this wall of babble with a response? Alright, I will. You're a hypocrite, and I honestly should have stopped when I caught you in that one lie (the one how you NEVER watch Fox news, and are yet so well versed in "their segments" that you can somehow call me out for "parroting" them.)
In this page of.. something. You've said absolutely nothing at all worth reading, and I'm sad to say that I had to waste my time reading it to find that out. The points I made are still valid, and you aren't going to admit that. You didn't even acknowledge that Grayson's attack ad was one of the most overtly dishonest ads in recent history... And no, most political ads these days have not sunk as low as Alan tried to drag that one.
By the way, you once again you agreed with me in the guise of disagreeing with me (Your response to my pointing out his overt dishonesty was to point out his "progressiveness"... [code word for "Liberal", because "Liberal" has too many negative connotations.]) which was otherwise completely off topic, and how much you agreed with it. I associate Liberalism and dishonesty with eachother, and it would appear that you do as well.
Moving on to the rest of your post, all you really did was attack my statements for being opinions or ad hominims as if those were bad things, and then voice opinons of your own, and yeah there were some ad hominims in your last post too (mainly your tangent about fox news). You're reminding me exactly why I don't even bother debating your ilk anymore...
You guys don't debate, you just pick apart the points that other people make without making any real ones of your own, and more often than not you do the very things you accuse others of doing.. (Because it's ok when you do it, but not when anyone else does. ) So yeah, we're done here.
I will leave you with this though: I would LOVE to see Alan Grayson on the Democrat ticket this year. He has less than a snowballs chance in hell of winning ANY office ever again, let alone President, and as VP he would be a weak link of any ticket he was a part of... even with a headliner as weak as Obama.
All one would have to do is post videos of what a nasty guy he was and still is... How he outright lied on the house floor saying that Republicans wanted to kill people (a claim so laughably easy to disprove it should be a joke, only it isn't funny), how grossly he lied in that reelection ad (and that wasn't even the only time he fought dirty in a political ad, just the most disgusting example, ) his frequent temper tantrums... many of them on film, how barged into a republican gathering in a family restaraunt to CUSS THEM OUT (this is also on film) and acted like a general jackass to people who were just having a meeting, oh and let's not forget: How he tried to sue and have a woman thrown in jail for saying that he was nuts.
With Grayson on the ticket, even a limp noodle like Romney looks like a halfway decent candidate.
[quote=Snovvy]
Except I don't watch mainstream media. I pay attention to historians, scientists, economists, read the bills in congress, underground news, and watch C-Span. I know that you parroted their talking points because I've seen plenty of Fox news segments stating the very phrase you said.
No, I don't think Alan Grayson is mature. He's got a pretty nasty personality, but I like that he's outspoken and actually sincere in doing his job. I'm not shocked that a deep south
MSNBC has a liberal bias, Fox news has a conservative bias, and CNN has an American/corporate bias. In studies, people who watched MSNBC and Fox were the 2nd least informed and least informed, respectively.[/quote]
You're full of [expletive deleted]. Not only have you yet to refute anything I said (actually you pretty much agreed with most of it), you're making this about Fox news (a common tactic I've seen Liberals use when they don't want to put a lot of effort into an argument). I don't watch Fox news. I don't watch ANY television. Hell, I don't even have CABLE so yeah... Spot on observation there. Odd though that you say you "dont watch main stream news" yet you seem to know enough to claim I'm "parroting it". (For the record, all I did was state facts.. if any news organization also happened to say the same things then they got it right for once).
Alan Grayson is an uncultured thug with absolutely zero class. He was a disgrace to everyone in his district, and the audit the fed bill is not enough to make up for the childish temper tantrums he threw on the house floor on a constant basis. He was unpopular in his own district almost from the beginning, and only sunk lower when his true colors came out... (namely that he would tell any lie he could to keep his position)... He actually paid for a campaign add that... You know what, I'll post it here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWdyf9eSkqQ
What he ACTUALLY said was: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kS2V_VQWb5Y the exact opposite of what was presented in that attack ad.
Alan Grayson is dishonest, and disgusting... Basically, an unashamed practitioner of Liberal way. Which is exactly why I think he would make the perfect vice presidential nominee, in fact the perfect presidential nominee. Time and time again, whenever America sees the *true* face of Liberalism, presented as it ACTUALLY is, without fancy words like "hope" and "change" to dress it up, they turn and run away from the kookiness screaming.
@Snovvy: And I'm seeing some very blatant parroting of MSNBS rhetoric from you, now can we can the platitudes or are you going to quote the same talking points Liberals use any time they get cornered: (i.e. oh you watch fox[in some misspelled way to make it look less than legitimate] news! that makes your argument inferior somehow!)
Moving on, Alan Grayson actually was MY representative during his (thankfully short) tenure in office. Yes I lived in floridas 8th for those 2 years and was forced to watch as he repeatedly made an ass out of himself and made out entire district look bad by acting in a way that no grown man should, especially an elected representative. I also got so see his reelection campaign ads on television and saw first hand how low he sunk.. Taking his opponent, Daniel Webster, out of context to the point of making it seem like he said the exact opposite of what he actually said, and calling him "Taliban Dan".. That's real mature don't you think?
Thank god for news organizations like "Faux" news who reported what Daniel Webster ACTUALLY said, and that what Grayson was saying about him was an utter lie. God knows MSNBC wouldn't report the actual news if it made a Democrat look bad.
[quote=Snovvy]@FightTheWar: The comment about liberals. And you're right, though, I over-reacted to that one. It gets frustrating when the crux of your arguments almost always fall upon blaming the left, even if it means ignoring all the nuance, or cherry picking influences.
-We didn't have to bail out the banks. Iceland proved that bailing out the people is a stronger plan.
-Look at the Ryan plan. Does nothing for like 6 years, doesn't target our biggest problems (corporate welfare and military,) and does a great job on worsening the stratification of our society (which is a bad thing y'know.) Look at who finances him, and look at who finances Romney.. Look at the inconsistency in Romney (I don't know as much about Ryan.) To think they're even close to trustworthy is horribly naive semi-partisanship.
-I agree on Obama being a sketchy person. I guess you can say he's moderately sincere, but then again, so are most politicians. maybe 1/3 of politicians are "pants on fire corrupt,:" 11/18 politicians are "moderately sincere," and 1/18 are actually sincere.
I'm recognizing some very blatant parroting of Faux news rhetoric![/quote]
Therein lies the problem: we both believe there are different issues with the military. You believe we're spending too much, and I believe (well, know) we don't have enough manpower for the current amount of work that needs to be done. Therefore I agree with Paul Ryan's plan because I see the necessity for the United States to remain untouchable militarily.
Also, good luck against Laguniroth, you won't beat him in a debate. He knows a lot about Alan Grayson (Grayson was his Congressman). Laguniroth is an expert on politics, his criticisms of Grayson are far more in depth than simple 'Fox News Rhetoric' (he's just blunt about how he feels).
[quote=Snovvy]@FightTheWar:
Jobs: agree, funny statement.
Chains: The Republicans started talking about banks in chains, and Biden flipped it back around as people in chains. Has nothing to do with the like 50% black crowd. Extremely out of context.
Indian accent: Don't know of this quote.
Alan Grayson is one of the only people who pushed for auditing the fed, alongside Sanders and Paul. Hopefully he can get back in because while he's brash, he's sincere and actually tries to do his job.
EDIT: Messed up quote.[/quote]
Alan Grayson is actually an EXCELLENT choice for a running mate for Obama. An irrelavant whack job like that would do nothing but emphasize what a whack job Obama himself is, and his propensity to put his foot in his own mouth is at least as good as Joe Bidens... Honestly moreso sinc he's proven he's willing to scrape the bottom of the barrel, utterly lying and taking people completely out of context in his fail reelection ads... (luckily he was seen to be the lunatic that he is and likely won't be elected for so much as dog catcher any time soon)
[quote=Snovvy]@FightTheWar: Oh, except when it comes to Wars, the Drug War, and corporate welfare. Paul Ryan is totally into that! Oh wait.. isn't that like 60% of our budget? oh wait it is. Somehow he's going to lower taxes and carry those on? Hahaha.
We can keep our social welfare programs if we spend more on them. Simple as that. I've seen many conflicting arguments over whether medicare or social security will actually crash. From the sounds of it, it's the right cherry picking information and ignoring factors to get nonsensical statistics.
Can you go through an argument without mindlessly trashing the left?[/quote]
Mindlessly trashing the left? The only comment I had trashing the left was on Alan Grayson (look it up, he tried to have a woman imprisoned) and pointing out that I hear a lot more people complain about Paul Ryan's efforts to amend medicare but don't point out that it will collapse soon unless it's reformed. Paul Ryan may have voted for the bailouts, but that is a very touchy subject; I don't believe anyone in Congress (except the extremely corrupt) wanted to see bailouts, but the reality was if all those companies collapsed then the recession would have been a lot worse. What do you do if you know millions of people who had no involvement will lose their jobs if you don't prop up their companies? I believe Paul Ryan is sincere when he says he will work to reduce the deficit and if I'm wrong I will admit it (though Obama through his actions has proven he is not). Granted, most of the blame should go to the federal government, Fannie/Freddie, and yes, the Fed, for setting up and enforcing what was nothing more than a government-backed ponzi scheme which never should have existed to begin with.
[quote=Snovvy]@FightTheWar:
Jobs: agree, funny statement.
Chains: The Republicans started talking about banks in chains, and Biden flipped it back around as people in chains. Has nothing to do with the like 50% black crowd. Extremely out of context.
Indian accent: Don't know of this quote.
Alan Grayson is one of the only people who pushed for auditing the fed, alongside Sanders and Paul. Hopefully he can get back in because while he's brash, he's sincere and actually tries to do his job.
EDIT: Messed up quote.[/quote]
Alan Grayson was also the guy who tried to have a woman imprisoned for creating a website that was critical of him (mycongressmanisnuts.com). So much for respect for the first amendment. As for auditing... someone needs to audit the federal government. Paul Ryan at least understands the seemingly basic concept of not spending money you don't actually have. It also seems like no liberals ever seem to realize that if left alone Medicare and Social Security will completely collapse relatively soon, which will REALLY screw over old people.
[quote=Snovvy]Dem quotes taken out of context!
@FightTheWar:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yMr9h9R3df8[/quote]
3 letters: J O B S
Republicans want to put you back into chains
You cannot go to a 7/11 without an Indian accent?
How are any of those taken out of context?
You want EXTREME out of context? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nV-hnd74OZ0 Alan Grayson was probably the biggest sleazebag in Congress.
[quote=askmiller]what does a vice president do anyway? Leader of house? O boy he's gonna make all the decisions guys... [/quote]
He's actually president of the Senate, as well as the first in line to succeed the president.
Well I hear he's just a benchwarmer, because his purpose was to make Obama look like he had more 'experience' since Biden was in the legislative branch for a long time while Obama might have been to young back in '08.
I wish he did something more interesting though... like shoot someone's face, hahaaa.
That video showed me nothing to be impressed about. It's like any other political ad.
I just don't want Mitt Romney to win...
Yea he's definitely the right person to run with Obama, so we can take them both down at once
[quote=FallOfMan]American politics ... lulz will be had.[/quote]
So true.