http://gamingtrend.com
October 21, 2014, 01:05:41 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: What are they smoking?  (Read 6750 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Blackadar
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3458



View Profile
« Reply #40 on: March 04, 2008, 09:21:51 PM »

Quote from: unbreakable on March 04, 2008, 09:02:19 PM

I was caught in yet another exaggeration and rather than admit I did so, I'll continue my bluster until the whole issue is dropped or I've managed to get yet another thread locked.


Fixed that for you.
Logged

Raise the bridge! I have an erection!
Brendan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3841


two oh sickness


View Profile
« Reply #41 on: March 04, 2008, 09:22:29 PM »

Quote from: denoginizer on March 04, 2008, 06:58:03 PM

To be fair there is "attack machinary" on both sides.

I'm not talking about the candidates.  I'm talking about the parties and their proxies in the media/talk radio/television/online/etc.  The democrats don't pull off coordinated attacks like republicans do - whether that's due to high-mindedness or incompetence is a separate issue.

Let's take a gander at the recent press on Obama and see what we learn:

Obama looks like Ayman Zwahiri.
He's only been a christian for two decades.
He'll probably withdraw support for Israel.
He has a funny middle name.
...which must mean he's secretly a muslim.
In fact, which sort of muslim is he?!
Huh - I guess he's the type of muslim who'll bomb other muslims that we're attached to.
Check out his wife, the black militant.

Contrast this garbage with what we get on McCain from the media.  The NYT article about him played up a salacious angle that made conservatives angry, but the details in the article appear to be accurate.  There's no disputing that McCain portrays himself as a crusader against special interest politics and lobbyist influence, but that he takes money from those lobbyists, intercedes on their behalf, and employs them in his campaign staff.  His campaign manager, Charlie Black, makes lobbying calls directly from the "Straight Talk Express" and tells his clients that he works on McCain's staff. He's attempting to manipulate his own financing law to avoid being fined for exceeding a spending cap he should be held to.  The republicans are good at diverting people's attention, however, so they managed to make the NYT story about the story itself, rather than the content.

There is no equivalency between the two sides.  The republicans are far far more manipulative and dishonest.  The links above are just the start of what'll be a storm of bullshit if he gets the nomination.
Logged
Brendan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3841


two oh sickness


View Profile
« Reply #42 on: March 04, 2008, 09:45:07 PM »

Quote from: unbreakable on March 04, 2008, 05:07:25 PM

If McCain would stop calling Democrats traitors, I would stop mentioning that he does it.  Check a few days ago, when John "does this sweater make me look gay" McCain was talking about how Obama would surrender to Al Qaeda.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/30/GOPdebate.transcript/index.html

"I'm proud to have played a role in making sure that we didn't raise the white flag and surrender in Iraq, as the Democrats wanted us to do and we would have done if we had set timetables for a withdrawal."

http://mediamatters.org/items/200801280011?f=s_search

"What Senator Clinton said was that you would set a timetable within 60 days of withdrawal, complete withdrawal from Iraq. To me that's surrender. And I think in most people's view that would be surrender if we told Al Qaeda that we are leaving Iraq within a certain period of time."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23374260/

"Throughout the primary season, McCain has repeatedly attacked Obama and Hillary Clinton for saying they would withdraw troops from Iraq.  "And my friends, if we left, they (al-Qaida) wouldn't be establishing a base," McCain said Wednesday. "They'd be taking a country, and I'm not going to allow that to happen, my friends. I will not surrender. I will not surrender to al-Qaida.""

Actual Obama position:

During the Democratic debate on February 26, Obama said that after he withdrew troops from Iraq, he would -- as president -- "reserve the right to make sure that we are looking out for American interests. And if al Qaeda is forming a base in Iraq, then we will have to act in a way that secures the American homeland and our interests abroad." Mocking Obama over the debate comment, McCain said: "I have some news: Al Qaeda is in Iraq. Al Qaeda, it's called Al Qaeda in Iraq." But, contrary to McCain's suggestion, Obama did not say that Al Qaeda currently has no presence in Iraq; he was speaking of the future, saying: "If Al Qaeda is forming a base in Iraq, then we will have to act in a way that secures the American homeland and our interests abroad." Furthermore, the Post simply reported that McCain accused Obama "of making ill-informed comments about Iraq and al-Qaeda" -- it did not point out that McCain made comments similar to those he criticized. For example, a September 13, 2007, Quad-City Times (Iowa) article reported that McCain said, "We cannot set a date for surrender, which would be a date for withdrawal from Iraq," and that "f we leave under those conditions, you will see chaos, genocide in Iraq, and we will be back. And we will be back because it will become a base for al-Qaida activities."
Logged
unbreakable
Guest
« Reply #43 on: March 04, 2008, 09:50:05 PM »

Quote from: Blackadar on March 04, 2008, 09:21:51 PM

Quote from: unbreakable on March 04, 2008, 09:02:19 PM

I was caught in yet another exaggeration and rather than admit I did so, I'll continue my bluster until the whole issue is dropped or I've managed to get yet another thread locked.


Fixed that for you.

Your access to Google is just as powerful as mine.  I suggest you use the tools at your disposal, rather than blaming me for your information deficiency.

BTW, antics like the above (lying about what I said in your "quote") are what gets threads locked, not anything I say.  There's already been a warning, and yet you continue with the personal attacks.

BTW2- not only should you thank Brendan for doing your homework FOR you, but you owe me an apology (since you were, indeed, proven wrong).  Feel free to address both in your next post in this thread.
« Last Edit: March 04, 2008, 09:54:04 PM by unbreakable » Logged
denoginizer
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6538


View Profile
« Reply #44 on: March 04, 2008, 09:50:37 PM »

Quote from: Brendan on March 04, 2008, 09:45:07 PM

Quote from: unbreakable on March 04, 2008, 05:07:25 PM

If McCain would stop calling Democrats traitors, I would stop mentioning that he does it.  Check a few days ago, when John "does this sweater make me look gay" McCain was talking about how Obama would surrender to Al Qaeda.




McCain is calling withdrawal from Iraq surrender.  But where does he call Obama a traitor?



« Last Edit: March 04, 2008, 09:53:13 PM by denoginizer » Logged

Xbox Live Tag: denoginizer
PSN Name: denoginizer
unbreakable
Guest
« Reply #45 on: March 04, 2008, 09:56:48 PM »

Quote from: denoginizer on March 04, 2008, 09:50:37 PM

Quote from: Brendan on March 04, 2008, 09:45:07 PM

Quote from: unbreakable on March 04, 2008, 05:07:25 PM

If McCain would stop calling Democrats traitors, I would stop mentioning that he does it.  Check a few days ago, when John "does this sweater make me look gay" McCain was talking about how Obama would surrender to Al Qaeda.




McCain is calling withdrawal from Iraq surrender.  But where does he call Obama a traitor?

Are you going to continue splitting hairs in a lame attempt to continue your bluster until the whole issue is dropped or you've managed to get yet another thread locked?
Logged
denoginizer
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6538


View Profile
« Reply #46 on: March 04, 2008, 09:58:19 PM »

Quote from: unbreakable on March 04, 2008, 09:56:48 PM

Quote from: denoginizer on March 04, 2008, 09:50:37 PM

Quote from: Brendan on March 04, 2008, 09:45:07 PM

Quote from: unbreakable on March 04, 2008, 05:07:25 PM

If McCain would stop calling Democrats traitors, I would stop mentioning that he does it.  Check a few days ago, when John "does this sweater make me look gay" McCain was talking about how Obama would surrender to Al Qaeda.




McCain is calling withdrawal from Iraq surrender.  But where does he call Obama a traitor?

Are you going to continue splitting hairs in a lame attempt to continue your bluster until the whole issue is dropped or you've managed to get yet another thread locked?


So you are not going to answer the question then? 

Please post a a quote where McCain calls Obama or Clinton a traitor.  You said it.  Or are you going to backpedal yet again when someone calls you out?

« Last Edit: March 04, 2008, 09:59:59 PM by denoginizer » Logged

Xbox Live Tag: denoginizer
PSN Name: denoginizer
unbreakable
Guest
« Reply #47 on: March 04, 2008, 10:07:44 PM »

Quote from: denoginizer on March 04, 2008, 09:58:19 PM

So you are not going to answer the question then? 

Please post a a quote where McCain calls Obama or Clinton a traitor.  You said it.  Or are you going to backpedal yet again when someone calls you out?

Please quote where I've backpedalled.  Brenden was kind enough to do the research that you, as an informed individual, were supposed to do, and effectively proved my point.

There's no difference between saying someone is "surrendering to Al Qaeda" or is a traitor.  It's a rewording of the exact same thing.  Sadly, I'm going to go out on a limb and predict you have decided to split hairs in a lame attempt to continue your bluster until the whole issue is dropped or you've managed to get yet another thread locked.
Logged
Blackadar
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3458



View Profile
« Reply #48 on: March 05, 2008, 12:34:49 AM »

Quote from: unbreakable on March 04, 2008, 10:07:44 PM

Quote from: denoginizer on March 04, 2008, 09:58:19 PM

So you are not going to answer the question then? 

Please post a a quote where McCain calls Obama or Clinton a traitor.  You said it.  Or are you going to backpedal yet again when someone calls you out?

Please quote where I've backpedalled.  Brenden was kind enough to do the research that you, as an informed individual, were supposed to do, and effectively proved my point.

There's no difference between saying someone is "surrendering to Al Qaeda" or is a traitor.  It's a rewording of the exact same thing.  Sadly, I'm going to go out on a limb and predict you have decided to split hairs in a lame attempt to continue your bluster until the whole issue is dropped or you've managed to get yet another thread locked.

Actually, he doesn't prove your point, as none of the links he provides use the term "traitor" as you did.  Case closed.  Period.  Done.  There's a big difference between "surrendering to Al Qaeda" and being a traitor.  Ask any POW about that...

The problem here is you're desperately attempting to backpedal and change the terms of this discussion to another "woe is me, I'm being personally attacked again" thread.  I'm sure you're not a bad person, but you just can't distinguish between fact and hyperbole.  You don't rationally debate very well, you don't admit when you're wrong and you have a hard time not taking everything on a personal level.  This isn't character assassination, these are a matter of facts.  I enjoy the political discussions here at GC - they're far better than those at OO - but you tend to fling crap all over the place and muck the threads up.  As such, I'd like to see you permanently banned from all political threads forever at GC and I tend to agree with you on virtually every political issue out there.  That's just sad...

To the mods, there's no reason to lock the thread since the entire crux of the thread is being played out tonight at the polls.  But a hard look at how this thread has devolved would be in order.
« Last Edit: March 05, 2008, 12:37:39 AM by Blackadar » Logged

Raise the bridge! I have an erection!
Blackadar
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3458



View Profile
« Reply #49 on: March 05, 2008, 12:40:55 AM »

Back to the thread...

Obama looks like he'll dominate Vermont.  Not a big surprise, but it may be a 20+ point margin of victory.  And with huge voter turnout in Ohio and Obama managing to close a 20 point gap in two weeks, Hillary is definitely on the ropes.

In the general election, I think Obama will tab Richardson as the Veep to boost his ratings among Hispanic voters.  They seem to be some of the last holdouts to not flock to Obama.
« Last Edit: March 05, 2008, 12:42:44 AM by Blackadar » Logged

Raise the bridge! I have an erection!
denoginizer
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6538


View Profile
« Reply #50 on: March 05, 2008, 01:41:55 AM »

Quote from: Blackadar on March 05, 2008, 12:40:55 AM

In the general election, I think Obama will tab Richardson as the Veep to boost his ratings among Hispanic voters.  They seem to be some of the last holdouts to not flock to Obama.

I agree.  In fact I said the same thing a few weeks ago.  icon_biggrin

http://www.gamingtrend.com/forums/index.php/topic,25069.0.html
Logged

Xbox Live Tag: denoginizer
PSN Name: denoginizer
CeeKay
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 71766


La-bibbida-bibba-dum! La-bibbida-bibba-do!


View Profile
« Reply #51 on: March 05, 2008, 02:44:31 AM »

and Huckabee drops out.
Logged

Because I can,
also because I don't care what you want.
XBL: OriginalCeeKay
Wii U: CeeKay
Blackadar
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3458



View Profile
« Reply #52 on: March 05, 2008, 02:58:41 AM »

Well, Clinton finally got a win.  Not surprisingly, Rhode Island went to her.

I think Obama will take Texas tonight.  Not only has he concentrated more on Texas, but the caucus system will give him an advantage as well.  I wouldn't be surprised to see Obama win by 5 points in the election and a slightly higher margin in the caucuses.

Ohio is anyone's ballgame, but for some reason I think Hillary will pull out a 1 or 2 point victory.  It's questionable whether that's enough for her to carry on.
Logged

Raise the bridge! I have an erection!
denoginizer
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6538


View Profile
« Reply #53 on: March 05, 2008, 04:13:57 AM »

Looking at CNN.com's county by county results I am struck by the fact that in Ohio Lake and Ashtabula counties had more people vote for Hillary than McCain.  These 2 counties have traditionally been heavily Republican.  Bush got over 70% in both counties in both 2000 and 2004.  Either alot of those Republicans have suddenly had a change of heart, or they are voting for Hillary just to keep Obama from getting the nomination.  Interesting stuff.

Logged

Xbox Live Tag: denoginizer
PSN Name: denoginizer
Blackadar
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3458



View Profile
« Reply #54 on: March 05, 2008, 12:13:11 PM »

I'm really quite surprised Hillary won by 10 in Ohio.  As far as Texas, I don't know why everyone is claiming she "won" - she won the popular vote, but Obama is winning the caucuses.  Still, voter turnout continues to be very encouraging, with more people voting for either Clinton or Obama than all the Republican candidates combined. 

Dean better announce a plan - like right now - on what they're going to do about FL and MI.  Charlie Crist, the Governor of FL, has supported a do-over, but I can't imagine the RNC wanting the Democrats covering FL since it's such a swing state.  If they suddenly count, I think you'll see the Democratic Party fracture over racial lines and McCain will have an easy ride to the White House.    You had Hillary counting FL and MI as wins in her speech last night (tasteless, in my book) and a non-decision will be disastrous in Denver.  Either Dean has to declare that FL and MI will not count at all (Hillary will scream), pro-rate their delegates based on some formula (everyone will scream) or just do it over. 

It's said that a do-over will cost around $4m.  I'd advocate that the DNC puts in $2m while Hillary and Obama put in $1m each.  Same goes for MI.

 

Logged

Raise the bridge! I have an erection!
denoginizer
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6538


View Profile
« Reply #55 on: March 05, 2008, 01:17:11 PM »

Quote from: Blackadar on March 05, 2008, 12:13:11 PM

Dean better announce a plan - like right now - on what they're going to do about FL and MI.  Charlie Crist, the Governor of FL, has supported a do-over, but I can't imagine the RNC wanting the Democrats covering FL since it's such a swing state.  If they suddenly count, I think you'll see the Democratic Party fracture over racial lines and McCain will have an easy ride to the White House.    You had Hillary counting FL and MI as wins in her speech last night (tasteless, in my book) and a non-decision will be disastrous in Denver.  Either Dean has to declare that FL and MI will not count at all (Hillary will scream), pro-rate their delegates based on some formula (everyone will scream) or just do it over. 


 Bring your own!
It's going to be fun to watch. 

I thought Hillary counting Michigan and Florida as wins in her speech was disgraceful. And it gives a look at her campaign's strategy all along.  Keep going into Denver and try to steal the nomination with litigation concerning Fla/Mich and by buying Super Delegates.
« Last Edit: March 05, 2008, 01:27:44 PM by denoginizer » Logged

Xbox Live Tag: denoginizer
PSN Name: denoginizer
unbreakable
Guest
« Reply #56 on: March 05, 2008, 02:41:56 PM »

Quote from: Blackadar on March 05, 2008, 12:34:49 AM

Actually, he doesn't prove your point, as none of the links he provides use the term "traitor" as you did.  Case closed.  Period.  Done.  There's a big difference between "surrendering to Al Qaeda" and being a traitor.  Ask any POW about that...

Feel free to quote the portion where I said McCain used the exact term "traitor".  It should be easy, because I would have put it in quote marks as I did in the last sentence.

Quote
The problem here is you're desperately attempting to backpedal and change the terms of this discussion to another "woe is me, I'm being personally attacked again" thread.

No, the problem is you are desperately attempting to put words in my mouth, and claim it's a backpedal.  Sadly, you not only fail on both counts... but you have zero credibility to play with.

Quote
I'm sure you're not a bad person, but you just can't distinguish between fact and hyperbole.

For someone who is trying to split hairs and demand I provide a quote where McCain directly says the words "traitor", the fact that you bring up hyperbole... and claim I can't tell what it is... is beyond irony and lands right in the land of hugely unintended comedy.  Kudos!

Quote
You don't rationally debate very well, you don't admit when you're wrong and you have a hard time not taking everything on a personal level.  This isn't character assassination, these are a matter of facts.  I enjoy the political discussions here at GC - they're far better than those at OO - but you tend to fling crap all over the place and muck the threads up.  As such, I'd like to see you permanently banned from all political threads forever at GC and I tend to agree with you on virtually every political issue out there.  That's just sad...

It's kind of amazing how well you've internalized the textbook conservative discussion style.  You always blame the other guy for the exact same tactics you are using.  Again, kudos, sir!

Please feel free to quote where I've said a single bad thing about you.  Here's a tip: saying you are misinformed isn't an insult, it's an opinion.  Or, in this case, a fact.

The reality of this discussion is you've been repeatedly claiming I say things I don't, and continue making the discussion about me rather than what I've said.  That's why you continue to push your "backpedal" lie, and why you continue to say my facts are wrong while bringing forth nothing to prove your point.  You simply can't compete, so you make up your own facts.

Quote
To the mods, there's no reason to lock the thread since the entire crux of the thread is being played out tonight at the polls.  But a hard look at how this thread has devolved would be in order.

I think that's a good idea.  You've failed to back up a single thing you've said, and you refuse to discuss anything but me.  Try sticking to the topic, or at least the general issue, and stop the personal attacks.

Since you bring nothing to the table, it's probably best that I just ignore anything you post.
« Last Edit: March 05, 2008, 02:43:27 PM by unbreakable » Logged
Kevin Grey
Global Moderator
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 13976


View Profile
« Reply #57 on: March 05, 2008, 02:45:35 PM »

We're done here. 
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.125 seconds with 59 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0.024s, 2q)