Is Obama finished?

[smoseley]

Originally Posted by apk919

Some people believe that whenever you commit a sin you're being "led by demons" (i.e. the devil). That doesn't make the people evil. And as I said, it's not my stance anyway.

Right, and as I said (had you read my entire post), the ones who believe in little green men with horns, and prodding you to do bad deeds are what we call extremists, and certainly don't represent the majority of any religion. The vast majority of people live in a little place we call "reality".

Originally Posted by apk919

I never heard McCain say anything remotely like this.

I never said McCain said anything remotely like that. I said that is what his connection (Parsley) believes, as an expansion on glb's statement of how "McCain's guy is scarier than Obama's guy"

Originally Posted by apk919

Where has McCain said he's morally led by someone who believes this? This is pure hyperbole. Obama's the one who's been financially supporting an obvious racist, bigot, egomaniac and America hater.

Let's cut the ****... When has anyone ever said "I'm morally led by xyz person" with the exceptions of Gandhi, Mother Theresa, Jesus, Buddha, the pope, or Mohammed?

And personally, I'd rather have an unpatriotic racist in office (wouldn't be the first) than a genocidal maniac (not naming names here... just talking conceptually).

Anyhow, the bottom line is that we don't know that Obama is a racist anti-American egomaniac or that McCain is a genocidal maniac - we only know that they consort with people who are. But it's ridiculous for one side to claim the other party's candidate is A unless he acknowledges the possibility that his own candidate is B as well.

Originally Posted by apk919

Promise? We'd hate to lose you Steve, but I'm really tired of people saying they're leaving the country if so and so gets elected, and then realize that even with so and so in charge, they seem to want to stay.

Whatchyou talkin 'bout, Willis? I didn't say I'd leave the country if McCain got elected.

I said I'd leave the country if we started exterminating Muslims & Arabs, primarily because I'd want to be as far away from the shooting as possible, but also due to the fact that I'm of Lebanese descent.





PS - You don't even read my posts, do you? You just skim **** and come back with canned responses trying to get people's goats. Don't try and troll on me... respond only if you have something intelligent to say.

[ezmoney]

Originally Posted by Flash G

I don't ever pluck things out of air. I always back up my arguments with fact.

$200billion between Jan `07 and this year alone.

What Iraq will cost the U.S. - Jan. 11, 2008


.

That's what the war costs. My question is how much will we save if we do what you said, 50k troops to Afghanistan and the rest home. There is still a cost for this. If the war in Iraq costs X and your plan costs Y, X-Y= ? That's what I want to know. Back up your numbers with facts.

[smoseley]

Originally Posted by ezmoney

That's what the war costs. My question is how much will we save if we do what you said, 50k troops to Afghanistan and the rest home. There is still a cost for this. If the war in Iraq costs X and your plan costs Y, X-Y= ? That's what I want to know. Back up your numbers with facts.

I added it up in my head. We'll save $143,985,492,175.32 annually.

It would (and should) have been $143,985,492,205.31, but one of the officers illegally expensed his $29.99 Playboy subscription to the budget. He will be reprimanded.

[apk919]

Originally Posted by smoseley

PS - You don't even read my posts, do you? You just skim **** and come back with canned responses trying to get people's goats. Don't try and troll on me... respond only if you have something intelligent to say.

Please excuse my supposed ignorance. I read this:

Originally Posted by smoseley

In short, it could be deduced that McCain is morally led by whacko Christian extremists (terrorists) who want to rid the world of all members of another religion, and he's got the most powerful army in the world to back that motive if he chooses to execute on it. Sound familiar? Does the world Holocaust ring a bell?

History does have a tendency to repeat itself. If this **** goes down, I'm moving my ass to France.

and quite reasonably "deduced" that "this ****", as you so eloquently put it, meant that you thought McCain would start a Holocaust. After all, somehow you "deduced" that McCain is morally led by "whacko Christian extremists", even though the candidate that hired a whacko to his "spiritual advisory committee" was Obama!!!!!

[ezmoney]

Originally Posted by smoseley

Before you answer me, make sure you know what you're responding to. I didn't say I'd leave the country if McCain got elected. I said I'd leave the country if we started exterminating Arabs. Not the least of which reason being that I'm Lebanese-American.

This statement I am in total agreement with. It is fortunate that this country has shown great restraint in Iraq. We have the means (if we desired to) to exterminate everyone in that country. What concerns me is that not every country will show this kind of restraint.

In WW2 we didn't show that kind of restraint. We targeted civilian populations frequently, so did our enemys, but remember they started that war. They also were the first to target non military targets.

Should our NEW enemys (terrorists) get weapons of mass destruction I have no doubt that they will use them. They've showed us that targeting civilians is what they will do.

I believe that part of the reason for us to maintain a presence in that region (middle east i.e. Iraq) is be be able to deploy rapidly to prevent a terrorist organization or a rogue government from getting these weapons and then using them.

If we pull out and come home:
a. I believe that it is more likely that terrorists with the aid of rogue governments will get WMD capabilities.
b. That our response time will be too little and too late. It takes time to build up forces that far from the USA.

Just my opinion.

[apk919]

Originally Posted by smoseley

Don't try and troll on me... respond only if you have something intelligent to say.

Originally Posted by smoseley

I added it up in my head. We'll save $143,985,492,175.32 annually.

It would (and should) have been $143,985,492,205.31, but one of the officers illegally expensed his $29.99 Playboy subscription to the budget. He will be reprimanded.

Hello pot? This is kettle, over!

[SKYVUE]

ezmoney: I agree with your statements. It's just a matter of time that terrorists WILL use WMD targeting more innocent civilians to show their "point". The Iran/Syria/North Korea and other countries that harbor Muslim extremists are willing to do this.
I'm outraged by this "idealism" growing around the world.

I hope our country will have strong leadership to deal with the Muslim extremist threat.
In my opinion, this is the most important issue that threatens civilization.
More important than global warming, energy crisis.

-Hal

[smoseley]

Originally Posted by apk919

Hello pot? This is kettle, over!

There's a difference between trolling and using literary tools such as hyperbole to illustrate a point.

In this case, I was illustrating what could have been more blandly stated as "it's impossible to add up exact figures, but it'll be A LOT", which of course would have led to the rebuttal "well if you can't add it up, then you don't know."

Rather than allow Flash G to get set up for that trap, I decided to spring it ahead of time.

[smoseley]

Originally Posted by SKYVUE

I'm outraged by this "idealism" growing around the world.

Sorry, dude, you just made one of the most ridiculous-sounding (out-of-context) quotes I've ever seen. That's going in my signature.

[fitfan]

Originally Posted by ezmoney

That's what the war costs. My question is how much will we save if we do what you said, 50k troops to Afghanistan and the rest home. There is still a cost for this. If the war in Iraq costs X and your plan costs Y, X-Y= ? That's what I want to know. Back up your numbers with facts.

different operations or programs come from different budgets, depending on "who" is asking for the money, and for "what".

point is - the overall grand scheme big picture $ are far greater than that, you just don't hear about it. certain programs are not and will never be acounted for in that regard. so while what you say above makes common sense - it doesn't really work that way. another way of saying it was how much of the 200 bil was being spent prior to the war in iraq?

[ivan1]

since this thread is getting more and more off topic...

Steve - what do you think about Hezbolla's recent actions in Lebanon ? were they just trying to prove a point, get more influence, or something more than that? should Lebanese Christians be worried? I think I recall you saying you still had relatives there....

[fitfan]

Originally Posted by smoseley

Sorry, dude, you just made one of the most ridiculous-sounding (out-of-context) quotes I've ever seen. That's going in my signature.

thank Allah !!! Steve is BACK!!! may 240 camels power your right sandal.

[smoseley]

Nice to be loved. Missed you guys too.

[fitfan]

Originally Posted by smoseley

Nice to be loved.

oh god no - please tell me you deleted THOSE pics...

[apk919]

Originally Posted by smoseley

There's a difference between trolling and using literary tools such as hyperbole to illustrate a point.

Aha, I see. What about pathos, or irony, or perhaps sarcasm? Are they literary tools as well or simply trolling?

Frankly, it seems if you don't like what I have to say, you seem to consider it trolling.

Try this!

[smoseley]

Originally Posted by apk919

Please excuse my supposed ignorance. I read this... and quite reasonably "deduced" that "this ****", as you so eloquently put it, meant that you thought McCain would start a Holocaust. After all, somehow you "deduced" that McCain is morally led by "whacko Christian extremists", even though the candidate that hired a whacko to his "spiritual advisory committee" was Obama!!!!!

I don't really think I need to spell all this out again for you, do I? Fine, I will, just because you seem to have trouble getting history straight:

1. Someone said something about Obama's whacko.
   
   
2. glb said he's more afraid of McCain's whacko.
   
   
3. You said "who? the guy who baptized his children?"
   
   
4. I said, no, more likely glb is referring to Parsley, the whack-job who wants to rid the world of Muslims.
   
   
5. You came back with some off-kilter argument about how all religious people believe in little green men and then associated glb's pro-Obama stance to me, claiming again that Obama's guy (or was it Obama?) is a racist, bigot, anti-American egomaniac.
   
   
6. I retorted that glb's referenced "McCain's guy" (after all, I still haven't made a claim either way) is yet worse, and if following glb's logic with regards to McCain (as you would have us follow yours with regards to Obama), would have a genocidal maniac in office.
   
   
7. You said I made a claim about someone. I never did such a thing.

[SKYVUE]

Originally Posted by smoseley

Sorry, dude, you just made one of the most ridiculous-sounding (out-of-context) quotes I've ever seen. That's going in my signature.

You have my blessing, Steve!

--Hal

[smoseley]

Originally Posted by apk919

Frankly, it seems if you don't like what I have to say, you seem to consider it trolling.

No, I consider trolling the concoction of a statement, based neither in logic nor fact, that is designed specifically to elicit a negative response from an opponent in a debate.

I'm not saying I'm not guilty of having done it... but it doesn't work on me, so don't do it.

Originally Posted by apk919

Try this!

Don't need it. You don't in the least bit upset me. I assume by the fact that you seemingly want to taunt me with the option that you are, in fact, trying to.

[apk919]

Originally Posted by smoseley

I don't really think I need to spell all this out again for you, do I? Fine, I will, just because you seem to have trouble getting history straight:

• Someone said something about Obama's whacko.
  
  
• glb said he's more afraid of McCain's whacko.
  
  
• You said "who? the guy who baptized his children?"
  
  
• I said, no, more likely glb is referring to Parsley, the whack-job who wants to rid the world of Muslims.
  
  
• You came back with some off-kilter argument about how all religious people believe in little green men and then associated glb's pro-Obama stance to me, claiming again that Obama's guy (or was it Obama?) is a racist, bigot, anti-American egomaniac.
  
  
• I retorted that glb's referenced "McCain's guy" (after all, I still haven't made a claim either way) is yet worse, and if following glb's logic with regards to McCain (as you would have us follow yours with regards to Obama), would have a genocidal maniac in office.
  
  
• You said I made a claim about someone. I never did such a thing.

No, I've got my history is straight.

It's the relevance and content of your argument that isn't straight.

I'd go through a bullet point by bullet point refutation of your argument, but frankly, I'm bored by it. Maybe I'll get to it later. Maybe not.

[Rob T]

Originally Posted by LARRY

Say "hello" to smoseley, gentlemen.

This man is extremely intelligent and as sharp as a razor.

If you're going to have a battle of wits with him, you better have your sh*t together.

I.E. please refer all further arguments to him, and I will simply add a "+1" since I really can't speak for myself (or have any idea what I am talking about for that matter)!