If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(RealClearPolitics)   At some point, one has to ask: Is this administration responsible for ANYTHING?   (realclearpolitics.com) divider line 249
    More: Followup, RNC  
•       •       •

2375 clicks; posted to Politics » on 15 May 2013 at 5:37 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



249 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-05-15 08:50:41 PM

OlderGuy: Where did you get the numbers from ? Oh, the US Government.. and they would NEVER lie !!!!


Somehow I get the impression that you blame the Jews when your toilet backs up.
 
2013-05-15 09:03:52 PM

tenpoundsofcheese: HotWingConspiracy: tenpoundsofcheese: Sliding Carp: The deficit is shrinking much faster than anyone predicted.  Does that suit you, subby?

Thanks to the GOP winning the House and taking a hard line on the budget and over-spending.

LOL, tell us that again when you're crying about Obama's "record spending".

Because the GOP didn't win the House until the shellacking of 2010 and because they can't fix everything at once.


meow
 
2013-05-15 09:04:57 PM
67.18.219.83
 
2013-05-15 09:05:39 PM

tenpoundsofcheese: Zeppelininthesky: tenpoundsofcheese: Sliding Carp: The deficit is shrinking much faster than anyone predicted.  Does that suit you, subby?

Thanks to the GOP winning the House and taking a hard line on the budget and over-spending.

No thanks to the GOP trying to tank the economy because Obama is in office and doing their job would make Obama look good.

wow.  so much derp in so few words!  Nice job.

Yeah, people thought that getting spending under control was going to tank the economy ("oh no, spending controls automatically means full austerity and look what happened in Greece") when in fact the GOP was right.  They proved that with better spending controls and by not dramatically raising taxes (they gave in on some increases) the deficit could improve and businesses would have the confidence to hire again.

they also proved that the sky is falling panic of the sequester was just BS.


But yet they whined incessantly when planes were delayed.
/And white house tours were cancelled.
//meow
 
2013-05-15 09:07:48 PM

Lt. Cheese Weasel: DarwiOdrade: Wessoman: Lt. Cheese Weasel: Zeppelininthesky: Let's see:
Killing Bin Laden  Seal Team Six did that.

OH LOLS. Seal Team Six was around for years before Bin Laden was killed. Why didn't Seal Team six kill Bin Laden when your favorite President was in office?

Think hard before you answer.

Why would they kill bin Laden when Reagan was president? Reagan's the one who turned bin Laden into the terrorist kingpin he became.

You're on a very slippery slope here considering the doings in Syria right now and who Obama is giving guns and aid to.


So it's just straight up lying meow, that's what you are going for??
 
2013-05-15 09:13:52 PM

o5iiawah: Corvus: What's the difference for the cuts Republicans are calling for and the failed austerity plans of Europe?

because even republican "Cuts" arent actual cuts in the budget - they are cuts in the overall rate of growth.  A reduction in the deficit is still overspending.  That is not Austerity.

Europe has no choice but for Austerity.  The Euro isn't the global reserve currency so they cant just print however many euro they want in order to keep things afloat.

Just ask someone to explain what Austerity is, since you havent the slightest farking clue.


The best part about this is that they actually ARE doing quantitative easing in Europe. Here's an article about it

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/feb/28/european-central-bank -e uro-eurozone

So you say something that's demonstrably untrue and follow if up with 'you haven't the slightest farking clue'

You're welcome shiatbox.
 
2013-05-15 09:14:10 PM

veedeevadeevoodee: [67.18.219.83 image 500x861]


Derp!
 
2013-05-15 09:15:43 PM

meyerkev: Lt. Cheese Weasel: Improving the economy despite the GOP obstructing everything  Might want to let the folks in Detroit know how well things are going.

Detroit is improving.  There's still MAJOR structural problems (tax base fleeing to the suburbs, the best highway system in the US aiding and abetting the tax base fleeing to the suburbs, the Catch-22 of no taxes to pay for services and no services to attract people to pay taxes, the fact that 90% of the city has been abandoned by the cops...), but downtown and midtown are recovering, the Emergency Manager thing can't make anything worse, and the metro area itself has been fairly affluent since the metro area got really going 60 years ago (with the caveat that all the high 5-figure/low 6-figure manufacturing jobs went away, and a lot of those people are now more or less underqualified for fast food).

/I was getting salary offers for 80% of my current salary, with housing costs at 1/10 - 1/4 of what they are here.


This is surely explained why the mayor just quit.
 
2013-05-15 09:24:41 PM

MooseUpNorth: o5iiawah: Just ask someone to explain what Austerity is

Actually, I kinda wish someone would.


Milton Friedman.. paging Milton Friedman to the white courtesy phone....paging Milton Friedman
 
2013-05-15 09:30:45 PM

OlderGuy: Sliding Carp: The deficit is shrinking much faster than anyone predicted.  Does that suit you, subby?

Where did you get the numbers from ?   Oh, the US Government.. and they would NEVER lie !!!!


How many black helicopters am I holding up?
 
2013-05-15 09:32:15 PM

mistrmind: jim32rr: Maud Dib: mistrmind: This thread is so Left that if you placed it in a boat it'd capsize portside.

Oh, sweet..my ignore list needed rounding up to 100.
*plonk*

My TF sponsorship number goes up to 21


Thanks for the TF Jim!


 You don't say much my friend, but when you do it's to the point, and I salute you for it.  You are very much welcome ..... enjoy
 
2013-05-15 09:37:50 PM

tenpoundsofcheese: Zeppelininthesky: tenpoundsofcheese: Sliding Carp: The deficit is shrinking much faster than anyone predicted.  Does that suit you, subby?

Thanks to the GOP winning the House and taking a hard line on the budget and over-spending.

No thanks to the GOP trying to tank the economy because Obama is in office and doing their job would make Obama look good.

wow.  so much derp in so few words!  Nice job.

Yeah, people thought that getting spending under control was going to tank the economy ("oh no, spending controls automatically means full austerity and look what happened in Greece") when in fact the GOP was right.  They proved that with better spending controls and by not dramatically raising taxes (they gave in on some increases) the deficit could improve and businesses would have the confidence to hire again.

they also proved that the sky is falling panic of the sequester was just BS.


Looks like an excellent reason to have a dagburn Dimmycrat varmint in the White House:  so the Republicans will actually give a damn about deficits.
 
2013-05-15 09:38:44 PM

Lt. Cheese Weasel: meyerkev: Lt. Cheese Weasel: Improving the economy despite the GOP obstructing everything  Might want to let the folks in Detroit know how well things are going.

Detroit is improving.  There's still MAJOR structural problems (tax base fleeing to the suburbs, the best highway system in the US aiding and abetting the tax base fleeing to the suburbs, the Catch-22 of no taxes to pay for services and no services to attract people to pay taxes, the fact that 90% of the city has been abandoned by the cops...), but downtown and midtown are recovering, the Emergency Manager thing can't make anything worse, and the metro area itself has been fairly affluent since the metro area got really going 60 years ago (with the caveat that all the high 5-figure/low 6-figure manufacturing jobs went away, and a lot of those people are now more or less underqualified for fast food).

/I was getting salary offers for 80% of my current salary, with housing costs at 1/10 - 1/4 of what they are here.

This is surely explained why the mayor just quit.


Non-sequitur, but thanks for playing. Funny what you call proof.
 
2013-05-15 09:41:10 PM
This probably won't end as well as some folks would like...

But then again, this IS the Trolliest President ever. Don't get me wrong, James Polk really liked to play with his adversaries, but Obama has a talent for getting them frothy and then pointing at them and laughing.
 
2013-05-15 09:49:41 PM
He's making Dubya look bad and potentially on track to be remembered as fondly as Clinton (who was popular regardless of the similar sort of witch hunt BS the GOP threw at him). And that is absolutely KILLING the neocons teabaggerswhatever they call themselves this week.

And it is hilarious.
 
2013-05-15 09:58:24 PM

Marcus Aurelius: Nabb1: FlashHarry: JerseyTim: Here's the thing that kills me: the President not really being down with the day-to-day operations of the DOJ and IRS is ideal. That's the way it should be. Granted, he should have strong leadership in place there in order to guide things in a responsible, legal manner, but the president should not be involved in operations.

i know - the idea that he would be intimately involved in the day-to-day operations of the cincinnati field office of the IRS is ludicrous.

I'm still giving him the benefit of a doubt on the IRS thing.  I think that's institutional mismanagement, not an Obama directive.  But, I don't believe for a second he didn't know what was going on with the DoJ and the AP.  That was an investigation into a pretty serious security leak, and he has been cracking down on those, and this involved the Associated Press, one of the largest and well-known media outlets in the country.

I think this kind of action would have given even Nixon pause.  I find it scandalous that this isn't the only scandal we really need to look into.  Because if what I know so far is true, this is fairly outrageous.

/seriously


You do remember that Nixon sent his goons on a B and E into his political enemies office because he thought he was going to lose an election, right?  The DOJ investigates a security leak (criminal act) using existing laws, and you think that Nixon was the lesser of the two evils?  Talk about false equivalence...
 
2013-05-15 10:10:07 PM
Just that bin Laden thing, but nothing else apparently.
 
2013-05-15 10:10:58 PM

Schubert'sCell: Marcus Aurelius: Nabb1: FlashHarry: JerseyTim: Here's the thing that kills me: the President not really being down with the day-to-day operations of the DOJ and IRS is ideal. That's the way it should be. Granted, he should have strong leadership in place there in order to guide things in a responsible, legal manner, but the president should not be involved in operations.

i know - the idea that he would be intimately involved in the day-to-day operations of the cincinnati field office of the IRS is ludicrous.

I'm still giving him the benefit of a doubt on the IRS thing.  I think that's institutional mismanagement, not an Obama directive.  But, I don't believe for a second he didn't know what was going on with the DoJ and the AP.  That was an investigation into a pretty serious security leak, and he has been cracking down on those, and this involved the Associated Press, one of the largest and well-known media outlets in the country.

I think this kind of action would have given even Nixon pause.  I find it scandalous that this isn't the only scandal we really need to look into.  Because if what I know so far is true, this is fairly outrageous.

/seriously

You do remember that Nixon sent his goons on a B and E into his political enemies office because he thought he was going to lose an election, right?  The DOJ investigates a security leak (criminal act) using existing laws, and you think that Nixon was the lesser of the two evils?  Talk about false equivalence...


Yes, Nixon was a prick. Total Prick with a capital P. Reagan was the head of the most corrupt administration in modern America. Obama, on the other hand, oversees DOJ that actually got a farking subpoena and followed the goddamn law.

/Just threw the Ronnie bit in because it is fun to point out he had more of his administration indicted than Nixon.
//Yes, Reagan's administration was actually worse than Nixon's.
 
2013-05-15 10:14:44 PM

whidbey: Seeing as how you've put your foot in your mouth more than a few times just recently espousing denial of man-made climate change, I wouldn't be admonishing others about who has "the slightest farking clue."


I havent denied climate change - I just express doubt over the expertise of those who are suggesting it is going on, especially given that they've had to fabricate the numbers to do so.

Will someone please just call Whidbey smart so he can go away

Wessoman: I think somebody here is mistaken in believing expansionary fiscal contraction is not a form of Austerity. So, in layman's terms, there is not much difference between what the GOP proposes and what was applied in Europe.


The PIIGS states were forced into actual austerity, or actual cuts to their government spending because for decades, their stimulus and social spending didn't quite get the money circulating like all your pseudo-keynesians seem to think it would.  Its hard to explain this to someone who doesn't understand the difference in a cut to a rate of growth and a cut in raw dollars from one year to the next.

And again, for you and all the rest of the short bus crew - I havent denied or accepted climate change. I just question the expertise of people who have been caught fabricating their data
 
2013-05-15 10:14:54 PM

Sliding Carp: The deficit is shrinking much faster than anyone predicted.  Does that suit you, subby?


This.

Aarontology: bin Laden is still dead.


That.

JerseyTim: The DOW is skyrocketing.


The other.  So IOW, go fark yourself GOP.
 
2013-05-15 10:20:28 PM

randomjsa: Just that bin Laden thing, but nothing else apparently.


i.imgur.com
 
2013-05-15 10:29:53 PM
Thanks for the TF, anonymous.
 
2013-05-15 10:36:47 PM

Corvus: AeAe: NDAA.

Damn Obama for signing appropriations to our US military.


Are you serious?  One of the provisions of NDAA allows the president to hold an American citizen indefinitely without due process at his discretion.  You ok with this?
 
2013-05-15 10:49:44 PM

Sliding Carp: The deficit is shrinking much faster than anyone predicted.  Does that suit you, subby?


Because of the sequester and gridlock and no budget.  And I believe it's still larger than any non-Obama deficit.
 
2013-05-15 11:24:46 PM

AeAe: Corvus: AeAe: NDAA.

Damn Obama for signing appropriations to our US military.

Are you serious?  One of the provisions of NDAA allows the president to hold an American citizen indefinitely without due process at his discretion.  You ok with this?


No, but does that invalidate everything else? Or does accepting one part mean glad dancing joy about everything else, in your mind?  Since line-item vetoes are unconstitutional, Obama could either sign the whole thing or sign none of it; and it was either grant the appropriations with the holding provisions, or starve the troops of funding, but maintain the moral high ground. Obama did what needed to be done.

Perhaps you should dismount your high horse and join the rest of us here in the real world.
 
2013-05-15 11:25:29 PM

AeAe: Corvus: AeAe: NDAA.

Damn Obama for signing appropriations to our US military.

Are you serious?  One of the provisions of NDAA allows the president to hold an American citizen indefinitely without due process at his discretion.  You ok with this?


I think the blame for that rests on those who inserted it into a necessary military appropriations bill, not the man who signed it to pay our troops.
 
2013-05-15 11:37:27 PM

LordJiro: I think the blame for that rests on those who inserted it into a necessary military appropriations bill, not the man who signed it to pay our troops.


Obama didn't hesitate long enough when signing to prove he wasn't salivating at the chance to detain innocent Americans, but hesitated too long to suggest he wanted to see anything but the failure of a military and the death of American lives.

/am I doing it right?
 
2013-05-16 12:24:52 AM

Gyrfalcon: AeAe: Corvus: AeAe: NDAA.

Damn Obama for signing appropriations to our US military.

Are you serious?  One of the provisions of NDAA allows the president to hold an American citizen indefinitely without due process at his discretion.  You ok with this?

No, but does that invalidate everything else? Or does accepting one part mean glad dancing joy about everything else, in your mind?  Since line-item vetoes are unconstitutional, Obama could either sign the whole thing or sign none of it; and it was either grant the appropriations with the holding provisions, or starve the troops of funding, but maintain the moral high ground. Obama did what needed to be done.

Perhaps you should dismount your high horse and join the rest of us here in the real world.


It's a bad law and chips away at our civil liberties.  The ACLU is challenging it in court.
You position appears to be "it's part of the package, what can you do?" .. that's pretty goddam cynical.

It's a good thing that other people don't think like you do.
 
2013-05-16 12:25:08 AM
Hey, if the GOP doesn't want to give props to the administration for the positive stuff it is responsible for.......
 
2013-05-16 12:31:38 AM

Sergeant Grumbles: LordJiro: I think the blame for that rests on those who inserted it into a necessary military appropriations bill, not the man who signed it to pay our troops.

Obama didn't hesitate long enough when signing to prove he wasn't salivating at the chance to detain innocent Americans, but hesitated too long to suggest he wanted to see anything but the failure of a military and the death of American lives.

/am I doing it right?


Yes.
 
2013-05-16 12:44:34 AM

AeAe: Gyrfalcon: AeAe: Corvus: AeAe: NDAA.

Damn Obama for signing appropriations to our US military.

Are you serious?  One of the provisions of NDAA allows the president to hold an American citizen indefinitely without due process at his discretion.  You ok with this?

No, but does that invalidate everything else? Or does accepting one part mean glad dancing joy about everything else, in your mind?  Since line-item vetoes are unconstitutional, Obama could either sign the whole thing or sign none of it; and it was either grant the appropriations with the holding provisions, or starve the troops of funding, but maintain the moral high ground. Obama did what needed to be done.

Perhaps you should dismount your high horse and join the rest of us here in the real world.

It's a bad law and chips away at our civil liberties.  The ACLU is challenging it in court.
You position appears to be "it's part of the package, what can you do?" .. that's pretty goddam cynical.

It's a good thing that other people don't think like you do.


Except there really wasn't anything Obama COULD do, aside from the signing statement. As a military appropriations bill, it passed with a veto-proof majority.
 
2013-05-16 01:08:43 AM

Lorelle: It's responsible for making the GOP whinier and derpier than it's ever been.


no, the meth caused that
 
2013-05-16 01:09:17 AM

LordJiro: AeAe: Gyrfalcon: AeAe: Corvus: AeAe: NDAA.

Damn Obama for signing appropriations to our US military.

Are you serious?  One of the provisions of NDAA allows the president to hold an American citizen indefinitely without due process at his discretion.  You ok with this?

No, but does that invalidate everything else? Or does accepting one part mean glad dancing joy about everything else, in your mind?  Since line-item vetoes are unconstitutional, Obama could either sign the whole thing or sign none of it; and it was either grant the appropriations with the holding provisions, or starve the troops of funding, but maintain the moral high ground. Obama did what needed to be done.

Perhaps you should dismount your high horse and join the rest of us here in the real world.

It's a bad law and chips away at our civil liberties.  The ACLU is challenging it in court.
You position appears to be "it's part of the package, what can you do?" .. that's pretty goddam cynical.

It's a good thing that other people don't think like you do.

Except there really wasn't anything Obama COULD do, aside from the signing statement. As a military appropriations bill, it passed with a veto-proof majority.


Yesss.. there's nothing he could do..

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/06/ndaa-indefinite-detention-l aw suit_n_2632254.html
 
2013-05-16 01:15:44 AM

AeAe: Gyrfalcon: AeAe: Corvus: AeAe: NDAA.

Damn Obama for signing appropriations to our US military.

Are you serious?  One of the provisions of NDAA allows the president to hold an American citizen indefinitely without due process at his discretion.  You ok with this?

No, but does that invalidate everything else? Or does accepting one part mean glad dancing joy about everything else, in your mind?  Since line-item vetoes are unconstitutional, Obama could either sign the whole thing or sign none of it; and it was either grant the appropriations with the holding provisions, or starve the troops of funding, but maintain the moral high ground. Obama did what needed to be done.

Perhaps you should dismount your high horse and join the rest of us here in the real world.

It's a bad law and chips away at our civil liberties.  The ACLU is challenging it in court.
You position appears to be "it's part of the package, what can you do?" .. that's pretty goddam cynical.

It's a good thing that other people don't think like you do.


Realism is often considered cynical. I'd be happier if the laws weren't such that our Supreme Court hadn't decided based on strict allegiance to the Constitution that a line-item veto was improper--then we wouldn't have had a bad law that chipped away at our civil liberties, because Obama could have simply struck out that clause and signed the rest. But most people ignored Clinton v. City of New York because it didn't involve them. Except now it does, because it was intended to prevent idiocies like NDAA.

I'd rather be realistic and accept what's been done, and allow the ACLU to work on the unconstitutional parts of the law after the fact; than to go with what would probably be your preferred alternative, have the President refuse to sign such a bill with moral fortitude, and have it pass anyway over his veto. Morality and politics are poor bedfellows. Reality has a cynical bias, unfortunately.
 
2013-05-16 01:52:18 AM
o5iiawah: I havent denied or accepted climate change. I just question the expertise of people who have been caught fabricating their data

[Citation Needed]
 
2013-05-16 02:17:10 AM

Sliding Carp: The deficit is shrinking much faster than anyone predicted.  Does that suit you, subby?


So the Treasury won't be asking to raise the debt ceiling?
 
2013-05-16 03:52:29 AM

o5iiawah: I havent denied climate change - I just express doubt over the expertise of those who are suggesting it is going on, especially given that they've had to fabricate the numbers to do so.


Um, that is what constitutes denying climate change: thinking you're better than the actual scientists who are studying it.

Will someone please just call Whidbey smart so he can go away

You're the one making the outrageous comments. Maybe I shouldn't waste my time pointing them out.
 
2013-05-16 05:39:27 AM
www.ewednewz.com


Take a few steps back.
 
2013-05-16 07:32:33 AM

whidbey: Um, that is what constitutes denying climate change: thinking you're better than the actual scientists who are studying it.


Ctrl+F for "I am better than climatologists"

You cant find it - because you're a farking liar and you'll continue to do so since you are not intelligent enough to debate at any higher level than that of a petulant child.

Malthus did the same thing - an "expert" of his time whip people into a frenzy that we can all laugh at now
The doctors who said it was healthy for kids to smoke cigarettes?
the Expert psychologists of the 1970's who said homosexuality was a mental disorder.
 
2013-05-16 07:46:04 AM

o5iiawah: whidbey: Um, that is what constitutes denying climate change: thinking you're better than the actual scientists who are studying it.

Ctrl+F for "I am better than climatologists"

You cant find it - because you're a farking liar and you'll continue to do so since you are not intelligent enough to debate at any higher level than that of a petulant child.

Malthus did the same thing - an "expert" of his time whip people into a frenzy that we can all laugh at now
The doctors who said it was healthy for kids to smoke cigarettes?
the Expert psychologists of the 1970's who said homosexuality was a mental disorder.


You really do fail a the "knowing facts and history and science" thing. I know you're just playing a moron on fark, But it depresses me to know that there are people who really ARE so stupid. otherwise your "act" wouldn't be 
"funny"
 
2013-05-16 09:29:32 AM

whidbey: Gyrfalcon: It always amazes me how some of the most obvious trolls here have submitted thousands of links successfully, and they've never been banned for being totally obvious trolls.. Corrolation?

Payment.

Or possibly blowjobs.

Maybe a few of the more prominent Fark gods lost a huge bet a while back there and have to "service" these unsavory characters. Or it was blackmail, who knows?


In truth, his greens could be good. However, it is hard to tell as all his posts are just filled with bitterness, anger, misery, stupidity and contempt.

The gods did admit that if a high green user and a low green user both submit the same headline, the higher green user gets their submission approved. And of course trolling and dickish headlines (mostly for this tab) get approved more as they lead to page clicks.
 
2013-05-16 10:27:40 AM

Wessoman: mistrmind: I don't know, I don't see many posts by Mussolini supporters on this thread.


The corporate State considers that private enterprise in the sphere of production is the most effective and usefu [sic] instrument in the interest of the nation. In view of the fact that private organisation of production is a function of national concern, the organiser of the enterprise is responsible to the State for the direction given to production.Fascism is definitely and absolutely opposed to the doctrines of liberalism, both in the political and economic sphere.                                                                        -Benito Mussolini, 1935Like I said, very little daylight. Even down to the mis-spellings and bad grammar.


I stand corrected.
 
2013-05-16 11:50:22 AM
Well you can rest assured no matter what comes to light, the Fark libs will stand by their man.
 
2013-05-16 12:04:02 PM

Kangaroo_Ralph: Well you can rest assured no matter what comes to light, the Fark libs will stand by their man.


Sad and obvious
 
2013-05-16 01:19:57 PM

o5iiawah: whidbey: Um, that is what constitutes denying climate change: thinking you're better than the actual scientists who are studying it.

Ctrl+F for "I am better than climatologists"

You cant find it - because you're a farking liar and you'll continue to do so since you are not intelligent enough to debate at any higher level than that of a petulant child.

Malthus did the same thing - an "expert" of his time whip people into a frenzy that we can all laugh at now
The doctors who said it was healthy for kids to smoke cigarettes?
the Expert psychologists of the 1970's who said homosexuality was a mental disorder.


Yeah, thanks for proving my point. Again. You're anti-science. To you, scientists are a bunch of a untrustworthy amateurs who are going to hoodwink "libertarians" like you into giving up your rights. Or something. That's what your posts sound like to any reasonable person.

because you're a farking liar

And I've warned you about using personal attacks against me. Honestly, bro, if you do it again, I'm going to put you on ignore. If you can't discuss issues without flying off the handle when called out, then you're hardly worth a civil discussion.
 
2013-05-16 03:38:45 PM

ghare: You really do fail a the "knowing facts and history and science" thing. I know you're just playing a moron on fark, But it depresses me to know that there are people who really ARE so stupid. otherwise your "act" wouldn't be 
"funny"


skip the BS and tell me where I'm wrong in saying that history is full of social-scientists and experts being wildly wrong

.

whidbey: Yeah, thanks for proving my point. Again. You're anti-science. To you, scientists are a bunch of a untrustworthy amateurs who are going to hoodwink "libertarians" like you into giving up your rights. Or something. That's what your posts sound like to any reasonable person.


I dont think someone whose only expertise comes from 'peer review' can call themself a scientist.

whidbey: And I've warned you about using personal attacks against me. Honestly, bro, if you do it again, I'm going to put you on ignore. If you can't discuss issues without flying off the handle when called out, then you're hardly worth a civil discussion.


No you havent - and I really dont care.  If you never respond to a single post I make then that would make my day.  You already lied openly and got badly called out for it in a gun thread and you dont budge off your myopic opinions even when presented with cold hard facts to prove otherwise.  You're as big off a moron as they get on these boards.  I have intelligent conversations with plenty of progressives on here and often come to agreements with them but the amount of shiat you pretend to know anything about is staggering.

To my previous point, i asked you to derive the expertise of a climatologist and you reply "peer review".  I point out historical evidence of pseudo-scientists being completely wrong and then you, bereft of any intelligence whatsoever give up and just say i am Anti-science.  Thats what we call losing an argument - or resorting to 3-rd grader, "I know you are, but what am I" sort of intelligence.

Im sure you're a hell of a blogger and social critic but when it comes to how the world actually works, you're as small and pathetic as they come.
 
2013-05-16 04:38:06 PM

o5iiawah: If you never respond to a single post I make then that would make my day.


Well, maybe I'm taking you a bit too seriously, then. If you don't believe your over the top right-wing libertarian talking points don't deserve honest responses, then I'm just wondering if you're trolling. I'll admit, it's a good angle in the spirit of Fark, a more than Ron Paul friendly site.

You already lied openly and got badly called out for it in a gun thread

No I haven't. You took some response and elevated it to some ridiculous dramatic level. And if I recall correctly, you were trying to downplay Sandy Hook to what happens on a monthly basis in Chicago. It didn't score you any points as a human being. Yes, I mistook "month" for "day." BFD. Smoke a fatty, dude.


You're as big off a moron as they get on these boards

Personal attacks again. Whatever points you were making are forfeit. Just letting you know. And putting you on ignore doesn't really benefit you because the reason I would do it is because you are dishonest and spread disinformation, and defend these acts with personal attacks against the other person.

I have intelligent conversations with plenty of progressives on here

No you don't.

Im sure you're a hell of a blogger and social critic but when it comes to how the world actually works, you're as small and pathetic as they come.

More personal attacks in lieu of actual argument when your neo-Confederate utopian fantasies are called out once again. I mean, is there any reason I shouldn't put you on ignore after this repeated manner of posting?
 
2013-05-16 07:41:14 PM

whidbey: And I've warned you about using personal attacks against me. Honestly, bro, if you do it again, I'm going to put you on ignore. If you can't discuss issues without flying off the handle when called out, then you're hardly worth a civil discussion.


oh whidbey... if you stop lying, people won't call you a liar :)
 
2013-05-17 05:38:45 AM

whidbey: I have intelligent conversations with plenty of progressives on here

No you don't.


I'd have to second this.

o5iiawah: Will someone please just call Whidbey smart so he can go away

 
Displayed 49 of 249 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report