Romney ‘Advisor’: Mitt Will Bring a White Man’s Touch

I am so sick of the race issue, I want to puke.

Originally posted by CoolerAbdullah786
reply to post by beezzer

 

Show me where I called you racist. I never did any such thing. Secondly yes it's an analogy. I understand it well. Do you? Your analogy fell apart. I already walked you through it. So in your analogy where did Obama ever say his team sucks? Criticizing your team and the mistakes it makes in a sport is not the same saying it sucks. Coaches criticize their teams to get them to improve. Fans criticize their teams when they mess up. It doesn't mean they aren't fans anymore.

Your analogy sucks, basically.

Oh lordy!

I used the analogy because he's a sucky "coach".

I'll type slower, because you're obviously not getting it.

Originally posted by CoolerAbdullah786
reply to post by nenothtu

 

Ah I was wrong. You didn't edit it out. I missed it.

My apologies, then, for calling you a "liar" when you were only mistaken. I went to edit that and soften it, but given the subject matter at hand, I decided an edit would probably be a bad idea.

You said "I'll wait right here while you find something." on this comment.

So you did imply that I needed to go and look stuff up.

A matter of semantics. I assumed you had the facts to hand already, and it takes time to type things out. I wasn't telling you to look anything up at all - you are already alleged to have the facts to hand, and need only type them out.

reply to post by nenothtu


No. Just proclaiming that appointing Eric Holder is him hinting at taking our guns is an absolute falsehood that has no evidence to support it. If you want to claim that that is Obama hinting at taking away our guns then you need to back it up with evidence. Asking a follow-up question is not moving the goalposts. Your refusal to answer the follow-up about Holder himself shows that you have no evidence to back your paranoid claim.

On that note, I'm done. I won't run in circles with someone like you. I've seen how cats like you operate in debates. You run people in circles to cause confusion and change the subject. You attempt to win a debate dishonestly.

reply to post by beezzer


When did this sucky coach say that his team "sucks"? Hmm? Still waiting on that. Again, criticizing your team isn't the same as saying they suck.

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by CoolerAbdullah786
reply to post by nenothtu

 

When has Eric Holder taken our guns away. Oh that's right he hasn't.

That's because Fast & Furious went bust.

"Fast and Furious" wasn't Holder's first comment or even statement of intent on the abrogation of the Second Amendment. Early on he had a forceful love affair with the notion of banning so-called "assault weapons", even knowing of the dismal failure that was perpetrated under Clinton.

This ain't Holder's first rodeo.

Originally posted by CoolerAbdullah786
reply to post by beezzer

 

When did this sucky coach say that his team "sucks"? Hmm? Still waiting on that. Again, criticizing your team isn't the same as saying they suck.

You're becoming insulting in your obtusness.

If you really are that slow, then I apologise.

If you're not that slow, then the nicest thing I can say is that you are being deliberately disingenuous.

reply to post by beezzer


So that's it? Insults? You're not going to show me where Obama said his team sucks? Didn't think so.

(This is why I don't normally feed trolls.)

Originally posted by CoolerAbdullah786
reply to post by beezzer

 

So that's it? Insults? You're not going to show me where Obama said his team sucks? Didn't think so.

(This is why I don't normally feed trolls.)

*sgh*

a·nal·o·gy (-nl-j)
n. pl. a·nal·o·gies
1.
a. Similarity in some respects between things that are otherwise dissimilar.
b. A comparison based on such similarity. See Synonyms at likeness.
2. Biology Correspondence in function or position between organs of dissimilar evolutionary origin or structure.
3. A form of logical inference or an instance of it, based on the assumption that if two things are known to be alike in some respects, then they must be alike in other respects.
4. Linguistics The process by which words or morphemes are re-formed or created on the model of existing grammatical patterns in a language, often leading to greater regularity in paradigms, as evidenced by helped replacing holp and holpen as the past tense and past participle of help on the model of verbs such as yelp, yelped, yelped.

www.thefreedictionary.com...

reply to post by beezzer


*Yawn* I know what an analogy is. In your analogy you claimed the coach said his team sucks. When did Obama do this? You clearly think he did because you tried to back it up with him criticizing things about America (some of which were done positively saying that we need to improve).

That's where you shot yourself in the foot. If you didn't literally mean that Obama thinks America sucks in your analogy you wouldn't have tried to back it up with "evidence."

Basically you were trying to show how much you hate Obama by using the talking point that he hates America. Unfortunately, for you, you got called on it. He doesn't hate America, at least not any more than any other handpicked POTUS (Puppet of the United States).

reply to post by CoolerAbdullah786
You obviously have an agenda.

Good luck with that.

I'm done, this is just wasting time now.

Originally posted by CoolerAbdullah786
reply to post by nenothtu

 

No. Just proclaiming that appointing Eric Holder is him hinting at taking our guns is an absolute falsehood that has no evidence to support it. If you want to claim that that is Obama hinting at taking away our guns then you need to back it up with evidence.

I can do that. it's only a Google search away, but I can get that done for you if you've been asleep at the wheel since Obama came to power, and haven't been paying attention to Holder's antics and speeches.

Asking a follow-up question is not moving the goalposts.

it was not a "follow up" - it was a change of the initial question, since you claimed that the answer I provided didn't answer the new question. That means, if you expected that answer to answer the new question, that it had already been asked. It had not, nor have I ever made the claim that he was successful at his attempts, as you imply my answer states.

The question was "When did Obama even hint at taking away our guns?", not "when did he DO IT?" I've already answered the question, and made no claims at all as to the alleged "follow up", which, if it is really a follow up, makes it a straw man.

Your refusal to answer the follow-up about Holder himself shows that you have no evidence to back your paranoid claim.

I have made no claims that your "follow up" question addresses, so of course there is no answer for it. Nice try, no cigar.

On that note, I'm done. I won't run in circles with someone like you. I've seen how cats like you operate in debates. You run people in circles to cause confusion and change the subject. You attempt to win a debate dishonestly.

You won't be the first to run away, nor will you be the first to accuse me of "dishonesty". If you can support that allegation, however, you WILL be the first. Care to give it a try?

As far as "changing the subject" goes, let's revisit that sea change in YOUR question, shall we?

No?

I thought not.

reply to post by beezzer


Yeah. I have an "agenda." My "agenda" is getting you to back up your Right-wing rhetoric and talking points. I know that won't happen, though.

Originally posted by CoolerAbdullah786
1. Obama and his "mass media" don't make everything about race

Sure they do. The race card is constantly being played by the media to attack or discredit his critics. do you not watch the media? Are you just deluded? how many links should I post to demonstrate what should be blatantly obvious to you?

Have a problem with government run health care- You're a racist
Don't support Obama and have questions about his racist church - You're a racist
Want Obama to stop exploding deficits - you're a racist
Disagree with more taxes - You're a racist

Go down the list. The media has blamed every bit of opposition to Obama on racism.

2. When did obama say that the average White person is racist. I want a source citation for that boldfaced lie.

You really don't keep up with current events eh?



How is this any different than making wide generalizations about "typical black people"?

3. Obama doesn't make ads that urge Black to vote for him based on nothing more than his color. I want to see one of those alleged ads.

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by CoolerAbdullah786

 

You obviously have an agenda.

Good luck with that.

I'm done, this is just wasting time now.

And you don't? Everyone does. At least some people are honest about it.

reply to post by nenothtu


No, you brought Eric Holder into it. So it is fair then to ask when Eric Holder expressed a desire to take our guns away. I want some evidence for these claims. Show me where he or Obama said they are going to take away our guns.

Originally posted by CoolerAbdullah786
reply to post by nenothtu

 

No, you brought Eric Holder into it. So it is fair then to ask when Eric Holder expressed a desire to take our guns away. I want some evidence for these claims. Show me where he or Obama said they are going to take away our guns.

Holder tells Congress the Obama administration wants to ban guns

Obama to Seek New Assault Weapons Ban

Holder Revives Talk Of An Assault Weapons Ban



More where that came from, if you're a glutton for punishment.

Originally posted by CoolerAbdullah786
reply to post by nenothtu

 

And now with this I agree with you absolutely 100%

I evidently missed a few posts as I was hopping around, and this was one of them.

See? There IS hope that an agreement of sorts may eventually be reached!

reply to post by antonia


and some people are trustworthy with at least trustworthy agendas, even if we disagree on some points like Beez and I have sometimes done.

others I am finding it harder and harder to trust.... especially when they start calling very honest people (like Neno) liars with no cause....

I dont like agendas I cant see.... at least we know exactly where some of us are coming from, in a very upfront and honest manner.... others are a bit shady.... Beez is not shady in the least.

I dislike shady as much as I dislike lies. Our first clue to shady was regurgitating lies in effort to stir up racial tention and strife.... that was the OP of this thread

Originally posted by OpinionatedB
reply to post by antonia

 

I dont like agendas I cant see.... at least we know exactly where some of us are coming from, in a very upfront and honest manner.... others are a bit shady.... Beez is not shady in the least.

I dislike shady as much as I dislike lies. Our first clue to shady was regurgitating lies in effort to stir up racial tention and strife.... that was the OP of this thread

edit on 25-7-2012 by OpinionatedB because: (no reason given)

I tend to think most of you only like agendas that align with your own. It is a natural human thing to do. I have a different opinion of Beezer, and as such I don't normally speak to him. He's used outright falsehoods before, but the truth today is not concrete. It's whatever proves what you believe. I don't care really, I was simply making a point. I don't know about the OP frankly and I don't care. Most of you have your minds made up, they were made up before the thread was even posted and we all know that. It doesn't matter what Romney does, if you were going to vote for him before this thread it doesn't matter what anyone says, you'll still vote for him.