Reply With Quote
So whottt, where did you obtain all this knowledge on Israel. I'm rather curious.
I sure was...in fact I saying he is worse, Hitler didn't and couldn't talk about openly exterminating the Jews until well into WWII.
Asshole does it now...easily and openly, for "domestic consumption".
I am sorry but if that's domestic consumption then you have a problem my friend.
Yeah and I don't think you know what happened in the Islamic Revolution and what the rhetoric is now.Since the Iran regime is not like the Nazi regime, then I was wondering if you were fully aware of what the Shoa actually was............or if you were one of those Holocaust deniers, to whom the Holocaust was just a hard and tight political regime.
He doesn't agree with yours, and he is a holocaust survivor.Elie Wiesel is not the only survivor out there, and I don't agree with his political view.
Yeah...good luck with that, those people are ty leaders whose people would like to overthrow them...hating of the Jews is used as cause for uniting the angry masses and deflecting that anger...Iran can go to the war to Israel, they even can put a "dirty" bomb in Israel and kill a lot ( or worse) of my people, but there is no way Israel can successfully destroy Iran's Nuclear program, and there is no way the US can go and do that without destroying Iran completely.
The only way is peace between Israel and the Arabs countries and the isolation of Iran.
That's the only way.
IF you think it is going to stop any time soon...you are in denial.
For it to stop those governments have to stop being ty...since a huge part of what makes them ty is that they refuse any will of the people, you've got a problem.
The more you sanction and isolate BTW, the easier it gets to point the finger at Israel being the cause.
No it's a simple analysis of what is done in Iran vs what was done in Germany, the only difference is the scale. That is the only difference.
And is not a matter of English, is a matter of logic.
You are using the holocaust in a cheap way, so you are not educated on the holocaust or are denier, it's rather simple.
They execute children, they seize property(they seized a lot of it) they exectute gays, they execute people for religious reasons.
The only thing they are missing are ovens and disection tables....
But asshole already has something Hitler never did until he was at the height of his power and in a World War...the freedom to openly talk about exterminating Jews.
For "Domestic Consumption".
So whottt, where did you obtain all this knowledge on Israel. I'm rather curious.
A new USA Today/Gallup Poll shows 46% of people who watched Friday night's presidential debate say Sen. Barack Obama did a better job than Sen. John McCain; 34% said McCain did better.
copied from politicalwire.com
Every piece of public opinion research - whether focus group or poll - has declared Obama the winner.
That's why you can't believe them.
Patently false
Here's a Survey USA Poll in Washington where Obama was soundly defeated:
http://www.hillaryclintonforum.net/d...ad.php?t=32306
PA Focus Group(unscientific but technically they all are, and so are the polls):
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...,3499980.story
I am sorry but Obama did not beat McCain, he agreed with him, he forgot a soldiers name on his bracelet, and then mentioned it, something the kids parants have asked him to stop doing. McCain had a much more detailed knowledge of Georgia, Iraq, Afhganistan and regions of Pakistan having actually been there. The only way udecideds could have thought Obama won that debate is if they are afraid of being called racists or are completely ignroant on foreign policy. And while Obama did manage to piss McCain off once...Obama spent a lot more time pissed off than McCain.
K - enjoy your PA and WA victories. My bad.
opinion
On common sense statements McCain made. He disagreed with him on policy and pretty much everything elsehe agreed with him
No proof of thathe forgot a soldiers name on his bracelet
Source? Or are you just full of yet again?something the kids parants have asked him to stop doing
opinionMcCain had a much more detailed knowledge of Georgia, Iraq, Afhganistan and regions of Pakistan
You ever been to Israel?having actually been there.
opinionThe only way udecideds could have thought Obama won that debate is if they are afraid of being called racists or are completely ignroant on foreign policy.
Were you watching? McCain was pissed off the entire night. He wouldn't even look at ObamaAnd while Obama did manage to piss McCain off once
opinion yet againObama spent a lot more time pissed off than McCain.
There were others...Obama won the high profile ones but then so did Kerry.
Come on big guy don't try and pass your opinion off as fact. That's just being hypocritical when you rail on others for doing the same...and I should know cuz my name is hypocriteafarian!!!
McCain technically won the debate if you want to judge the actual content. Then again, he had the topic advantage. On most points, the only thing Obama could do was pin McCain to Bush ... which would be more effective if bashing Bush hadn't become cliche. Bashing Bush when no one stands by him anymore and even McCain has thrown him under the bus has limited sticking power.
Then again, even though McCain might have technically won, and most polls say Obama won ... I don't think there is a way to judge how the debates will affect how people will vote until a week or so before the election. Bush supposedly lost the debates but then magically got a big bounce right after the debate period ended. Before the bounce, the Democrats were polishing the seal for Kerry (and Gore, for that matter).
The technical winner or the poll winner of the debates don't really mean much, IMO. It's more who comes out at the end seeming like the candidate Average Joe can relate to and believe in.
Link to me trying to pass that off as fact? Most of the facts point towards Obama winning...that doesn't mean I have to agree with it. I call BS.
While I agree this election could still swing either way, I'm not sure the American public is all that eager to go with another average Joe (or John) considering we just had eight years under a guy who also sold himself as an average Joe and that hasn't gone so well.
Admittedly, I may be overestimating how deeply the current of anti-intellectualism runs in this country, but I guess we'll see in November.
I am sorry but Obama did not beat McCain, he agreed with him, he forgot a soldiers name on his bracelet, and then mentioned it, something the kids parants have asked him to stop doing. McCain had a much more detailed knowledge of Georgia, Iraq, Afhganistan and regions of Pakistan having actually been there. The only way udecideds could have thought Obama won that debate is if they are afraid of being called racists or are completely ignroant on foreign policy. And while Obama did manage to piss McCain off once...Obama spent a lot more time pissed off than McCain.
If you're going to focus on temperament I'd say Obama winds by default. McCain's refusal to look him in the eye made him seem petty and weak.
Fact.
Easily a common sense fact due McCain actually going to those places and the descriptions given during the debate.McCain had a much more detailed knowledge of Georgia, Iraq, Afhganistan and regions of Pakistan having actually been there.
If you are talking about Iraq well fair enough he has been there, but he hasn't been to as many regions as McCain.
Have no idea why ou would conclude I am presenting this as anything other than opinion.The only way udecideds could have thought Obama won that debate is if they are afraid of being called racists or are completely ignroant on foreign policy.
Amazingly enough you didn't attempt to refute this segment or claim it was opinion being presented as fact...I wonder why.And while Obama did manage to piss McCain off once...Obama spent a lot more time pissed off than McCain.
So you know he looked at the bracelet to look at the name?
Going to places doesn't equal more knowledge about them. That is NOT a fact. Maybe we should have a pop quiz for the candidates to settle this. Maybe you can point to specific instances where McCain's knowledge exceeded that of Obama.Easily a common sense fact due McCain actually going to those places and the descriptions given during the debate.
This phrase: "The only way..."Have no idea why ou would conclude I am presenting this as anything other than opinion.
I wanted to give you a break. I would've had to bold and italicize the entire paragraph.Amazingly enough you didn't attempt to refute this segment or claim it was opinion being presented as fact...I wonder why.
Yes.
Depends. In this case it did as was apparent in the descriptions. Obama could not describe what things looked like on the ground from Georgia and the Afghani Pakistani border region while McCain could. that equals details.Going to places doesn't equal more knowledge about them.
That equals knowledge.
Keep in mind just for the sake of argument, while it may possible Obama does have a greater knowledge(and without a doubt he doesn't), he didn't show it in this debate.
By the way, it's hilarious that you would make that point in this thread.
By all means...That is NOT a fact. Maybe we should have a pop quiz for the candidates to settle this. Maybe you can point to specific instances where McCain's knowledge exceeded that of Obama.
This phrase: "The only way..."
You're kidding right?
I wanted to give you a break. I would've had to bold and italicize the entire paragraph.
Well it was never intended to be taken as anything other than my opinion...the fact that every thing that could be reasonbly construed as me stating a fact was in fact a fact, is just merely gravy and a tribute to the routine excellence of my posts.
Fact.
Why is he still wearing the bracelet? The mother has asked him to take it off.
http://www.dehavelle.com/2008/09/bar...amas-bracelet/
...I can't believe I missed this hanging curve.
#1. That wasn't the part you italicized for emphasis.
#2. The part you did italicize for emphasis contained the word "if" which almost always indicates a speculation or an assumption......the exact opposite of facts.
Horrible example on your part.
Fact.
Let's examine it shall we?
"The only way udecideds could have thought Obama won that debate is if they are afraid of being called racists or are completely ignroant on foreign policy."
I only italicized the latter portion to show how ridiculous of a statement it was. My mistake. Next time I'll italicize/bold the entire thing and underline the more ridiculous parts.
Now let's look at your assertion that "if" denotes speculation or assumption. If introduces a conditional clause. In many cases it is related to speculation or assumption. Your use of "if" is indeed an assumption. However, it is an assumption that only speaks to modify the intelligence and thoughts of the people you are talking about. My claim that you state opinion as fact has nothing to do with that assumption. You could have said, "if they are afraid of being labeled geniuses" and you would still be parlaying your opinion as fact.
Maybe because that piece is a shameless lie?
POSTED: Sunday, September 28, 2008 --- 4:40 p.m.
MILWAUKEE (AP) -- The mother of a Wisconsin soldier who died in Iraq says she was "ecstatic" during Friday's debate when Senator Barack Obama mentioned the bracelet she gave him in honor of her son.
Tracy Jopek of Merrill told The Associated Press on Sunday she was honored that he remembered Sgt. Ryan David Jopek, who was killed in 2006 by a roadside bomb.
She criticized Internet reports that suggested Obama exploited her son for political purposes.
She acknowledges e-mailing the campaign in February asking that Obama not mention her son in speeches or debates.
But she says Obama's mention on Friday was appropriate because he was responding after Senator John McCain said a soldier's mother gave him a bracelet.
Jopek says Obama's comment rightfully suggested there's more than one viewpoint on the war.
http://www.nbc15.com/state/headlines/29864149.html
Bryan Jopek's interview was given back in March 2008, NOT AFTER THE DEBATE. The story on DrudgeReport gives the impression that he gave the interview after the 1st debate........by the way, the mother is an Obama supporter and the ex-husband is a McCain supporter
Hahahaha.
Pure win. Keep up the lies and slants, McCain supporters. You're really doing a good job of convincing the people who are undecided on this forum to vote for Obama.
The mother did ask Obama not to mention her son anymore in an E-mail to him. She never got a answer to the e-mail. The father said they wanted Obama to take it off. He is now stationed in Cuba and until we hear his side of things this is still a he said she said. A shameless lie --I don't think so!
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/c...,6413408.story
Wow. That definitely explains the article.
My goodness, you choose to believe a lie when the facts are staring you in the face. Pathetic.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
