News and Politics Forum

AC wrote:

iD, it seems to me that your main motivation in this thread is to get Qwinn even more wound up than usual. Now, you know I support you there, but the way you're playing fast and loose with the events in question is actually putting Qwinn in a sympathetic light.

You don't really want to see that happen, do you?

You got me.  I really do enjoy torquing quinn.  So much so I haven't paid attention to my original purpose for this thread.  I can't help it.  He's too easy.

Oh, and as for it being "easy" to torque me, well, yeah, I guess, if making up libelous slander, lying in order to accuse political opponents of lying, calling me a racist and a moron and an "evil nutjob" for arguing with you (when you knew full well I was right), and refusing to admit error when provided video evidence that you're full of shit is considered insufficient grounds to piss someone off.

How about this:  You lie and bullshit and accuse conservatives of crimes they never committed, in order to piss me off, because it's easy.  And I expose your vast intellectual dishonesty, because you make it even easier.

Of course, the real issue is that Michelle Obama was every bit as dishonest in her appearance on the View.  I guess her motive was to torque me too.

Qwinn

Last edited by Qwinn (06-25-2008 03:48 PM)

Gloria Estefan sucks!!

Wow.  3 posts in a row.  You really have no life.

Michelle, was misquoted, spun, and distorted.  Yet she'll still be your new first lady.

Must make xenophobes like yourself cringe.

Qwinn wrote:

Michelle, was misquoted, spun, and distorted.

Ya know, come to think of it, I never really felt -angry- about it.  Nor do I now.

I'd have to describe the emotion you evoke in me as incredulous laughter at how someone can combine such extreme self-righteousness with brazen bullshit.  It doesn't bring out anger, it brings out revulsion and a desire to mock you mercilessly while exposing your utter lack of decency or shame, cause you so richly deserve it.

Qwinn

Rest assured I never take you seriously or treat you with anything beyond "meh".

You are simply too partisan to respect.  You are incapable of ever seeing anything beyond liberal versus conservative, and you are incapable of siding with anyone or anything you deem "liberal".  You are the Sean Hannity of this board.  As such you have credibility.  Nothing you say is or can truly be honest in its merit.  I don't treat you seriously, nor will I ever.  When I post response to you I'm literally doing other stuff at the time.  Thats how much I respect a discourse with you.  I respect many others here, such as Seabird and even Zuk (though we always lock horns), but you are so partisan you can only be considered a joke.  Add to it that you are a racist and its a wash.

Now back to Drupal....

WHAT NOW? WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?

And quinn stop being a mamby-pamby whiney little pussy.  No one was lying.

But wait, I thought -we- were all lying when we accurately quoted Michelle Obama.  Now no one lied?  I suppose in some bizarre Strangelovian universe this could be considered progress.

The lack of respect is mutual.  The difference, however, is that you lost it by "virtue" of your complete lack of intellectual honesty.  As I have said from day one on this board - that is the one thing I have no tolerance for.

Your basis for lacking respect for me is that I continually debunk your bullshit, and call you out for what you are.  If I were you, I wouldn't like me either.

I must say, though, you are an EXTREMELY fitting acolyte for the Obama cult.  I suppose it -is- kinda silly to expect their followers to be any more honest than they are.

Qwinn

Last edited by Qwinn (06-25-2008 06:35 PM)

It just gets funnier.  The lies, the lies, they NEVER END.

No, you evil nutjobs took it much further and choose to over inflate some parts while ignoring others.  This is why you nutjobs and those who think like you are being marched out of power.  Example: Another GOP incumbent just lost his seat.

Please tell me you aren't talking about Chris Cannon.

Are you talking about Chris Cannon?

http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?d … 0002904749


The incredibly squishy Chris Cannon who lost primarly due to his support for Amnesty for illlegal aliens, and who supported all of Bush's most liberal policies like No Child Left behind and so on?

The Chris Cannon who just had his ass handed to him by a far -more- conservative Republican candidate?

In a district that went for Bush 77 to 20 percent in 2004?  You're considering this a likely pickup for the Dems?

This is your "example" of how "you nutjobs and those who think like you are being marched out of power."?

An Arlen Specter just got replaced by Fred Thompson on steroids in the House, and you're claiming this a resounding defeat for people who think like me?

Why yes.  You absolutely have to be talking about Chris Cannon.

*point*

*laugh*

*laugh*

*laugh*

*laugh*

You are -very- funny.  Not the normal kind of funny.  More like creepy clown funny.  But I guess it's better than nothing.

I'm glad this thread has happened.  From now on, any time anyone -ever- thinks to take -anything- you say at face value, I can link this thread and put an end to -that- silly nonsense.

Cause seriously, at this point, you're just a compulsive liar.  At this point, if you said "Hello", I'd feel duty bound to google it to make sure it was true.

Qwinn

Last edited by Qwinn (06-25-2008 10:56 PM)

Wewt!  The liberal smiting has begun!  That last post finally kicked it into gear.

Now I know I'm doing something right

Qwinn

AC wrote:

As for my second question, I was joking that I figured making the Canadian summer olympic team would be dramatically easier that making the winter team. But if it turns out your father was on the summer team but couldn't compete due to factors beyond his control, then I apologize as I can only imagine how disappointing that must have been for him and your family.

I wasn't born yet, but I can't imagine how disappointing it must have been.

He did have a great athletics career despite that though.

# Competed in athletics 1970-1980
# Provincial interscholastic champion in javelin 1970-1972
# Canadian javelin Champion 1979; runner-up, 1980
# In 1977, represented Canada at World Cup trials (silver medal); World Student Games (9th place) and Pan Pacific Games (bronze medal)
# Competed at Commonwealth Games, 1978
# Qualified for the 1980 Olympic Games in Moscow, but didn’t compete due to the boycott by Canada and others
# Competed at the "Alternate Olympics" in 1980, a series of competitions held in Europe & attended by the countries boycotting the Moscow Olympics and won silver medals at meets in Oslo, London, and Dusseldorf; and the bronze medal in Paris (1980)
# His personal best throw of 84.34 meters ranked as the third-best all-time in Canada in 1980

http://www.nbsportshalloffame.nb.ca/spo … spx?id=110

iDissent wrote:

MC Escher wrote:

Now, having said all that, I want to ask you a very simple question:

Do you see a fundamental qualitative difference between what Michele said and what John said; or do you see them as essentially equivalent?

I think both statements are benign personally.  But I also think the thrulls are unfairly spinning Mrs. O's statement to give it a meaning it did not have.  I posted McCain's statement because it looks on the face of it to be in the vein of where people are attempting to land Michelle's statement.

You would have a much better time assessing these statements yourself if you could do so without imputing xenophobia or racism to Obama's critcs.

If you cannot understand the difference between a very well off attorney stating that it took a very recent and personally beneficial event to make her proud of the country that lavished affluence on her, and an old man's remembrance of coming to love the country he served and for which he suffered as a young man long ago, I can't help you.

iDissent wrote:

Yet he does not and has not explained why.

My abject apologies for being beyond the gorenet.  Did you not understand the response I gave you?  Or is asserting that I note no difference intended to imply that there isn't one?

iDissent wrote:

This is an example of twisting the words of those you are in opposition to and not applying the same standard to those with whom you agree.

Except of course that this is no such example.

You got the Michelle Obama story wrong on the facts.  Have you, as JIMP suggested, returned to the site that gave you the bad information?

You seem to think it is a defense of Michelle's grotesque statement that McCain made a statement about love and country.  Here's a hint - it isn't.  You know who would argue strongly that McCain had his head up his ass as a lad?

McCain.

iD, I don't resent your presence here at all, but you do appear as one who presents points as tactics rather than a product of a belief that transcends the specific argument, a "bullshitter", a label I apply to you without animosity.  You post steaming loads of talking points and incorrect quotes as if they are incisive commentary, and seem primarily concerned with excusing objects of repub derision.  Actually, much of your tirade against Qwinn as unduly partisan could serve as apt self-description on your part.

My experience is that Qwinn believes each argument he uses, whereas you believe that most here have thought things through so little that a couple of facile comparisons, and allegations of hypocrisy will serve as a crushing blow to your adversary's view.  It isn't a mode that earns admiration.