howie on 28/9/2008 at 22:23
Quote Posted by theBlackman
No arguement. Just the benefit of the doubt, and consideration for the penchant for youth to over-indulge. :D
Sorry (oops Sarry) blackman, tina fay makes this whole political debate look like kids play. Regardless, I have become cynical over the year's and have found in humor (
http://www.mtv.com/player/html/popup/?artist=2227&vid=7944) that all things in Washington's back door are screwy at best.. I decided not to post SNL's version of things because I am no ones pawn.
howie
theBlackman on 28/9/2008 at 22:39
We love you too Howie. Welcome back. :thumb:
BEAR on 29/9/2008 at 14:46
Mind actually linking something about the incident? That is just a condemnation, it doesn't provide any information whatsoever, yet by your tone you've swallowed it hook line and sinker already.
In doing a quick Google search, no reputable news reports have come up, just other forum posts of people linking to that same press release.
Edit: after further reading, it looks like this is something about pressure against 3rd parties running ads about Obama? I'm kind of glad, he's been getting slandered by the ads run against him, he should stand up to them or at least challenge them if he can prove they are incorrect.
Again though I have to profess my amazement that you would link that article as if it were information to be read. I mean really, you could at least make some attempt to look impartial or objective. You might as well have linked a forum post condemning Obama, and yet you say it like it is some definitive piece upon which people should base their opinions. Shit like that terrifies me because I realize how many people could read that and instantly believe it without caring to look any further (and it might be true as far as I know, but since I cant see any real evidence of this so far I'll assume it is not).
Starrfall on 29/9/2008 at 14:54
Yeah, I think it's safe to say at this point that there is a rebuttable presumption that if a republican is crying about Obama, it's false.
Especially when Blunt's own press release doesn't allege anything specific.
Starrfall on 29/9/2008 at 15:22
OH GOD HE WANTS POLICE TO ENFORCE MISSOURI'S ETHICS LAWS
Well now I can't vote for him :mad:
BEAR on 29/9/2008 at 15:29
Yeah, seriously are you kidding paloalto?
Did you actually watch what you posted?
They specifically mentioned two things they wanted make clear: that he is a christian and that he proposes that he'll lower taxes for 95% of Americans. I was told by my brother that an independent fact-checker organization had claimed that the actual number was more like 85% or something like that, but I've not gotten him to point me where that information is.
So basically he is trying to fight against people claiming he is a muslim (My brothers girlfriend still thought he was a muslim until he set her strait the other night), and he's trying to fight them saying he will flat out raise taxes, which is misleading at best. Granted, nobody can be 100% sure he'll do what he says, but what information do yo have to the contrary (besides McCain claiming to know better).
You have a problem with this?
And using laws against people you think are infracting against you is police state tactics? Uhgn.
Starrfall on 29/9/2008 at 15:34
For the record I also think it's fair if McCain has "Truth Squads" out doing the same thing.
But I promise I'll be concerned if someone's ability to speak freely is actually infringed.
