US Elections - FK CL October vote

[Loyal Rogue]

Probably.

Damn, that FOX rag is getting even more desperate, nasty, and scrambly than McCain himself... which is saying a lot.

[FlashLackey]

Yes. Pointing out that taxing businesses during a recession is a bad idea, that Medicare is a failure but Obama wants to expand government run health care, that Obama represents special interests and that you can't cut taxes for people that haven't accrued any taxes... I'd say that's only nasty to someone who considers all disagreement with The One to be blasphemy.

[silverx2]

FL are you confidant enough in Sarah Palin's ability to run the country? Voting in McCain means you are handing a second set of Keys to a women that i dont think is ready. God forbid anything happens to McCain in the event that he is elected but if that came to pass i dont think Sarah palin would be able to handle the job.

[Loyal Rogue]

I think you are confusing me with one of the christo-fascist zombie brigade who believed Bush was appointed by God and erected Hitleresque billboards declaring Bush "Our Leader"... (Dear Leader... Mein Fuhrer...)

No blasphemy on my behalf, thank you, I just disagree with a bunch of falsehoods and propaganda from a FOX rag so slanted that the words almost slide off the page, but hey, you're entitled to your opinions and your opinion piece if it makes you feel good about voting for McCain.

[FlashLackey]

LR, I find this comment amusingly ironic given that it comes right after you accuse someone else of making "nasty and scrambly" statements.

Indulge yourself and like-minded people all you want. But, due to your dogged partisanship, you lost credibility on these subjects for me a long time ago. So, unless you have anything to support your assertions, I'm going to call hot air.

silverx2, yes, I am confident that Palin would do a better job than either Obama or Biden. Whatever bigoted feelings people have about her religion or whether or not she talks cool enough for hipsters, her positions on economics and government are superior to those of the opposition.

[gerbick]

Now when you talk, this is what I hear. Dead serious.

[FlashLackey]

That doesn't surprise me. You have always seemed hell bent on seeing me in the way you imagine rather than the way that I am.

[gerbick]

I'm not hell bent on anything pertaining you. You've just not proven otherwise.

That kind of republican all the way.

[FlashLackey]

In other words, you are being prejudiced because I haven't proven to have similar views to you.

[gerbick]

No. You've not dismissed any views of your prejudices. Last I checked - search for it - I don't mind people have different views other than my own.

In fact, I encourage it.

I cannot say the same for you.

Any other deflection you wish to attempt? I'll be here for a few more moments and can entertain idle banter for a bit longer.

[FlashLackey]

I don't need to search for it. I've been debating issues here with you for years and I can say without searching that you are very sensitive to any views that conflict with your own.

Because you either can't or are unwilling to offer anything substantial regarding my points on this subject, you have resorted to stereotyping and prejudiced comparisons. I don't have to say anything to dismiss my potential prejudices because I have said nothing to suggest that I am prejudiced. You have.

[gerbick]

It's funny that you would state the words "substantial" in regards to anything near the area of points and stances.

Your stances, quite nebulous typically, are based upon whatever link you will whip out and link to. Using Wikipedia was once off-limits by your own rhetoric. Lately, it's been par for the course. Lord forbid that somebody disagrees with you. Then they're labeled as propaganda-laden and statements like "like-minded people like you..." will pop out.

Whichever stance I do have, they're quite decent - some esoteric... some idealist. It's a known fact that I abhor racist people. And that's a problem for you? Or is it something that you either embrace or blindly follow?

You've not stated anything to counter my statement. Nor will you. It's not how you post. Never has been. Silence is not your friend when honestly you've been the one that has introduced me to McCain's anti-Asian comments; and in a thread where I started in and stated it was "not about race"... your continued posts and how it could be perceived has changed that perspective. You single-handedly made me think about race at a time I didn't even see it.

How so? Go back and read your own posts.

I will not go on any defensive about what I believe in. I'm honestly going to go out on a limb and state that you are invariably mistaken about what I believe in. I've been a registered republican longer than most others; more than likely yourself as well. I am not a blind faith/blind follower either. I do question, I have many ways of doing so.

But I also answer. Usually in short, sweet, small-worded answers.

So. With that said, what else do you have to suggest that I'm trying to state? So far, you'd fail at reading what I've stated very clearly. Time for you to derail yet another political thread with your rhetoric.

Your record proves that too. I'll await your next deflection. I'll stop waiting for you to refute anything stated above. You've not done so yet.

[FlashLackey]

This is an excellent example of how you respond to most disagreements; with a 5+ paragraph incoherent tirade.

I can't refute what you stated because frankly, it is such tortured language that I can't tell what you are trying to say. The only point that comes across to me is that you are frustrated and angry. All of that because I wouldn't take your absurd comparison and stereotyping of me sitting down.

[gerbick]

Oh, and before you assume anything else.

I had a good day. I hope that I am wrong... I will learn something if I am. However, your post really sounds like the rhetoric of the people that are blindly following McCain and are using the most unsound of logic to support that following.

For once, I'll spell it out before it gets out of hand.

And I use segmented posts as such to pull the attention to the parts that I feel are more important. I use more words to ensure a lack of holes where people can input false information.

Doesn't seem to be working.

[FlashLackey]

Gerbick, Gerbick, Gerbick...

Maybe you had too good of a day?

What is it that I have assumed? What am I deflecting?

Please be specific.

[gerbick]

lol. "Today was a good day... I didn't even use the AK" - Ice Cube

Do you support that kind of rhetoric for your candidate at his rallies?

Let's start there.

[gerbick]

Joe the Plumber... he's not a licensed plumber. Nor is he registered to vote.

[FlashLackey]

hehe

Would I support someone saying, at a McCain rally, "Today was a good day... I didn't even use the AK?"

Only if they were simply singing the words of the song. In that case, I would support it because it brings back memories of high-school and college.

[Loyal Rogue]

LR, I find this comment amusingly ironic given that it comes right after you accuse someone else of making "nasty and scrambly" statements.

Indulge yourself and like-minded people all you want. But, due to your dogged partisanship, you lost credibility on these subjects for me a long time ago. So, unless you have anything to support your assertions, I'm going to call hot air.

No problem, FL.
You post a partisan, opinion piece with no factual basis or sourcing whatsoever and then expect anyone who disagrees with your pure fantasy to back it up with hard support is comical but completely expected from your camp.
It has become the typical M.O.

"Barack is a muslim terrorist!
What?!? you don't believe the wild claim I just pulled from my ass?!?
Fine, you must first prove me and my baseless lie wrong before I consider any other arguements or facts anyone else has to present."

I'm sorry to say but Gerbs estimation of you is dead on the mark according to how you present yourself to the world.

Getting back to your post... sorry again, FL, but you are the very last person to talk about partisanship or credibility.
What's "amusingly ironic" is your new avatar epitomizes both terms as "Joe the Plumber" was a Republican shill planted by the McCain camp at the Obama rally and basically lied about everything he told Obama in his 15 seconds of shame.
Hmmmmm.... Jeff Gannon anyone?



Just like James T. Harris, the token black guy and Republican shill hired and planted at the end of McCain's Waukesha, Wisconsin town hall meeting who's own website advertises to deliver "The outcomes you want your audience to experience".

Your new hero, "Joe the Plumber" isn't a licensed plumber, isn't buying a business, is related to McCain and Cindy's buddy Charles Keating, and admitted he was contacted by the McCain camp to show up at Obama's rally.


By the way, the only "hot air" I feel blowing around here is coming from that Karl Rove swiftboat link you posted.
What a piece of horsecrap that was.
First off, 95% of small businesses won't see a dime of tax increase under Obama's plan so trying to wheel out that "taxing businesses during a recession" boogeyman is nothing but disgusting fearmongering and a big, fat lie... but that pretty much sums up your candidate's whole platform so it's what to be expected.

Also, although 95% of small businesses and working families will see a tax decrease under Obama because they make under a quarter million a year, what isn't mentioned is that those making between a quarter million and $600,000 a year will only see an increase of less than a $1,000 on the average.
I really wish Obama had brought that up at the debate last night along with a ton of other facts to debunk McShame's pile of manure.

Oh well,... if you want to give me $600,000 a year in pure profit after expenses then I will gladly pay my fair share of Obama's 39% taxrate on those profits... minus all the usual tax loopholes that bring down American corporations' actual taxrate to the second LOWEST in the world instead of McCain's lie about being second highest which filled in one of the squares on my debate liar bingo card last night... thanks grampy.

Second off, despite your whining protestations, that is exactly what the government did after the first Great Republican Depression of 1929 to help the economy and the country recover from beneath the control of 3 Republican Presidents in a row (Harding, Coolidge, and Hoover) that subjected America to the incompetance of 12 straight years of Republican rule, theft, laissez-faire capitalism, and economic disaster very similar to what we are experiencing today.
From the 1930's till Reagan took office there was a substantial taxrate on those making over $3.2 million (70%+) which helped rebuild a strong middle class, a strong economy, and a strong manufacturing base the likes of which we don't have anymore today.

All Obama wants to do is rollback the Bush taxcuts.... I say F*** that!
It's not enough.
He needs to rollback the Reagan taxcuts for the rich and repeal the doubling of the taxburden on the middle class, and the Greenspan doctrine that led to the whole mess we are in today.

Thirdly, in regard to your crack about Medicare, it's been proven over and over that Medicare is far more successful and efficient than the CEO salary-sucking overhead and "profit first" mentality mandated by private industry insurance who's very last concern is actual healthcare for it's victems...er, patrons.
Private healthcare cost 10 times as much in wasted spending as Medicare because it's primary goal is profit, not healthcare.
Medicare is non-profit, therefore it's primary goal is healthcare.

On a side note, Obama's healthcare plan isn't currently expanding Medicare (which I would prefer as a fiscal conservative), but instead would be extending the same private coverage of ETNA or Blue Cross to Americans without employer provided healthcare, just like federal employees are entitled to.

Lastly, the whole fake-ass notion of "government run" healthcare that you and McLiar are repeating is nothing but bulls***.
There is nothing "government run" about it.
Yes, the governemnt pays for it, just like the government currently pays for every super-expensive emergency room visit by every citizen that can't afford health insurance now, but the government isn't going to run it.
The private hospitals and doctors are going to run the healthcare just as they do now, the only difference is where the payment comes from and how much lower that payment is going to be.

One last thing, the fact that ANYONE would consider Palin qualified to run anything more important than a lemonade stand is ludicrous.
Just the fact that anyone would even attempt to pull that off with a straight face means that they have far less integrity and credibility than "Joe the Plumber", his evil twin Jeff Gannon, McLiar, or Sarah "bridge to nowhere" Palin... which is extremely hard to imagine.
Congratulations, you've reached a new low.

[FlashLackey]

Joe the Plumber... he's not a licensed plumber. Nor is he registered to vote.

lol. The machine is even going after Joe the plumber...

If he makes more than $250k, I'm guessing that he's more of a manager of plumbers than a plumber himself. But, maybe I'm underestimating how much they make. I heard it pays quite well actually.