| theprof00 said: fred thompson said what? |
Um... That quote you posted.
Or check out my new webcomic: http://selfcentent.com/
ok i just looked it up. Fred Thompson did alter the time when it happened. but what happened is mccain was tortured and gave up information.
thompson would have had me believe that he gave info for medical attention, but it happened under torture.
That's still what I thought in the first place, so no change there.
I still thought he never said anything, and I'm sure a lot of people still do.
it's directly from the autobiography rocket. thompson just quoted it, so i quoted a quoter.
Okay. I'll say this once. Read this entire link very carefully.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/688/
Or check out my new webcomic: http://selfcentent.com/
Seems like the issue is resolved, the bailout bill passed today and the market recovered nicely. Guess this is a moot point.
| rocketpig said: Of course you think Obama is less full of shit. You like him enough to put a huge banner in your signature and the rest of your sig is full of anti-McCain links. Not pro-Obama links, but anti-McCain links. That says a lot. Personally, I think McCain did this both because he thinks it's right and because he thinks it will work as a political ploy. Obama, on the other hand, didn't impress me at all by saying that he'll just stay out of it and now pushing the debate as great importance when he fought to limit the number of debates earlier. He's using it as an excuse to make McCain look bad when it's possible he's angry that he didn't think of this move first. In the end? They're both full of shit. They've been been using Fannie and Freddie to their advantage for the past two weeks, much to my disgust. But if you think Saint Obama has somehow kept his hands clean of this mess, go for it. I'm not going to argue because I just don't give enough of a shit. |
Whoah there, whoah there. Don't take it personally.
The reason I have an Obama banner in my signature is not because I liked him well enough to put it there, its because I started disliking McCain and his campaign enough to put that + anti-McCain links in my sig. In other threads you'll note that I've said I'm more anti-McCain than I am pro-Obama. It's a direct cause and effect from McCain's sleazy campaign. I don't think Obama's a saint and I disagree with him on a number of issues that I have stated before. However, I do find his character and personality to be more straightforward and likeable than McCain's these days, and his judgement to be more sound.
But you accuse me of not looking at things clearly while you are defending McCain? If you were taking the true neutral stance of total objectivity, you would not be defending McCain by offering your opinion or projecting your values on his actions. You accuse us of swallowing the shit these guys are throwing out, but then you say you think McCain did it because he thought it was the right decision. This is a projection of something you want to believe to be true, not a fact. (in the same way that we are projecting that McCain's decision is entirely political and self motivated.)
All I ask is don't be hypocritical. If you want to claim objectivity, then do so and act that way. If you want to defend a candidate, at least don't berate the rest of us who choose to defend a candidate.
|
|
|
| rocketpig said: Okay. I'll say this once. Read this entire link very carefully. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/688/ |
I see. but didn't you also say that everything in politics was a ploy?
sounds like someone said something great about someone, and not many were ever the wiser for it.
| rocketpig said:
McCain trumpets that POW horn far too often but dammit, he deserves a hell of a lot of respect for that period in his life. If you went through one day of that shit, you'd probably tell the Vietnamese you found the cup of Christ, the Rosetta Stone, and could part water at will if that's what you thought they wanted to hear. Then you'd probably cry for mommy. Most of us would.
|
Not me. That's foreplay haha. 
Sansui said:
Whoah there, whoah there. Don't take it personally. The reason I have an Obama banner in my signature is not because I liked him well enough to put it there, its because I started disliking McCain and his campaign enough to put that + anti-McCain links in my sig. In other threads you'll note that I've said I'm more anti-McCain than I am pro-Obama. It's a direct cause and effect from McCain's sleazy campaign. I don't think Obama's a saint and I disagree with him on a number of issues that I have stated before. However, I do find his character and personality to be more straightforward and likeable than McCain's these days, and his judgement to be more sound. But you accuse me of not looking at things clearly while you are defending McCain? If you were taking the true neutral stance of total objectivity, you would not be defending McCain by offering your opinion or projecting your values on his actions. You accuse us of swallowing the shit these guys are throwing out, but then you say you think McCain did it because he thought it was the right decision. This is a projection of something you want to believe to be true, not a fact. (in the same way that we are projecting that McCain's decision is entirely political and self motivated.) All I ask is don't be hypocritical. If you want to claim objectivity, then do so and act that way. If you want to defend a candidate, at least don't berate the rest of us who choose to defend a candidate. |
Bolded: Well, of course. Which is why I said "I think McCain did it because he thinks it's right". I don't know for certain, I'm just going from McCain's actions through most of his career. I never said whether I thought it was the right decision to go off without Obama (which I do not). Both could help, one will probably muck it all up, which I mentioned earlier.
Sorry if I went on a bit of a rant on you but all the pro-Obama crap thrown around on this thread gets tiresome (the pro-McCain crap is slightly more tolerable because there's so much less of it). There are real reasons to be concerned about Obama - just as there are McCain and ugh, Palin (vomits a little) - but no one seems to care around here. Why hasn't he authored a bill in Congress? Why has he stuck to such an ultra-partisan line his entire career? Why is no one attacking his stance on "clean coal" (oxymoron) or his back-tracking on Iran and the Iraq War? Yet McCain has three threads started up because his shit was a little liquidy this morning.
I've found myself really disliking McCain over the past few weeks and drifting slightly toward Obama. I won't deny that. But recently, I've really turned sour on the media's love of Obama, the relentless attacks on Palin (some with due cause, many without), and how really sleazy ads like Obama's hispanic ad in the southwest goes completely ignored. Yes, they're both guilty of running slimy campaigns and while you think Obama's has been cleaner - as did I, which impressed me - I think a lot of that has been lost with Obama's actions (and ads) over the past few weeks.
I'm not sure where this came from but it left a very bad taste in my mouth. The Democrats have turned the fearmongering meter way up recently:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2gf1U1BGDlU
Or check out my new webcomic: http://selfcentent.com/
theprof00 said:
I see. but didn't you also say that everything in politics was a ploy?
|
You were accusing McCain of saying that. I simply clarified that it was Thompson who said it.
Did McCain know Thompson was going to say that and didn't correct him? Possibly. I'm not even going to guess about that.
Or check out my new webcomic: http://selfcentent.com/
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2026 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
