On Wed, 07 Oct 2009 12:15:07 -0700, Jordon
wrote:

John H wrote:
On Tue, 06 Oct 2009 16:10:58 -0700, Jordon
wrote:

John H wrote:
Jordon wrote:
John H Rant wrote:
Jordon wrote:
JohnRant wrote:
Jordon wrote:
O' Bama said that very thing. But, we all know that the right
will never support anything with his signature on it.
There, I fixed it for you.
Bull****. As soon as he does something right, the right will support
it. We're waiting. Probably in vain.
You are either deaf, blind and dumb or you're towing
the party line. Which is it?
As a liberal, you are great at name-calling. But, you've not posted
anything to refute my post.
One recent example...

Just a couple days ago, at an Americans for Prosperity
meeting, the news broke that Chicago wasn't picked
for the 2016 Olympics. Someone made an announcement to
the crowd and the crowd erupted with cheers chanting
“Obama Loses, Obama Loses!”. It's all over the news.
It's on tape. I'll provide a dozen links if you want.

There are a ton of highly recognizable right-wing
names that are associated with that group. I'll
provide those too if you want.

Now, you tell me... what is so wrong with our president
trying to get the Olympics to be hosted in this country?
Something so terrible that would inspire a crowd to
chant "Obama loses"?

If you can't see that a substantial portion of the
right are opposing Obama, at all cost and with every
issue, you *ARE* blind! You *ARE* deaf. And you sir,
are dumb as a stump!
If he had sent Laura Bush, he might have gotten Chicago accepted. You
mentioned an act you didn't like.
Clouding a plain and simple fact with a supposition
to prove your point? Not too smart. The entire world,
with the exception of the republican party, sees the
current administration in a much more favorable light
than the previous one. It's just that the republicans
are too stupid to figure it out. Laura Bush could have
done better? Maybe better than her husband. The point
wasn't what Obama tried to do. The point, which you
chose to ignore, was how the right reacted to it. It
was a noble cause and all the right can do is rejoice
in his failure.

You've not mentioned an act 'Bama did right.
You said... "As soon as he does something right,
the right will support it."

Did you really mean "As soon as he does something
right-winged"? Even that wouldn't be good enough
and you know it.

I provided proof that many republicans will NEVER
EVER consider anything Obama does as being right.

Since you aren't bright enough to figure it out,
let me spell it out for you... It's an exercise in
futility for me to tell you what I feel he's done
right if all you're going to do is tell me that it
wasn't.

So, then tell me... if the right is only going to
oppose everything he does, how does your statement:
"As soon as he does something right, the right will
support it." make any sense? It's a lie.

But, you *are* good at calling names. You're nowhere close to the best
in the group, but keep working at it.

Thunder likes to call me an asshole.
Asshat is more appropriate but you're really
just another right-winged lemming.

And you've *still* not mentioned one thing he's done right.

What does my opinion on what Obama has done right,
have to do with anything? You started this by saying
that when he does something right, that the right
will support it. Still stand by your statement? You
haven't addressed my example about the Americans for
Prosperity meeting.

No, you started it by saying, "O' Bama said that very thing. But, we
all know that the right will never support anything with his signature
on it."

I *responded* to that statement by saying, "Bull****. As soon as he
does something right, the right will support it. We're waiting.
Probably in vain."

As for the Prosperity meeting, that wasn't an example of something
'Bama had done right. That was an example of something you didn't
like, which had no bearing on the matter at hand (but was, in fact, an
attempt to steer the thread in a new direction).


Now it's your turn. Remember, you said, "But, we all know that the
right will never support anything with his signature on it."

My turn for what? Giving you my opinion? You gave me
yours and I supplied evidence that your opinion is flawed.
Are you looking to return the favor by burying the argument
and changing it in a new direction? That's what they do on
Faux News.

Your turn to tell me something 'Bama has done right. You've still not
done so, even though I've given you something good he's done.

Your name-calling isn't what it should be.

You've changed your mind. You previously said I was
good at it.

Yes, but then you slid back. You were doing a good job at
name-calling, but your latest attempt was weak.

Your argument skills remind me of JustBait on
Prozac. You can't stick to the subject. Instead of
addressing the subject you avoid it and try and
steer it in another direction. But, to your credit,
at this point JustBait would be ranting incoherently.

I'm not trying to argue. I'm still trying to get you to tell me one
thing 'Bama has done right. When you do so, we can go on from your
original statement.