Nader Is In

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
61

Ralph Nader was on C-Span’s Washington Journal this morning, with the very lovely, very sexy, Greta Wodele… Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm Grrrrrrrrreeeetttttaaaaaaaaaa …

It was hard for me to pay attention because I am totally in love with Greta Wodele. I admit it. I try to call in to the show when she is on and propose to her, but I still can’t get through. I think it is because I keep trying on the Republican line. I should try and call in on the Independent line.

Anyway, she is a total fox and her voice alone is enough to give me major chub action in my pants. She is on only once or twice a week though, so it is pretty hit or miss when I tune into C-Span evry morning.

Uhhhhhhhhh, what was I posting about?

62

[quote]Mick28 wrote:
Polls are not 100%. But statistically there a hell of a lot better than listening to a few of your friends, as you’ve suggested. Your opinion on this is not better than any average Joe who thinks that the world revolves around his tiny circle.

I laughed heartily over your earlier comments.
[/quote]
I will trust real world observation over media polls any day of the weak. If you don’t know that most political polls are skewed to produce a given result, then you’re retarded. Wait, we already established that.

To go all the way back to the original post that sent you off the deep end, my choice of words, “MOST of the 3 million who voted for Nader” was a sloppy word choice. Most, some, many, who cares? My point is the same, the assumption that Nader’s 3 million votes would have gone to Gore is stupid. Many would, many wouldn’t.

Did I say I ever agreed with everything he stood for, or that I even thought he would make a good president? I thought he was the best out of three awful choices. I thought he had no chance in hell of winning. It was just a protest vote.

You’re obviously the kind of brain-dead reactionary who gives the right a bad name. Keep looking for straw men to whoop up on, I’m sure everybody’s real impressed.

Sure, the airline bailout after 9/11. Give the airlines a few billion tax payer dollars so they can keep paying their executives 8 figure salaries, then they go ahead and declare bankruptcy anyway. I could name dozens of other bailouts and no bid contracts, but why bother? Since you pretend like there’s no such thing as corruption in government, you obviously either live under a rock, or you’re twelve years old.

I just proved that you can’t read for shit. So I’ll go real slow, and spell words out fo-net-ick-aa-lee so even you can follow this. I DID NOT SAY AN-EEE-THING ABOUT TAAK-ING AWAY AN-EEE-ONES FREE SPEECH. I SAID THEY WOULD HAVE NO REE-ZUN TO LOBB-EE. If they want to piss away millions feeding my representatives when there is no regulation to fear and no subsidies or no-bid contracts to buy, then that is fine, I don’t care.

I did run out of time. But go ahead and keep quoting my words and responding with more rambling nonsense. Eventually I’ll get tired of sorting out your stupidity, and when you get in the last word, you win.

63

[quote]Mick28 wrote:
Blah Blah Blah[/quote]

When you feel ready to post substance, I will be glad to engage and debate you. Till then, I suspect you are just a trolling with your attacks and insults. I will not respond in kind.

66

[quote]Mick28 wrote:
More meaningless drivel.
[/quote]

And we’re done. You’ve proved you are a troll. Until you can actually respond to something I said, rather throwing insults and making shit up, this thread is pointless. All I can do is make fun of your lack of reading skills and that is getting old. Hurry up and get in the last word so this thread can die.

67

[quote]Mick28 wrote:
Gael wrote:
Mick28 wrote:
Blah Blah Blah

When you feel ready to post substance, I will be glad to engage and debate you.

Correction, you tried to respond and were ineffective.
[/quote]

Clearly.

69

[quote]Mick28 wrote:
It’s pretty clear what took place here:

You stated that all of Naders supporters would have stayed home and not voted in 2000. You then tried to back away from this point…probably after thinking about how stupid it was.

You also told me that you drew this ridiculous sweeping conclusion because a few of your friends said they wouldn’t have voted that year if Nader didn’t run. You tried to convice us that everyone of Naders almost 3 million votes would have also stayed home instead of some going to Gore.

You further questioned my numbers and I proved you wrong on that as well.

You’re looking bad on all three points that you raised. If I were you I would either respond with PROOF of your original assertions, as comical as they were, or shut up.

Otherwise, I’ll just chalk your posts up as free comedy from an ignorant liberal.

Thanks for the laugh idiot.
[/quote]

Yet again you fail. That isn’t what happened. I was having a conversation with other people on this thread and you came along ranting and raving and claiming I said a bunch of shit I didn’t.

Do you even know what a straw man argument is? Let me point out all the ones you made on this page.

Where did I say you could take away someone’s free speech? Go find it. You quoted something I said, and inferred something completely different.

Where did I say they didn’t? What the hell does that even have to do with anything we were talking about?

Neither did I. I said some would, some wouldn’t. Saying ALL 3 million who voted for Nader would have voted for Gore is dumb. Saying ALL 3 million would have stayed home is dumb. I said MANY, MOST, SOME. But seeing that difference would require some reading on your part.

There’s that retarded shit again. What the fuck does that have to do with anything?

You either can’t read or can’t win an argument without making shit up.

By the way. Let me explain how your retarded beer argument works. Your version. You don’t drink budweiser beer so no one drinks it. False

A correct analogy of my position would be,

  • The media says everyone who drinks beer drinks budwieser. I said, "I drink beer, and a lot of people I know drink beer, but none of us drinks budwieser. Therefore it’s wrong to say that all people who drink beer drink budweiser. True.

In summary, It’s pretty clear what took place here:
I ran circles around your dumb ass, and you had a mental breakdown. Better luck next time.

70

Wow. This thread went down the shitter quick…

72

Is there any other Green hoping that Nader won’t try for the Green nomination? Cynthia McKinney is a near lock to be nominated and unlike Nader, she actually has political experience. Nader did a lot of good 30 years ago but his war against corporations is tired and old today. I think more people would feel comfortable voting for him as President if he would be humble enough to work as a legislator first. Maybe then he will understand that he is trying to be the President of the most capitalistic nation in the world.

73

[quote]Mick28 wrote:

  1. You claimed those who voted for Nader in 2000 would have stayed home. You tried backing away from this point later on.

  2. You claimed the above because a few of your friends would have stayed home had Nader not been in the race. You said polls are not as good as asking your group of friends.

  3. You doubted the numbers I posted relative to Nader in the 2000 election, and were proved wrong a third time.

You can rant and rave all you want, you were/are wrong on the points above.

If you post back address these things. Is it too difficult for your little mind to grasp?

[/quote]
I just addresse those things, approximately 3 inches above the crap you just wrote. Here it is again.

"By the way. Let me explain how your retarded beer argument works. Your version. You don’t drink budweiser beer so no one drinks it. False

A correct analogy of my position would be,

  • The media says everyone who drinks beer drinks budwieser. I said, “I drink beer, and a lot of people I know drink beer, but none of us drinks budwieser. Therefore it’s wrong to say that all people who drink beer drink budweiser. True.”
76

[quote]Mick28 wrote:
Uncle Gabby,

I really hate calling you an idiot, or a retard. But you know…nothing else seems to fit.

You’ve answered NOTHING. You waffled around a little on one or two issues, but in the end I just can’t get away from calling you what you appear to be.

Now I know that all liberals are not like you. Granted many are…

Oh well, get back to me soon.

[/quote]

You’ve dragged this thread all over hell and back. Now you want to set the rules of debate after breaking every rule in the book.

I’ve answered everything point you’ve made, and I hate repeating myself. But I’ll make a deal, you answer these three questions I asked you several posts back, then I’ll cut and paste the answer to this deep question of yours yet again.

Here are the questions I asked you, your words are in Italics (that means they’re slanted):

[quote]
How do you not understand that you cannot take away someones free speech?

Where did I say you could take away someone’s free speech? Go find it. You quoted something I said, and inferred something completely different.


By the way do you actually have any idea of how much money is pumped IN to the government by corporations? You very stupid cluess idiot…

Where did I say they didn’t? What the hell does that even have to do with anything we were talking about?


No one knows how many exactly and I never said I did.

Neither did I. I said some would, some wouldn’t. Saying ALL 3 million who voted for Nader would have voted for Gore is dumb. Saying ALL 3 million would have stayed home is dumb. I said MANY, MOST, SOME. But seeing that difference would require some reading on your part.


Do you have any idea of the amount of money that corporations pay in taxes each year? Trillions idiot…trillions!

There’s that retarded shit again. What the fuck does that have to do with anything?
[/quote]

Go find where I said any of the things you accuse me of above. And while you’re at it, explain how these random accusations you threw out don’t constitute a straw man argument.

Or just close with another insult/random accusation, and I’ll let you have the last word so this shit pile of a thread you made can go back to the soil. Remember, if you get in the last word you win.