Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 57 of 57

Thread: A new low for the libs, McCain's physical appearance

  1. #41
    [QUOTE=NIGHT STALKER;2795375]Kind of I guess...sort of like maybe if the people in China quit ****ing so they wouldn't have so many mouths to feed.[/QUOTE]

    you are being sarcastic recommending a billion china men and women to practice abstinence?

    this whole line of thinking sounds mysteriously like planned parenthood

    pro choice even

  2. #42
    McCain is now reaping what he sowed his whole political career.
    1. He's basically disliked by Repubs whom he's enjoyed "poking in the eye" whenever he felt like it(see the hideous amnesty for illegals immigration bill that he co-sponsored that was killed due to public outcry).
    2. He's not loved by Dems, who tolerated him with amusement because of his fights with Repubs, but who quickly threw him overboard when Obama appeared.
    3. He's basically honest, and stupidly admitted at one point that he knows nothing about economics, yet he tries to convince that he can lead during this financial crisis.
    4. He told us he is more experienced yet he chose not the most experienced Palin: an obvious attempt to appeal to women and conservatives, that comes across now to women as a manipulative ploy once she needed to speak off the cuff, proving she is no Hillary or Condi Rice.
    5. He is prone to the wacky unpredictable manuever, like suspending his campaign to help in DC that came up empty, that makes voters nervous.

    So here is McCain, Repubs are leery of him, Dems bow at the alter of Obama, women feel manipulated, and conservatives cringe whenever Palin opens her mouth.
    So who's left to vote for McCain?
    Mainly white middle-aged men who have to vote for the guy because of his POW-hero status, about 40% of the voting public.
    That leaves about 60% for Obama, which means landslide.
    It's over Johnny!

  3. #43
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    14,908
    [QUOTE=Green Jets & Ham;2795612]How do you think it might be recieved if I posted ... "black people have reached a new low"

    I don't think that kind of sweeping generalization would be recieved very well

    I think some of the black posters at JI might view that as a racist remark, don't you?

    Or how bout if I just said ... "black people often allude to the idea that all white people are evil"

    Do you think some black posters might think I am using a sweeping generalization to inflame racial bigotry?

    Isn't this pretty much what you told me just yesterday, substituted "black" for "leftist" and asked me to defend it?

    Do you really want to compare race to political ideologies or do you now see how absurd that idea is?

    Who really cares that we say [B]conservatives this[/B] or [B]liberals that[/B] .. are we really that thin skinned?

    Are we really that uptight?

    If so, we need to get over ourselves man .. and fast

    JMO[/QUOTE]

    Ray is attacking an idea. Albeit, a misguided one. But he's at least saying something based on something. "Liberals are wrong for attacking McCain's physical appearance"; that's an argument, right or wrong.

    You were and consistently are attacking the people, saying that everything that is wrong is the liberals fault. Or calling names, or saying you can't be nice to them.

    That's the difference. And if you think I'm alone in this thinking you're way off base, but I, and apparently the guy with the 'where's osama' avatar are the only ones willing to say something. PMs tell a different story.

    Solid effort on the spin back to racism though, a lesser liberal {idiot/dumbass/fool/scum} might have been fooled.

  4. #44
    [QUOTE=Green Jets & Ham;2795653]DEAD ON THE MONEY

    The man spent the past decade antagonizing his friends while coseying up to the NY Times {Metaphor for the MSM}, and they loved him for it just as they love any Republican who does their bidding and sticks it to the right, [COLOR="Red"]but once it became McCain verses one of them[/COLOR], they kicked his @$$ to the curb so fast he didn't know what hit him! :eek:[/QUOTE]

    How ironic!

    At first, McCain was touted as "the only Republican with a chance to win in this anti-Republican year," when it is looking like he may end up being the only Republican who can lose really, really big, like losing the Carolinas big! (and I think even Dole carried them in '96)

  5. #45
    [QUOTE=Green Jets & Ham;2795383]Whoa Ray, that's a personal attack on all liberals! :eek:

    Just ask some of the libs around here, they'll explain it, that is a Quasi personal attack and therefore any liberal who decides to personally attack you, its your own fault, you have only yourself to blame, they would simply be responding to a clear and obvious personal attack against each and every one of them as individuals[/QUOTE]

    [QUOTE=Green Jets & Ham;2795418]Whoa Ciaran, some conservatives might feel personally violated by this remark

    As a conservative they may feel like this is a direct personal attack

    These types of generalizations are just plain wrong and can only incite conservative posters

    Of course I'm not serious, if any conservative doesn't appreciate that remark, TOUGH LUCK, then don't read it[/QUOTE]

    I am pretty sure this is flaming....


    but of course, by saying that I must be oppressing you

  6. #46
    All League
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Wildcat Country
    Posts
    4,948
    [QUOTE=Green Jets & Ham;2795653]DEAD ON THE MONEY

    The man spent the past decade antagonizing his friends while coseying up to the NY Times {Metaphor for the MSM}, and they loved him for it just as they love any Republican who does their bidding and sticks it to the right, [COLOR="Red"]but once it became McCain verses one of them[/COLOR], they kicked his @$$ to the curb so fast he didn't know what hit him! :eek:[/QUOTE]

    Yeah but he's been good on a lot of things. He does have excellent foreign policy experience. He's an honest (for a politician, anyway) man. He's been good on the environment and he really has been a guard dog on government spending. As for antagonizing his friends--so some Republicans didn't like it when he criticized their own pork-barrel spending, or when he criticized how the Iraq war was being managed? Boo hoo. Fact is, he was right. :yes:

  7. #47
    [QUOTE=Green Jets & Ham;2795677]Why is it flaming?[/QUOTE]

    it is flaming because you want to bring a "fight" into this thread, you are actively looking to pick a fight with people because your feelings are hurt that almost everyone thinks you are in the wrong.

    So, instead of dropping it, you decide to bring that fight with you hoping to get a rise out of people. So, yes, no matter how you categorize it, this is what flaming is.

    Just like what TD did to you with the Nailin Palin thread.

    [QUOTE]I was told by more than a few posters, I believe including you?, that these types of generalizations {libs this and cons that} are just plain wrong and can indeed be viewed as Quasi personal attacks .. its just not right to speak in these kinds of generalizations I have been told over and over again for days[/QUOTE]

    not from me...my point is you shouldn't act like the victim when you post things that could offend people. I never once said you shouldn't post what you want. My only problem with it was how you tried to play the victim.

    [QUOTE]I'm following the same logic of EY and quite a few other liberal posters

    So don't accuse me of flaming, if anything get together with your liberal friends and make up your minds, are these types of sweeping generalizations wrong or aren't they?[/QUOTE]

    well...I guess I must be scum...since you believe all liberals are scum..although I don't consider myself a liberal..but for some reason you have to label me one over and over again.

    I could care less what other people are doing or what they said. I am just letting you know, you are looking to instigate. To me, that is flaming.

    [QUOTE]Maybe you can join EY's little PM Party and talk it over in private

    Get back to me just as soon as you guys make a decision :thumbup:[/QUOTE]

    not interested in joining any party. Just find your little game of a little tiring.

  8. #48
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    14,908
    [QUOTE=Green Jets & Ham;2795666]I notice you fail to mention the context was exactly the same[/QUOTE]

    umm, no it isn't.

    [QUOTE]On both of my harshest attacks on leftists, the ones you seemed to find most objectionable {leftist scum} it was for the same reasons, like Ray I was responding to vicious leftist attacks on Sarah Palin where here he is responding to vicious leftist attacks on John McCain .. the first one was Sandra Bernhardt calling for Sarah Palin to be Gang Raped and the second was SNL attacking Palin with incest Jokes and other characterizations designed to demean the woman in my view, so like Ray I fired back at leftists in general because the attacks in my view are eminating from the left and/or being celebrated by the left for the most part[/QUOTE]

    Leftist scum is just the easiest to point out. In fact, I really hope it's just my limited experience here that would dictate that all I ever see from you on this board is attacks on the left. When repeatedly questioned on Palin, [B]you've refused to defend her on political merit. Can you? Will you?[/B]

    Do you want to have a political discussion on it, or any of the issues? You're older, more knowledgeable, and more well read, yet take out the attacks, and we can discuss anything you want, because I'm eager to see what you actually have to say that has some substance, I really am.

    [QUOTE]The only difference is Ray said "libs reach a new low" and I said "leftist scum", but when you consider the degrees of the attacks we were reponding too I think the degrees of the responses were in accordance[/QUOTE]

    The difference is you attack in EVERY post. Without building an argument as to why. I've said this before, you've made no attempt to counter. It's simply repetition now.

    [QUOTE]I also think its telling that you were more outraged .. WAY MORE .. at my attacks on leftists in the abstract than the Gang Rape Jokes, Incest Jokes, Mock Porn depictions of Sarah Palin, etc .. that could even make me wonder if you hate conservatives so much that my attacks on leftists are what you find most objectionable and not those vicious attacks on Sarah Palin?[/QUOTE]

    I associate with the democrats. I'm not Sarah Palin. That's pretty much the difference.

    But I'll go even further. People who put themselves in the national spotlight become the object of ridicule my the satirist. Could we please pull up your posts condemning the New Yorker for depicting Obama as a terrorist. If that's your moral principle, it wouldn't be based on political affiliation and you'd surely at least call the New Yorker a rag published by scum.

    And here's another point where you just come out of the blue with something that holds no merit. If I hate conservatives, where are my comments to match yours? Where did I say conservatives are scumbags? Where have I called anyone a rightwing nutjob? Do you have any evidence?

    See, that's the difference, I DO have this evidence. You're just spinning wheels.

    [QUOTE]Lastly, I don't care what your little friends are saying in their PM's, I'm not so insecure that I need the approval of EY and his little friends, it doesn't matter to me what the mob thinks, if it did the mob would have intimidated me a long time ago, so obviously its not something that matters too me, that you and your little friends could talk about the big bad conservative behind his back ... OH MY .. EY and his friends don't like me anymore ... how will I ever survive without their love and affection? :([/QUOTE]

    This isn't about people not liking you, I've made my fair share of enemies on the main board myself... I really don't care. The point, as you've again chosen not to acknowledge and to take a moment of introspection is that I'm willing to call you on this, and others aren't. But those other people obviously feel the same way I do because they've let me know about it.

    The point, as it goes, is that when you claim personal attacks against you, well, you shouldn't be surprised because you attack the masses, and everyone here knows it. And you are a big part of the reason for Sooth's thread, I know it, other posters know it, 'maybe' even some people in power here know it, and I think deep down, you might even know it too.

    Let's analogize further, tell you what, you don't think what you're saying is at all bad. Go into a biker bar, and say, 'All bikers are fags'. Then, as they're beating your ass, explain to them that they are personally attacking you, while you were just making a comment in general.

    [QUOTE]As for the racism thing, its not spin, its exactly what you did yesterday ... exactly![/QUOTE]

    No, it's really not. Again, you make generalized attacks with no thought behind them, as I've demonstrated, Ray is making commentary right or wrong, based on some things this board's left has said. He's using examples in reality. You are not.

  9. #49
    All League
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Wildcat Country
    Posts
    4,948
    [QUOTE=Green Jets & Ham;2795682]I understand that, bushy, but the point is where are his liberal friends in the MSM now?

    For all the antagonizing of conservatives and all the time he spent coseying up to the NY Times, how long did it take for the NY Times to splash a fake sex scandal involving John McCain all over their front page the moment it became McCain verses one of them as opposed to McCain verses the conservatives?[/QUOTE]

    Wait a minute...you just shifted "the point" 270 degrees and 3 squares to the left! Your original post that I responded to criticized McCain for alienating Republicans. Now you say the real issue is lack of support from the liberal press. Talking points.
    Last edited by BushyTheBeaver; 10-09-2008 at 12:27 AM.

  10. #50
    [QUOTE=Green Jets & Ham;2795693]Now you are surmizing my motivation, attaching some motivation to my posts when I said nothing of the kind, I'm simply reponding to a particular logic I have encountered in recent days because it seems to matter a great deal to some of the posters on this board, they have taken serious issue with these kinds of generalizations and you need only read Sooth's thread to see very clearly that I am responding to a specific complaint from nemerous posters

    If you disagree, fine, but let me say very clearly that my motivation is not the one you see in your crystal ball[/QUOTE]

    I am sorry Ham, but the sarcastic way you posted makes me think otherwise....

    but....if that is your story, then there is nothing else to say...

  11. #51
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Washington, D.C.
    Posts
    3,408
    EY, for the record I have never been in private conversations with you, correct? Just want to make that clear, apparently some people think there is some conspiracy amongst the liberal scum.

    Ham glad to see you are back to yourself.

  12. #52
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    14,908
    [QUOTE=Section109Row15;2795714]EY, for the record I have never been in private conversations with you, correct? Just want to make that clear, apparently some people think there is some conspiracy amongst the liberal scum.

    Ham glad to see you are back to yourself.[/QUOTE]

    correct.

  13. #53
    [QUOTE=Green Jets & Ham;2795715]The sarcasm you detected was only to point out the absurdity of the initial complaint in my view, but it was indeed a response to that particular complaint, if not for that complaint there would have been no reason to even address that issue, sarcastically or otherwise

    I hope that clears it up for you, piney?[/QUOTE]

    not really, if anything it proves my point.

    here is what you said in a previous post:

    [QUOTE]I'm simply reponding to a particular logic I have encountered in recent days because it seems to matter a great deal to some of the posters on this board, they have taken serious issue with these kinds of generalizations and you need only read Sooth's thread to see very clearly that I am responding to a specific complaint from numerous posters[/QUOTE]

    Well, what you stated here isn't really what you were doing, you were instead speaking sarcastically and not simply responding to a compaint in generalizations.

    So, you were being disingenuous in your initial response to me.

    You really want to use this as a way to point out the "absurdity of the complaint"

    You are indeed looking to prove your point, and continue the argument...or in other words, you are picking a fight.


    That is flaming.

    Instead of discussing the issue further in the other thread you decide to go to extremes to prove your point, knowing it will provoke EY et al to come in here and have it out. You are smarter than you are letting on if you say you didn't see that happening.

  14. #54
    [QUOTE=Green Jets & Ham;2795735] when in reality I have probably banned less posters than every other mod combined [/QUOTE]

    Ham,


    I am only pointing this out because I like you...but this sentence doesn't help you out...reread it and you will see what I am talking about..probably just a late night error

  15. #55
    All League
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    transplanted new yorker in maryland
    Posts
    4,444
    [QUOTE=Ray Ray19;2795264]So now the new rant is how McCain looked physically during the debate last night.[/QUOTE]
    he looked every second his age..can men at 72 still be full of life & robust??

    of course they can & are.

    i don't think anything about watching mccain tells me he is on of these guys..

    oh & palin..

  16. #56
    I guess you guys haven't learned from the recent debates that attacking and going negative turns off the audience.

  17. #57
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Portland Oregon
    Posts
    104
    Yes Mcain is old and his injuries are catching up to him.

    It has got to be harder for him to keep this gruelling campaign schedule than Obama. That is one reason to admire him. It is hard for younger men and women who were not tortured to keep campaigning hard.

    I take my hat off to him for his effort because it does take more effort for him it has got to.

    To me it makes him more appealing that his arms are bowed and he has a limp. These injuries happened to him while in the service of his country how can any one hold this against him.

    He should wear these injuries as a badge of courage.

    Bill Clinton wore his impeachment proceedings as a badge of courage as they were not able to impeach him. His words not mine.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us