Obama's Urban Policy Plan - "Commonsense gun laws and childproof guns" - Page 11

jim schmidt · 11-21-2008, 09:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bush

I find that hard to stomach, coming from somebody who would be frothing at the mouth if I'd said that during the Bush administration.

If you'd complained about an Obama policy during an Obama administration, you'd have a valid complaint. However you've just proven that you didn't get it, and that you still don't.

Arguing about what a candidate might do is fair game. Arguing about what a president does is fair game. Arguing about what an elected official might do -- as if he already did it -- is just a strawman made of sour grapes.

jim schmidt · 11-21-2008, 09:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LDS

That's gotta be one of the stupidest things I've ever seen posted anywhere...

Outrageousness packaged and presented as logical thought doesn't make it logical thought.

That accurate analysis should have led you directly to my point, however apparently it didn't.

636blurr · 11-21-2008, 09:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jim schmidt

That accurate analysis should have led you directly to my point, however apparently it didn't.

Becouse your the dumbest fucking person on this forum, Which is why you are constantly explaining yourself telling everyone else how dumb they are.

bush · 11-21-2008, 09:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jim schmidt

If you'd complained about an Obama policy during an Obama administration, you'd have a valid complaint. However you've just proven that you didn't get it, and that you still don't.

Arguing about what a candidate might do is fair game. Arguing about what a president does is fair game. Arguing about what an elected official might do -- as if he already did it -- is just a strawman made of sour grapes.

Ding ding ding, here comes the logic train, last stop is you.

Of course this isn't an Obama administration yet. Speculation is all anybody has at this point, and that goes for both sides.

However, given the man's past regarding the issue, logic would dictate that we can safely debate what he'll do once he takes office.

After all, isn't that what the entire premise of a democratic election is based on?

So, according to you, arguing about specifics of a president-elect's likely policy, based on quotes, past policies, and voting record, is not allowable because he's not in office yet.

Or, you're not open to criticism of your candidate. I've never seen somebody get so asshurt over intelligent discourse critical of their man-crush.

jim schmidt · 11-21-2008, 09:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bush

Ding ding ding, here comes the logic train, last stop is you.

Of course this isn't an Obama administration yet. Speculation is all anybody has at this point, and that goes for both sides.

However, given the man's past regarding the issue, logic would dictate that we can safely debate what he'll do once he takes office.

After all, isn't that what the entire premise of a democratic election is based on?

So, according to you, arguing about specifics of a president-elect's likely policy, based on quotes, past policies, and voting record, is not allowable because he's not in office yet.

Or, you're not open to criticism of your candidate. I've never seen somebody get so asshurt over intelligent discourse critical of their man-crush.

I'll try and restate it as simply as I can...

Criticism is fine. Making up shit to criticize -- in advance -- is juvenile. It's the sign of a sore loser. For you to label it "intelligent discourse" is simply a sign of how off-track you are.

I'll leave it to others to decide who's behaving as if he is "asshurt."

bush · 11-21-2008, 10:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jim schmidt

Criticism is fine. Making up shit to criticize -- in advance -- is juvenile. It's the sign of a sore loser. For you to label it "intelligent discourse" is simply a sign of how off-track you are.

Sorry Jim, I don't make shit up. You should know that by now. If you can't recognize a well-documented anti-gun Obama, that's your problem and not mine.

And as far as being a sore loser, I'm pretty sure I was ready for a loss when I wrote in a candidate for POTUS.

Quote:

I'll leave it to others to decide who's behaving as if he is "asshurt."

Wow, now I know you're bent out of shape.

You go all frothy when somebody interrupts your profuse Obama-related masturbation, and baring your fangs at anybody critical of him or his policies makes your hackery so blindingly obvious that I have to wear sunglasses while I type this.

It's going to be a good four years.

jim schmidt · 11-21-2008, 10:59 AM

I'd agree that -- for the most part -- you're not a liar, if that's what you mean. But I do believe you make up what Obama is going to do -- in order to fulfill your prophecy of how smart you are -- in the face of a stunning rebuke of your ideas by voters.

And I don't believe that you actually believe that you've upset me. I believe you're lying about that. But I don't think you lie about things that matter. I think you just delude yourself about them.

Or perhaps all of this can be explained by self-delusion. After all, you did imagine that Ron Paul's brilliance -- supplemented by your own superior intellect -- would capture more than a fraction of one percent now, didn't you?

It's water under the bridge dude. Let it go.

bush · 11-21-2008, 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jim schmidt

I'd agree that -- for the most part -- you're not a liar, if that's what you mean. But I do believe you make up what Obama is going to do -- in order to fulfill your prophecy of how smart you are -- in the face of a stunning rebuke of your ideas by voters.

I'm not making anything up regarding what Obama is going to do. There's a lot of evidence to support the hypothesis that an Obama administration will be advantageous to any with an anti-gun agenda, such as the Brady Campaign.

Look at the facts. He is on record opposing concealed carry, his own policy statement says he wants to see the AWB permanently reinstated, and his VP was essential to the passage of the 1994 AWB, which has been outed as a sham - nothing more than "feel good" legislation that didn't accomplish jack shit, aside from pissing off legal gun owners and driving up prices.

There's more, but you don't want to hear it. You're in selective listening mode, and I don't think you'll switch operating levels until Obama fucks up bigtime.

Findings either support or disprove hypotheses. Everything in this case supports it. If you think using the scientific method as a means of political commentary is "making shit up," then I have some oceanfront property in Iowa you might be interested in.

Quote:

And I don't believe that you actually believe that you've upset me. I believe you're lying about that. But I don't think you lie about things that matter. I think you just delude yourself about them.

Takes one to know one, eh?

Quote:

Or perhaps all of this can be explained by self-delusion. After all, you did imagine that Ron Paul's brilliance -- supplemented by your own superior intellect -- would capture more than a fraction of one percent now, didn't you?

I don't think I ever expected him to get through the primaries, let alone take office. How much acid did you eat for breakfast?

Quote:

It's water under the bridge dude. Let it go.

Criticizing Obama makes me a sore loser.

My team can't lose if they didn't even play, Dipschmidt.

Jesus, the hostility is so thick in your general vicinity that one could package it and sell it as an overpriced scented candle to bitter narcissistic old codgers. But they wouldn't light it, they'd just pass by it every few hours and tell it how worthless and delusional it is, then carry on with their smug self-satisfaction in between fondling themselves to a loop of Obama debate footage.

Which puts you right back at square one, I guess.