Advertisement for Recent Dem Debate....Satire

[NEM]

FOX News/ABC News
Presents
The Democratic Presidential Debate
Between
Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York
(FEMALE, LIBERAL Democratic Candidate for President)
And
Senator Barack Hussein Obama of Illinois
(NEGRO, LIBERAL Democratic Candidate For President)
Written, Produced, Directed, and Choreographed
By
Sean Hannity

Disclaimer: All of the unfair and unbalanced questions asked of Senator HUSSEIN Obama by George Stephanopolous, the new Hannity Sock Puppet, have been prepared, written, and edited by Sean Hannity. Management of the two News Networks have no knowledge of their content and share no responsibility for them being asked of Senator HUSSEIN Obama and not of the FEMALE candidate, Hillary CLINTON.

Vote John McCain For President
(The MODERATE Candidate)
(Former War Hero and Former POW)
John McCain, he's our man,
If he can't do it, no one can.

================================================== ============

Note: The suggested ad, above, is complete fiction and has no bearing to the actual truth. Or does it?
But, the way the debate was set up and conducted, it makes a lot of sense.

[QuiGon]

================================================== ============

Note: The suggested ad, above, is complete fiction and has no bearing to the actual truth. Or does it?
But, the way the debate was set up and conducted, it makes a lot of sense.
More whining from the left.... tell us, where you this upset when MSNBC took Clinton and Obama staffers as "random people" to ask questions at the Republican debate...? No, of course you weren't. Beause you're a complete hypocrite.

[NEM]

More whining from the left.... tell us, where you this upset when MSNBC took Clinton and Obama staffers as "random people" to ask questions at the Republican debate...? No, of course you weren't. Beause you're a complete hypocrite.

You really need to lighten up and try to see satire when it is presented.

BTW, it appears that there is a major amount of people, nationwide, that are talking about the way ABC and FOX set that all up including many newspaper editorials calling it deplorable.

I cant wait for the real debates to begin, and then McCain will have his head handed to him on a plate. He has more garbage that he can be attacked with, and he will. I predicte he will actually lose some of the states that have been in the "red" camp for a while.

McCain is, without a doubt, the weakest candidate the republicans have put up in a long time.

He has more skeletons in his closet than any candidate ever seen...He will get torn apart.

[QuiGon]

You really need to lighten up and try to see satire when it is presented.It's not a matter of lightening up, it's just a matter of how hilarious it is to hear the left whining like crybabies about the mean, nasty debate moderators when these same people were (like you) were curiously silent over what MSNBC did.
BTW, it appears that there is a major amount of people, nationwide, that are talking about the way ABC and FOX set that all up including many newspaper editorials calling it deplorable.Yeah. Right. Sure there are. :rolleyes:
I cant wait for the real debates to begin, and then McCain will have his head handed to him on a plate. What makes you say that...? Both dumbocrats are humiliating themselves left and right during their own primary.
McCain is, without a doubt, the weakest candidate the republicans have put up in a long time.I agree. Maybe 4 years from now, the Republicans will actually nominate a Republican instead of a RINO. He's certainly the weakest Republican candidate of my lifetime because of his liberal stances.

[luso2kx]

If only Libertarians could gain more force.

Democrats want too much government control over most economic issues and think social help by taxing the working folk.

Republicans have become the Christian Taliban. Governing with a bible to the point of disregarding common sense with what is (misinterpreted) in the Bible. 3 cases in point:

- Certain states moronic decisions to teach ID as a science .

- Funding of the Boy Scouts of American who openly encourage discrimination against gays and atheists.

- Promoting abstinance-only programs that completely disregard responsible sexual education by, for example, not even teaching about other forms of contraception (you know, because kids generally have a tendency to be curious and not listen to everything that is force-fed to them)

The moment there's a government that decided to get out of the personal lives of people and worry about actual government issues (National Security, better roads, effective policing) then things will be different.

[QuiGon]

- Funding of the Boy Scouts of American who openly encourage discrimination against gays and atheists.Why is it so evil to form a group that says "well... we believe in God and we oppose the sodomite lifestyle"...? I was a Boy Scout and I have no problem with the government funding Boy Scouts. God willing, it will continue.

[NEM]

He's certainly the weakest Republican candidate of my lifetime because of his liberal stances.

That is a crock of crap and absolutely far from the truth. It is a falsetto that the RNC would like some ignorant Dems to believe, but in truth, McCain has the 4th highest percentage of rubber stamping all of Bush's , and republican sponsored, bills.

He is, in truth, an ultra conservative. Come the debates he will be exposed.

[QuiGon]

That is a crock of crap and absolutely far from the truth. It is a falsetto that the RNC would like some ignorant Dems to believe, but in truth, McCain has the 4th highest percentage of rubber stamping all of Bush's , and republican sponsored, bills.Now let's hold on a second... you say (direct quote, your words): "McCain is, without a doubt, the weakest candidate the republicans have put up in a long time." And how do I respond...? I agree with you, saying he is the weakest Republican nominee of my lifetime... and how do you respond back..? By calling my statement "a crock of crap"..? Dude... I was agreeing with you.
He is, in truth, an ultra conservative. Come the debates he will be exposed.Man, I wish that were true.... unfortunately it isn't. He was recently ranked the 3rd most liberal Republican Senator... the only Republicans ranked more liberal than McCain were Olympia Snowe and Arlen Specter.

[luso2kx]

Why is it so evil to form a group that says "well... we believe in God and we oppose the sodomite lifestyle"...? I was a Boy Scout and I have no problem with the government funding Boy Scouts. God willing, it will continue.Well, seeing that they are getting TAX MONEY, they should abide by the same civil rights and equal rights laws other public institutions have to adhere to. You CAN NOT pick and choose on this subject.

Though religious zealots would love to make people think that you actually can.

[luso2kx]

Of course, now I'm waiting for QuiGon or some other NeoCon-Artist to belch out the "This country was founded on Judeo-Christian beliefs" bullplop that's been spewed the last 8 years, not to mention pulling up quotes to try and back up their stance.

Note, that I said QUOTES, because the Amendments in the Constitution (namely the 1st, and namely the very first line of such) actually discredits their stance completely, so they've been dancing around it by saying "Yes, it is written that way, but THAT'S NOT WHAT IT SAYS! LISTEN TO US!"

[QuiGon]

Well, seeing that they are getting TAX MONEY, they should abide by the same civil rights and equal rights laws other public institutions have to adhere to. You CAN NOT pick and choose on this subject.Well, we're just going to have to agree to disagree. I have no problem with an organization saying they believe in God receiving tax dollars.

NOTE: My previous statement needs to be clarified. FWIW, if I had my druthers, then the government wouldn't be giving any money to any of these organizations. But I have accepted it as an unfortunate foregone conclusion that our government will always be in the business or sponsoring such groups. So having established the premise that the government will always be dishing out funds in such a manner, I sure as heck prefer seeing Boy Scouts getting money over, say, Planned Parenthood.

God forbid we should teach young men to have some morals and values in our society... those kids have the audacity to believe in God..?!? How horrible..!! :rolleyes:

[QuiGon]

Of course, now I'm waiting for QuiGon or some other NeoCon-Artist to belch out the "This country was founded on Judeo-Christian beliefs" bullplop that's been spewed the last 8 years, not to mention pulling up quotes to try and back up their stance.

Note, that I said QUOTES, because the Amendments in the Constitution (namely the 1st, and namely the very first line of such) actually discredits their stance completely, so they've been dancing around it by saying "Yes, it is written that way, but THAT'S NOT WHAT IT SAYS! LISTEN TO US!"This statement shows that you probably have never even read the 1st amendment to the Constitution.

It's a really good document. Brilliantly written. You should check it out sometime.

[luso2kx]

This statement shows that you probably have never even read the 1st amendment to the Constitution.

It's a really good document. Brilliantly written. You should check it out sometime.
Don't try and go into a pissing match with me on this one. I guarantee you that you'll lose and lose heavily.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

That's the 1st line of the 1st Amendment. But yet, Fundimentalist Yahoos like yourself probably want to interpret that differently, and use quotes and other such frivolous material to back up your religiously-driven agenda.

The founding fathers were very religious, but even they knew that, to avoid a system that would've been, in essence, a carbon copy of the British system, where the government headed the church, the ideal way of government would be one where they COULD NOT enforce any religious doctrine of any sort, allowing the citizens to freely practice any religion they want freely and without any authority telling them otherwise.

Bill of Rights >>>>> any quote or any other thing you can dig up.

Now try, just try to work around that.

[luso2kx]

Well, we're just going to have to agree to disagree. I have no problem with an organization saying they believe in God receiving tax dollars.

NOTE: My previous statement needs to be clarified. FWIW, if I had my druthers, then the government wouldn't be giving any money to any of these organizations. But I have accepted it as an unfortunate foregone conclusion that our government will always be in the business or sponsoring such groups. So having established the premise that the government will always be dishing out funds in such a manner, I sure as heck prefer seeing Boy Scouts getting money over, say, Planned Parenthood.

God forbid we should teach young men to have some morals and values in our society... those kids have the audacity to believe in God..?!? How horrible..!! :rolleyes:Teaching morals by ignoring common sense = blatant stupidity.

Teaching abstainance is good. But teaching it and refusing to teach kids about things like condoms, the pill, abortion, etc... is pure child abuse. Kids are not going to hear abstainance-only bull and not do it, THEY'RE TEENAGERS!

If you can remember back far enough when you were a teen, you know that you were not thinking straight and, unless you were some freak of nature, you wanted to have sex, regardless of what some priest and your parents told you about how "evil" it was. That's why responsible sexual education is a must. You can tell kids "don't do it" ad nauseum, but you still have to teach them about what precautions to take if they don't obey that order.

I remember the classes on drugs and how all drugs were evil and even remember that loon Nancy Reagan with her "Just say no" campaign. I also remember kids from my class back in Taunton wearing those green "Just say no" shirts and smoking a joint at the same time.

[QuiGon]

Don't try and go into a pissing match with me on this one. I guarantee you that you'll lose and lose heavily. No seriously... you really should read it sometime... you might actually learn something - unless, perhaps, that's precisely what you're afraid of... here's a link:

http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html

That's the 1st line of the 1st Amendment. But yet, Fundimentalist Yahoos"Fundamentalist yahoos"...? Ohhhhh kaaaayyyyy.... thank you for showing us all how ridiculously ignorant you are.... :rofl:

The founding fathers were very religious, but even they knew that, to avoid a system that would've been, in essence, a carbon copy of the British system, where the government headed the church, the ideal way of government would be one where they COULD NOT enforce any religious doctrine of any sort, allowing the citizens to freely practice any religion they want freely and without any authority telling them otherwise.And how exactly does giving money to the Boy Scouts impede Joe Sixpack from practicing whatever religious, agnostic or atheistic beliefs he so desires...?

[QuiGon]

I remember the classes on drugs and how all drugs were evil and even remember that loon Nancy Reagan with her "Just say no" campaign. I also remember kids from my class back in Taunton wearing those green "Just say no" shirts and smoking a joint at the same time.Um, WTF does any of that have to do with the government giving money to the Boy Scouts...? Man, you sure do like going off on completely unrelated tangential arguments, dont'cha..?

Actually, your tactics are very typical of someone losing a debate... change the subject, misdirect, try and start talking about other things, offer strawmen, etc, etc...

[luso2kx]

No seriously... you really should read it sometime... you might actually learn something - unless, perhaps, that's precisely what you're afraid of... here's a link:

http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html (http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html)
Hey dickhead, I QUOTED THAT LINE DIRECTLY FROM THE CONSTITUTION. Could you be more dim?


"Fundamentalist yahoos"...? Ohhhhh kaaaayyyyy.... thank you for showing us all how ridiculously ignorant you are.... :rofl:You say I didn't read the constition after I pulled that line DIRECTLY from it, without any alteration, and you're calling me ignorant?

And yes, you are a fundimentalist for trying to think that just because you believe in your God, that others have to pay for such. You're a bigot.

And how exactly does giving money to the Boy Scouts impede Joe Sixpack from practicing whatever religious, agnostic or atheistic beliefs he so desires...?Well gee, government (i.e. taxpayer's dollars) going to sponsor a movement that is linked to a religion. And the 1st Amendment saying that government can not mandate religion. And yet you see nothing wrong here or how it violates the US Constitution.

Here's a dollar, go buy a clue.

[luso2kx]

Um, WTF does any of that have to do with the government giving money to the Boy Scouts...? Man, you sure do like going off on completely unrelated tangential arguments, dont'cha..?

Actually, your tactics are very typical of someone losing a debate... change the subject, misdirect, try and start talking about other things, offer strawmen, etc, etc...Oh, so you didn't say that it was better to fund a religiously-driven movement over planned parenthood?

Who the hell is changing subjects here? So typical of NeoCon-Artists. Preach bullshit then claim to be the victim.

[QuiGon]

Hey dickhead, I QUOTED THAT LINE DIRECTLY FROM THE CONSTITUTION. Could you be more dim?Wow. Do you always get this hostile at people that disagree with you...? "Dickhead"...? Real mature. What are you..? 12...? :rofl:

Tell me... is this what you meant when you said "Don't try and go into a pissing match with me on this one. I guarantee you that you'll lose and lose heavily"...?

Apparently reducing you to the level of acting like a 4th grader is evidence that I will "lose and lose heavily"...? Newsflash for the clueless: Your ranting and raving is doing nothing but making you look like a complete jackass. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

But seriously... the United States Constitution is an absolutely brilliant document. You should check it out sometime.
Well gee, government (i.e. taxpayer's dollars) going to sponsor a movement that is linked to a religion. And the 1st Amendment saying that government can not mandate religion. And yet you see nothing wrong here or how it violates the US Constitution.I notice you were too chickensh*t to answer the question I asked you before, so let me try again. Please try to have the courage to give an answer to this question (and please try and have the maturity to do it without acting like a 9 year old):

How does giving some money to an organization that believes in God and promotes community values equate to mandating religion...? How is any citizen of this country forced to practice a certain religion when the government throws some pennies at the Boy Scouts..?

[QuiGon]

Oh, so you didn't say that it was better to fund a religiously-driven movement over planned parenthood?I mentioned Planned Parenthood in one sentence as an example of the government giving money to causes that not everyone believes in or supports. That's the subject of this conversation, isn't it...? Meanwhile you gave a 4 paragraph post about something that had absolutely nothing to do with the issue at hand.

I am not trying to be mean here but the more you post, the more evident it becomes that you are really just not an intelligent or educated person.

[luso2kx]

Wow. Do you always get this hostile at people that disagree with you...? "Dickhead"...? Real mature. What are you..? 12...? :rofl:

Tell me... is this what you meant when you said "Don't try and go into a pissing match with me on this one. I guarantee you that you'll lose and lose heavily"...?

Apparently reducing you to the level of acting like a 4th grader is evidence that I will "lose and lose heavily"...? Newsflash for the clueless: Your ranting and raving is doing nothing but making you look like a complete jackass. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

But seriously... the United States Constitution is an absolutely brilliant document. You should check it out sometime.
I notice you were too chickensh*t to answer the question I asked you before, so let me try again. Please try to have the courage to give an answer to this question (and please try and have the maturity to do it without acting like a 9 year old):

How does giving some money to an organization that believes in God and promotes community values equate to mandating religion...? How is any citizen of this country forced to practice a certain religion when the government throws some pennies at the Boy Scouts..?
You're either playing stupid or you're not playing at all.

I quoted that very line from the first Amendment of the US Constitution. If anyone in this conversion needs to "read it sometime", it's you.

And anytime government funds a program that has ANY religious ties, regardless of what religion it is, it is mandating by proxy. Of course, you are obviously brainwashed and can't figure out such incredibly simple logic, but that I blame on bad parenting and possible child abuse.

[luso2kx]

I mentioned Planned Parenthood in one sentence as an example of the government giving money to causes that not everyone believes in or supports. That's the subject of this conversation, isn't it...? Meanwhile you gave a 4 paragraph post about something that had absolutely nothing to do with the issue at hand.

I am not trying to be mean here but the more you post, the more evident it becomes that you are really just not an intelligent or educated person.Really? So, after being thrown a section of the Constitution in your face, and you replying "You need to read the Constitution" and yet, I'm uneducated?

Like I said, you're the product of bad parenting and child abuse.

[NEM]

Geeez, this was such a nice, quiet and serene place until I started this thread, and it seems to have veered off somehow. But don't let me stop you, its time that this political forum got to where it should be and lots of new blood, too.

I knew I could find a nice place to call home, again. :smiley_towel::smiley_towel:

But, of course, I am the NEW NEM.

Celtics come on in 45 minutes.

[luso2kx]

Geeez, this was such a nice, quiet and serene place until I started this thread, and it seems to have veered off somehow. But don't let me stop you, its time that this political forum got to where it should be and lots of new blood, too.

I knew I could find a nice place to call home, again. :smiley_towel::smiley_towel:

But, of course, I am the NEW NEM.

Celtics come on in 45 minutes.Sorry NEM, it's just that, for the past 8 years, we've heard NeoCons trying to rewrite history and the Constitution. They've been trying to pander off the American public as stupid by taking the very bylaws the country was founded upon, and having the gall to say that what's written doesn't mean what the text says while, at the same time, picking up a Bible and saying that every passage is valid, word for word. I mean hell, look at that bubblehead, QuiGon, trying to negate what is the very first line of the 1st Amendment of the Constitution. He's proving my point.

Like I said, the moment American finally goes Libertarian is the moment the country finally comes to it's senses. Less government = much more freedom.

[NEM]

Sorry NEM, it's just that, for the past 8 years, we've heard NeoCons trying to rewrite history and the Constitution. They've been trying to pander off the American public as stupid by taking the very bylaws the country was founded upon, and having the gall to say that what's written doesn't mean what the text says while, at the same time, picking up a Bible and saying that every passage is valid, word for word. I mean hell, look at that bubblehead, QuiGon, trying to negate what is the very first line of the 1st Amendment of the Constitution. He's proving my point.

Like I said, the moment American finally goes Libertarian is the moment the country finally comes to it's senses. Less government = much more freedom.

I agree with every word you just said. But, I have also learned, in these past eight years, is that you can flash the truth in front of their eyes, transcripts, videos, and anything else that represents the truth, and they wont believe one word of it.

And, it is because of ignorance like that, that our nation is in the crapper like it is, not just here, at home where we are facing a recession, and possibly even worse, and all across the globe where we have alienated most of the free nations of the world, and, of course, in Iraq, where our presence in an illegal occupation is threatening the stability of the middle east, and the stability of the world.

As I have said many times, I hope and pray that when the changes occur, hopefully, in Washington DC in November, and on January 20th, that these fascists who have created this tragedy will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, both here at home, and by an international court.

We, as Americans, must never allow this to happen again, for if we do, our nation, as we have known it, will cease to exist.

[QuiGon]

You're either playing stupid or you're not playing at all.

I quoted that very line from the first Amendment of the US Constitution. If anyone in this conversion needs to "read it sometime", it's you.

And anytime government funds a program that has ANY religious ties, regardless of what religion it is, it is mandating by proxy. Of course, you are obviously brainwashed and can't figure out such incredibly simple logic, but that I blame on bad parenting and possible child abuse.I am not surprised you couldn't answer the question without once again resorting to 3rd grade level insults. Tell me, is that how you think someone wins a debate..?

If "mandating by proxy" is the best you can do, then thank you for proving my point and admitting you have lost the debate. If you want to learn what the real definition of forced religion is, I suggest you visit the Middle East sometime. After about a day or two over there, you'll be pissing your pants begging for the chance to come back to a place where the "worst" the government does is contribute to the Boy Scouts of America.

[QuiGon]

Really? So, after being thrown a section of the Constitution in your face, and you replying "You need to read the Constitution" and yet, I'm uneducated?

Like I said, you're the product of bad parenting and child abuse.No no... really, my ignorant friend... you should read the Constitution sometime. Unless you're too afraid you might actually learn something.

[QuiGon]

Geeez, this was such a nice, quiet and serene place until I started this thread, and it seems to have veered off somehow. But don't let me stop you, its time that this political forum got to where it should be and lots of new blood, too.Nem, this is what we both wanted..!! You invited me to mix it up and I gladly accepted, and I must say it is a relief to be discussing something - good Lord, anything - but the Iraq War.

[QuiGon]

Sorry NEM, it's just that, for the past 8 years, we've heard NeoConsJust out of curiousity... what do you consider the meaning of the word "NeoCon"..?
trying to rewrite history and the Constitution.How would you know..? You've never even read that document.

[NEM]

Nem, this is what we both wanted..!! You invited me to mix it up and I gladly accepted, and I must say it is a relief to be discussing something - good Lord, anything - but the Iraq War.
Exactly. Hopefully it will pick up even more. It is well needed. :banana::banana:

Although, not discussing the Iraq war is what Bush wants, to take it off of the table because they know it will destroy McCain and the rest of them.

But, soon, as we move past this primary crap, it will go right back onto the table as the number one issue, and the RNC is dreading it.

[luso2kx]

No no... really, my ignorant friend... you should read the Constitution sometime. Unless you're too afraid you might actually learn something.
Listen dullard. Pull up that link you posted. Got it? Ok, click on the first Amendment, go on, click it. Ok, now, what does that very first line say? Go on, share it with the rest of the class.

Still want to continue?

[luso2kx]

I am not surprised you couldn't answer the question without once again resorting to 3rd grade level insults. Tell me, is that how you think someone wins a debate..?

If "mandating by proxy" is the best you can do, then thank you for proving my point and admitting you have lost the debate. If you want to learn what the real definition of forced religion is, I suggest you visit the Middle East sometime. After about a day or two over there, you'll be pissing your pants begging for the chance to come back to a place where the "worst" the government does is contribute to the Boy Scouts of America.Ah, so you are ignorant. Ok.

Again, typical of someone who was brainwashed.

[luso2kx]

Just out of curiousity... what do you consider the meaning of the word "NeoCon"..?Eseential a group of religous quacks who hijacked the GOP.
How would you know..? You've never even read that document.Click on the first Amendment, read the first line, and read it to this forum. You're trying really hard to be ignorant here.

Rather than keep saying "you should read it", why not explain why I should? Or do you think the sections interpreting the definition of the government structure somehow negates the actual Amendments.

But please, tell me why I "should read it".

[luso2kx]

Might I add that QuiGon is exemplfying the typical NeoCon dittohead. I pulled up the very first line of the first Amendment and his response is "you should read it sometime". Didn't provide any justification as to why he said that, didn't present any valid evidence. In fact, all he did was spin rhetoric and try to divert his lack of knoledge in the subject by saying I should read the Constitution.

Of course, I'm sure he's going to try and dig up some obscure area that has "God" mentioned in it, or even pull up a bunch of quotes by our forefathers mentioning religion (you know, because the US is governerned by quotes, not bylaws). He won't, and I doubt will ever, acknowledge the cold hard fact that the Amendments in the Constitution, in this case the Bill of Rights, override any quote or document he may bring up in rebuttal.

He's already established that he is ignorant to the fact of government already breaching the separation of church and state by saying it's OK to sponsor a movement that has a religious agenda, and uses extreme exaggerations to back up his claim (saying I should move to a muslim country).

He's also stated that sponsoring a religiously-driven organization is better than sponsoring an organization that actually thinks about proper sex education and preventitive method os family planning as well as explaining reliable means of contraception and prevention from STD's. According to him: "It's better to instill the belief of God in our youth". You know, because back when the Black Plague ran rampant, the "belief in God" worked wonders. Hey, you want use and extreme exaggeration, 2 can play at that game.

Of course, he wastes no time to reply to the insults rather than present his side of the story. That's easier for him.

But yes, according to that low-IQ numbskull, I lost the debate...

[QuiGon]

Still want to continue?No, I think I've humiliated you badly enough for now. I mean, not that I am thumping my chest or anything because I've clearly taken advantage of your mental retardation... I mean, it's not like it's your fault you're so ridiculously ignorant...

[QuiGon]

Eseential a group of religous quacks who hijacked the GOP.Thank you for helping me prove a point I have made many times in different forums. You are the 8th moonbat who has used the term "NeoCon" that I asked to provide me with a definition of what exactly a "NeoCon" is... and yours is now the 8th completely different answer.

[QuiGon]

But yes, according to that low-IQ numbskull, I lost the debate...No, according to the rules of proper debate, you have lost the debate. Your eagerness to engage in ad hominem attacks is clue #1. Maybe someday you'll grow up and understand.

[QuiGon]

Exactly. Hopefully it will pick up even more. It is well needed. :banana::banana:Yeah, but I gotta tell ya it's boring with just 2-3 people going back and forth... any good political forum needs multiple participants... so unless others join in, I doubt I'll be sticking around much longer...

[luso2kx]

No, I think I've humiliated you badly enough for now. I mean, not that I am thumping my chest or anything because I've clearly taken advantage of your mental retardation... I mean, it's not like it's your fault you're so ridiculously ignorant...So, cherry picking my posts and only answering the superficial stuff is "humiliating" me? If anything, it makes you look more like the moron for avoiding the question.

Still waiting for you to tell me why I should read the constitution. I mean, for you to repeat that line must mean that you have a reason for it.

[luso2kx]

No, according to the rules of proper debate, you have lost the debate. Your eagerness to engage in ad hominem attacks is clue #1. Maybe someday you'll grow up and understand.Another factory issued NeoCon reply. Avoid the question I made and try to victimize yourself by claiming your opponents is making ad hom attacks and "strawmen".

Again, why should I "read the constitution"? Still waiting for this answer. Go on, you seem to be the know it all, right? Or are you going to continue to dance around the subject?

[luso2kx]

And again, QuiGon tries to avoid such a simple question or such obvious facts. I'm certain he will cherry pick these replies once more, trying to victimize himself while avoiding such a simple question.

Go on QuiGon, why should I read the Constitution?

[luso2kx]

But don't worry QuiGon, I'll ask the same question, every day, multiple times, until you finally answer in your "infinite wisdom"

Why should I read the Constitution?

[QuiGon]

Again, why should I "read the constitution"? Still waiting for this answer. Go on, you seem to be the know it all, right? Or are you going to continue to dance around the subject?Oh, I've mentioned it several times... you're clearly unfamiliar with the document, which is why I passed on the friendly suggestion that you, ya know, actually read it sometime.

Obviously I hit a sore spot with you because you are throwing quite the tantrum over that innocuous remark of mine. Perhaps it's because you know I am right.

[QuiGon]

And again, QuiGon tries to avoid such a simple question or such obvious facts. I'm certain he will cherry pick these replies once more, trying to victimize himself while avoiding such a simple question.

Go on QuiGon, why should I read the Constitution?Oh, I've mentioned it several times... you're clearly unfamiliar with the document, which is why I passed on the friendly suggestion that you, ya know, actually read it sometime.

Obviously I hit a sore spot with you because you are throwing quite the tantrum over that innocuous remark of mine. Perhaps it's because you know I am right.

[QuiGon]

But don't worry QuiGon, I'll ask the same question, every day, multiple times, until you finally answer in your "infinite wisdom"

Why should I read the Constitution?Oh, I've mentioned it several times... you're clearly unfamiliar with the document, which is why I passed on the friendly suggestion that you, ya know, actually read it sometime.

Obviously I hit a sore spot with you because you are throwing quite the tantrum over that innocuous remark of mine. Perhaps it's because you know I am right.

[luso2kx]

Oh, I've mentioned it several times... you're clearly unfamiliar with the document, which is why I passed on the friendly suggestion that you, ya know, actually read it sometime.Actually, you haven't read it seeing that you keep avoiding from answering such a simple question by responding with the same rhetorical bull.

So, why should I read it?

Obviously I hit a sore spot with you because you are throwing quite the tantrum over that innocuous remark of mine. Perhaps it's because you know I am right.How can you be right when you've yet to answer such a question?

Still waiting.

[luso2kx]

Oh, I've mentioned it several times... you're clearly unfamiliar with the document, which is why I passed on the friendly suggestion that you, ya know, actually read it sometime.

Obviously I hit a sore spot with you because you are throwing quite the tantrum over that innocuous remark of mine. Perhaps it's because you know I am right.No, you haven't answered it yet and keep avoiding the question.

Why should I read the constitution?

[luso2kx]

Oh, I've mentioned it several times... you're clearly unfamiliar with the document, which is why I passed on the friendly suggestion that you, ya know, actually read it sometime.

Obviously I hit a sore spot with you because you are throwing quite the tantrum over that innocuous remark of mine. Perhaps it's because you know I am right.No, you haven't answered it yet and keep avoiding the question.

Why should I read the constitution?

Want to make this 100+ messages long with the same run around, be my guest. I like seeing you sidestep this issue over and over again. Just proves that I'm right.

[QuiGon]

No, you haven't answered it yet and keep avoiding the question.

Why should I read the constitution?How many times do I have to answer the exact same question...? Now you may not like the answer, but I have given a response about 8 times in this thread alone.

What part of my response are you not intelligent enough to understand..? Did I use too many multi-syllable words..?

[luso2kx]

How many times do I have to answer the exact same question...? Now you may not like the answer, but I have given a response about 8 times in this thread alone.

What part of my response are you not intelligent enough to understand..? Did I use too many multi-syllable words..?Still didn't answer the question I see and still with the rhetorical bull and character assassinations. So, I'll ask it again:

Why should I read the Constitution?

Don't worry, I'll ask it as many times as possible until you stop with the rhetoric and actually come around to answer it truthfully and without any of the run around that you've been doing up until now. Of course, it may take a while for you to realize that you haven't said a damn thing up til now, and chances are that you're too dim to ever become that enlightened, and the rhetoric and character assassinations will continue on your part.

But fear not. I can go at this for days if need be. It's what I do when I know I'm on the winning side of the argument. And yes, I can be a sore winner.

[luso2kx]

How many times do I have to answer the exact same question...? Now you may not like the answer, but I have given a response about 8 times in this thread alone.

What part of my response are you not intelligent enough to understand..? Did I use too many multi-syllable words..?And might I add that you keep referring to your "answer", but you never explain it in detail.


Gee.....I wonder why?

[QuiGon]

Still didn't answer the question I see and still with the rhetorical bull and character assassinations. So, I'll ask it again:

Why should I read the Constitution?

Don't worry, I'll ask it as many times as possible until you stop with the rhetoric and actually come around to answer it truthfully and without any of the run around that you've been doing up until now. I've answered it several times and I have reduced you to a babbling fool running around in circles. "All too easy."

You're clearly not interested in anything that even approaches reasonably intelligent discourse - you would rather act like a 7 year old and then thump your chest. Your childlike mind thinks that whoever shouts the loudest and gets the last word is the one who has "won" the debate.

Unlike you, I am a bit too mature for your childlike games. You're obviously not a remotely intelligent person. So go ahead, little child.... have the last word you so pathetically crave... Prove me right (once again) by showing everyone how your childlike mind is so incredibly desperate to have the last word...

[luso2kx]

I've answered it several times and I have reduced you to a babbling fool running around in circles. "All too easy."

You're clearly not interested in anything that even approaches reasonably intelligent discourse - you would rather act like a 7 year old and then thump your chest. Your childlike mind thinks that whoever shouts the loudest and gets the last word is the one who has "won" the debate.

Unlike you, I am a bit too mature for your childlike games. You're obviously not a remotely intelligent person. So go ahead, little child.... have the last word you so pathetically crave... Prove me right (once again) by showing everyone how your childlike mind is so incredibly desperate to have the last word...Gee, I must've struck a nerve.

[luso2kx]

And usually when you say stuff like "I'm more mature than you", the opposite is more often than not the case.

And you certainly haven't proven to be the exception.

Now, chew on that last word.

[fightingdoxies]

Yeah, but I gotta tell ya it's boring with just 2-3 people going back and forth... any good political forum needs multiple participants... so unless others join in, I doubt I'll be sticking around much longer...

well personally im having fun reading you two go at (three actually) Its like a being front row at a title fight. Ok, i will throw in my two cents. I agree with both of you up to a certain point. Gov't giving money to an organization like the Boy Scouts i don't have a problem with. Giving it to an organization like the boy scouts over something like planned parenthood i completely disagree with. I think the amendments have been twisted, manipulated so horribly that its only purpose now is to see how far they can be twisted so organizations, gov't, message board philosophers can beat their chest and tell people that their idea is the right way to read it. Look at the 2nd amendment and how twisted the NRA had made it. Now as far as "religion" goes, i believe people have taken it too far. Taking away praying in school, i'm not to upset by that... think they could have just a moment of silence for those who want to pray good, those who don't fine. But some of these people take it too far. The Pledge of Allegiance for instance. Thats our pledge. Under God, if you don't believe in God, i'm ok with that... but the you should still say the pledge. Don't like it... i'm sure Canada has a lot of open spaces for you to move to. Can't remember the particulars but when a southern state was forced to remove a statue of a bible in front of the capital, thats taking things too far. Actually its reverse. Not believing in God is still a religion. Taking things like that away means they win. That bothers me

[luso2kx]

well personally im having fun reading you two go at (three actually) Its like a being front row at a title fight. Ok, i will throw in my two cents. I agree with both of you up to a certain point. Gov't giving money to an organization like the Boy Scouts i don't have a problem with. Giving it to an organization like the boy scouts over something like planned parenthood i completely disagree with. I think the amendments have been twisted, manipulated so horribly that its only purpose now is to see how far they can be twisted so organizations, gov't, message board philosophers can beat their chest and tell people that their idea is the right way to read it. Look at the 2nd amendment and how twisted the NRA had made it. Now as far as "religion" goes, i believe people have taken it too far. Taking away praying in school, i'm not to upset by that... think they could have just a moment of silence for those who want to pray good, those who don't fine. But some of these people take it too far. The Pledge of Allegiance for instance. Thats our pledge. Under God, if you don't believe in God, i'm ok with that... but the you should still say the pledge. Don't like it... i'm sure Canada has a lot of open spaces for you to move to. Can't remember the particulars but when a southern state was forced to remove a statue of a bible in front of the capital, thats taking things too far. Actually its reverse. Not believing in God is still a religion. Taking things like that away means they win. That bothers meI think that each person is free to express themselves religiously. The key here is to have government stay out of it.

When the likes of Washington, Hancock, Franklin, etc... molded the US, many people today will take their quotes completely out of context in a way to make it sound like they wanted a Christian Theocracy.

One of the most abused quotes was one made by Washington where he said "We respect no king but Jesus!". To the fundies, they take this to the literal sense. However, they fail to see the context in which he said it. They had just declared independence from a European Monarchy, where you had to pay respect to the King and abide by his rules. When Washington said this quote, it wasn't to say that he was going to establish a theocracy, it was that they weren't going to respect any king other than one they read in a holy book, meaning they wouldn't respect any king at all.

Another quote misused ad nauseum is what you see on every coin and bill: "In God We Trust". Again, this quote was used as more to thumb their noses at King George and say they will not obey any unelected regent. Plus, the time these quotes were said, this was the norm. Darwin wasn't even born yet and most people though you could fight the plague by saying grace. God was their explaination to most things. Things that we now can atrribute to science.

When the founding fathers created the Bill of Rights, they knew then that the best way to have a country where religious expression is not persecuted is to have a government that was strictly neutral to any particular religion. They had just left a regime that had a state-established religion(molded in pure perversion, by the way) and wanted to make sure such never happened. That's why they wrote down that line to start the 1st Amendment in the consitution. They wanted to set the record straight that they were to guarantee total religous freedom by having Congress stay out of it and not sponsor or oppose any particular relgion, that could result in favoritism.

They could've mentioned God hundreds of times prior to writing the Amendments. But the moment it came down to the bylaws themselves, they pratically started writing them by saying "yes, we are religious, BUT we won't force our beliefs onto others.".


The fundies always leave that part out and, like QuiGon, try to claim ignorance on the part of others who notice this. Hell, I kept asking him why I should read the constitution, did he ever explain why? All he did was say "I did answer it", but never even bothered to repeat said answer and insisted with the rhetorical bull and character assassinations. Hmmm, wonder why.

[fightingdoxies]

Another quote misused ad nauseum is what you see on every coin and bill: "In God We Trust". Again, this quote was used as more to thumb their noses at King George and say they will not obey any unelected regent. Plus, the time these quotes were said, this was the norm. Darwin wasn't even born yet and most people though you could fight the plague by saying grace. God was their explaination to most things. Things that we now can atrribute to science.

Exactly. So why then make a big deal about the saying on a national coin? Thats what always bothers me.

[luso2kx]

Exactly. So why then make a big deal about the saying on a national coin? Thats what always bothers me.I have no problem with it written on a coin, provided that people understand the context it was written in. Those who say that it's proof positive that the founding fathers wanted to govern the country with a Bible in their hands clearly aren't getting it at all.