Obama bars Muslims from photo opportunities

[YOhio]

You guys should have your respective staffs do the research.

[Archaea]

On May 31, 2008, last post.

http://cougarguard.com/forum/showthr...ree#post227259

There are others.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Archaea

Baka yaro.

To my knowledge, I am aware of no material disagreements you have ever listed with Obama. The fact you fail to list any now is suspicious and seems to support my thesis.

I take this as an admission that you didn't find any posts like you were referencing.

Whatever happened to logical Arch? You have always had a tendency to get overly emotional and lose rational thought on certain subjects (Hillary Clinton, government, Democrats in general, homosexuals, and now Obama), but it feels like irrational Arch is losing more and more ground to emotional Arch. Sad to see.

I obviously don't agree with everything Obama says. I find myself defending him frequently on CG due to the absurd attacks people here (namely you) decide to level against him. Rather than engage in a thoughtful dialogue on relevant subjects, you instead decide to cry "Messiah!" anytime Obama's name is mentioned (a lame use of blasphemy for political gain which I find repulsive), you focus on trivial issues like something a volunteer did at a rally that clearly doesn't reflect the campaign's actual policies, and you engage in name calling.

I don't have a problem with name calling or clever insults, so long as there is also substance mixed in (otherwise, it seems like a total waste of time to me). In this regard, you are much like Tex. Lots of rhetoric, little substance.

If you want to discuss actual issues that do matter, I am happy to do so. I doubt very much that you do, but in your venture you would learn that I do not agree with Obama on everything.

I disagree with him the following, for example:

1. The windfall tax for oil companies (I would instead eliminate oil company subsidies rather than trying to create a faux definition of "windfall");

2. Permitting holes in the fence on the Mexican border (seems to eliminate the utility of the fence); and

3. Drilling in Anwar (I don't get too worked up over Anwar, so long as it is coupled with an actual long-term strategy for eliminating energy dependence on the Middle East that is implemented concurrently with any drilling in Anwar).

Those are off the top of my head and clearly there are more.

Back to your regularly scheduled programming with Arch using Jesus as a political attack and focusing on unimportant topics.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by Archaea

Baka yaro.

Ooooooh. Them's fightin' words.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Archaea

On May 31, 2008, last post.

http://cougarguard.com/forum/showthr...ree#post227259

There are others.

Are you serious? You are citing a post that I didn't reply to at all as proof? What makes you think I actually read your post in the first place? Show me a post where I responded and dodged the question.

From now on, I will assume that your lack of a response to any post indicates you are unable to respond at all.

[Archaea]

I have others, but they are imbedded within lengthy threads, probably ones which devolved into a Cali-Tex love tussle. That was the easiest one to find.

Nonetheless, still silence. You now argue first, I never stated it, now you claim because my easiest was a last post, you never read it. What will you do upon somebody finding one imbedded in a thread? The love Tex had you distracted?

Still no response other than misdirection.

You consider those disagreements material? They sound more like cosmetic to me.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Archaea

I have others, but they are imbedded within lengthy threads, probably ones which devolved into a Cali-Tex love tussle. That was the easiest one to find.

Nonetheless, still silence. You now argue first, I never stated it, now you claim because my easiest was a last post, you never read it. What will you do upon somebody finding one imbedded in a thread? The love Tex had you distracted?

Still no response other than misdirection.

*Sigh* How about you find that post rather than dwell on your silly hypothetical. It could be that I did respond to your question but in your overly emotional state you missed the answer.

I can give an example of exactly that happening if you would like.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

Ooooooh. Them's fightin' words.

My favorite Japanese expressions.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

... but it feels like irrational Arch is losing more and more ground to emotional Arch. Sad to see.

Naturally, you are the only rational, unemotional one here.

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

I don't have a problem with name calling or clever insults, so long as there is also substance mixed in (otherwise, it seems like a total waste of time to me). In this regard, you are much like Tex. Lots of rhetoric, little substance.

Heh. I admit, I'm usually a loser in pissing contests. You are very gifted in hiding your stupors of thought behind meaningless insult. I'm not nearly so good at being an outright jerk.

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Can you take a break from attacking Obama and/or his staff? Nobody will think you are going to vote for him if you don't attack him.

Honestly, if the silly attacks leveled against Obama on CG are an indication of what the country cares about, our democracy is in a sorry state.

No, I can't. I think Obama will start the demise of the US, as his socialist policies will be outrageously expensive and his ass kissing of terrorist states will be dangerous to the lives of citizens.

You only make juvenile comments like "McCain does it too."