America's Biggest Mistake

Adonai wrote:I like how you automatically assumed my political party affiliation. Never once have I stated it. To the shallow extent of your knowledge, I might be a Republican. You have a very weak mind for someone who claims such exceptional debating prowess. You are defensive and controlled by your emotions. A good debater quells their impetuous emotional responses, remaining logical and composed even while under the assault of a greater mind.

I have a feeling you've never had a girlfriend.

I'm on the phone with her right now.

Yeah right.

^I'm a pretty attractive guy btw

Well i guess there's no easy way I could prove it, but I'm not lying. Believe me or don't, I don't care.

Yeah I'm sure you're really attractive, your weird little rants are just an extra something on the side for the ladies.

You're exactly right. In fact, the majority of my posts are pick-up lines.

Based on your posts I'd say you don't eat a lot of fast food too. It's fairly obvious.

and finally, I am a debater (on the debate team) and we are pretty hardcore, therefore I don't take stuff like this lightly, because iin the end, I win.

LOLOLO


there's so many ways I can go with that, but I'm just going to leave your ignorant statements as is and let yourself be the judge.

Adonai wrote:TRI_Love_518 and xc_babe09 are particularly stupid.
You need to calm down. I don't think Wgrt posted those facts for argumentative reasons, but I suppose he didn't anticipate your retarded sensitivity/defensiveness.

that would be nice if i responded to whoevers post with all the things. i new it was a useless list of facts and i didnt even read it. my post had nothing to do with that and if you actually read my post you would know that.

whenhen wrote:

im sure at least if not more than half of the people who voted were not educated. and had race not been an issue people might have gotten to know obama better and therefore saw him for the becoming hitler that he is. people might have listened instead of just hearing change if there had been a white person on the democractic ticket. our country might have made a responsible decision.

First off Obama was a far better candidate than McCain for precisely the reason of change. McCain supported the tax cuts to the rich and his whole economic policy was based on this.

I love it when people say McCain was in favor of tax cuts for the rich. When you look at both plans, McCain still would be taxing richer people a larger percent than poorer people, but it wouldn't be as big a difference as Obama. In capitalism I believe that taxation percentages should be as equal as possible, if you want to tax the rich a lot larger of a percent then that is leaning towards communism.

Adonai wrote:^I'm a pretty attractive guy btw

haha who would say that on the internet? lol. lame.

And you're probably ugly; doesn't it suck when someone is smarter and more attractive than you?

oh goodness

FinishingKick wrote:

whenhen wrote:

im sure at least if not more than half of the people who voted were not educated. and had race not been an issue people might have gotten to know obama better and therefore saw him for the becoming hitler that he is. people might have listened instead of just hearing change if there had been a white person on the democractic ticket. our country might have made a responsible decision.

First off Obama was a far better candidate than McCain for precisely the reason of change. McCain supported the tax cuts to the rich and his whole economic policy was based on this.

I love it when people say McCain was in favor of tax cuts for the rich. When you look at both plans, McCain still would be taxing richer people a larger percent than poorer people, but it wouldn't be as big a difference as Obama. In capitalism I believe that taxation percentages should be as equal as possible, if you want to tax the rich a lot larger of a percent then that is leaning towards communism.

While I agree that in an ideal society, the poor should be taxed just as heavily as the rich, in my opinion that is not economically feasible. The rich whether you like it or not must give the greatest amount of financial support, simply because their income is so astronomically high as compared to that of a poor or middle class person who cannot survive or help maintain the economy on a tax increase. The richest 1% in the vast majority of cases can afford their million dollar house, can send their kids to college, can get any possible insurance or health care necessary. This is in stark contrast to the people that have a hard time paying the bills, and thus cannot afford many of life's luxuries like college, and adequate coverage.

Adonai wrote:And you're probably ugly; doesn't it suck when someone is smarter and more attractive than you?

Judging guys "looks" is gay.

I think I can distinguish between an ugly guy and a good-looking guy without sacrificing my heterosexuality.

Well if some guy told me that another guy was good-looking I would say he was gay.

All guys think it, they just dont say it.

TRI_Love_518 wrote:

Adonai wrote:TRI_Love_518 and xc_babe09 are particularly stupid.
You need to calm down. I don't think Wgrt posted those facts for argumentative reasons, but I suppose he didn't anticipate your retarded sensitivity/defensiveness.

and finally, I am a debater (on the debate team) and we are pretty hardcore, therefore I don't take stuff like this lightly, because iin the end, I win.

WOOD U SAY U R A MASTERDEBATUR?? lOLOOOloLOL

amherst_xc wrote:

TRI_Love_518 wrote:

Adonai wrote:TRI_Love_518 and xc_babe09 are particularly stupid.
You need to calm down. I don't think Wgrt posted those facts for argumentative reasons, but I suppose he didn't anticipate your retarded sensitivity/defensiveness.

and finally, I am a debater (on the debate team) and we are pretty hardcore, therefore I don't take stuff like this lightly, because iin the end, I win.

WOOD U SAY U R A MASTERDEBATUR?? lOLOOOloLOL

pahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh! that cracked me up.

You're telling me if you saw Brad Pitt and Marilyn Manson walking down the street, you wouldn't be able to tell which one is better-looking?

xc_babe09 wrote:

Adonai wrote:TRI_Love_518 and xc_babe09 are particularly stupid.
You need to calm down. I don't think Wgrt posted those facts for argumentative reasons, but I suppose he didn't anticipate your retarded sensitivity/defensiveness.

that would be nice if i responded to whoevers post with all the things. i new it was a useless list of facts and i didnt even read it. my post had nothing to do with that and if you actually read my post you would know that.

It would be nice if you could communicate coherent sentences.

whenhen wrote:

FinishingKick wrote:

whenhen wrote:

im sure at least if not more than half of the people who voted were not educated. and had race not been an issue people might have gotten to know obama better and therefore saw him for the becoming hitler that he is. people might have listened instead of just hearing change if there had been a white person on the democractic ticket. our country might have made a responsible decision.

First off Obama was a far better candidate than McCain for precisely the reason of change. McCain supported the tax cuts to the rich and his whole economic policy was based on this.

I love it when people say McCain was in favor of tax cuts for the rich. When you look at both plans, McCain still would be taxing richer people a larger percent than poorer people, but it wouldn't be as big a difference as Obama. In capitalism I believe that taxation percentages should be as equal as possible, if you want to tax the rich a lot larger of a percent then that is leaning towards communism.

While I agree that in an ideal society, the poor should be taxed just as heavily as the rich, in my opinion that is not economically feasible. The rich whether you like it or not must give the greatest amount of financial support, simply because their income is so astronomically high as compared to that of a poor or middle class person who cannot survive or help maintain the economy on a tax increase. The richest 1% in the vast majority of cases can afford their million dollar house, can send their kids to college, can get any possible insurance or health care necessary. This is in stark contrast to the people that have a hard time paying the bills, and thus cannot afford many of life's luxuries like college, and adequate coverage.

McCain would still have taxed the rich more, just not as much as Obama. There are better ways to aid the economy in my opinion. I am going to take an educated guess and say a democrat would be more inclined to give out a house loan to someone with poor credit.

I love it when people say McCain was in favor of tax cuts for the rich

..........McCain is in favor of tax cuts for the rich (not that this is necessarily a bad thing)

Everyone benefits from upperclass money. No one benefits from welfare rats taking everyone's money.