Your lack of awareness shows in that your 'debating' skills consist of ad hominems, finger pointing, deflection, bloviating, and declaring victory despite not presenting any facts other than your opinion and that you're right and someone else is wrong.

You didn't call out or refute any points with anything of substance but rather your opinions or name calling. Your skills are pedestrian at best. And I apologize to pedestrians.

Kinda funny, this is pretty much exactly what I accused you of.. Talk about projection. Btw, it's obvious you have no idea what an "ad hominem" is. You just think it's a personal attack, how simple rofl. And there was nothing to deflect, as my response was a rebuttal to you. I appreciate you using your script of "projection" but it has no place in reality.

I have real sympathy for you. I would think someone with an average IQ such as yourself would have the ability to live in reality and admit when he got his ass kicked. It's quite a shame. Like I said, I'll give you a year to read books, and maybe you'll get on my level. Until then, continue lying to yourself. :thumbsup

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

You have a future in comedy if you decide to go that route. The world needs more clowns.

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

That's possible, but you've just proven that GFY is oversatured with clowns :) I definitely think your posts are among the funniest on this forum, keep it up:) One day people will take you seriously.

People do. You're just predisposed to not taking anyone seriously, except yourself.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3115/...8c6b79.jpg?v=0

You must be one of those crying-on-the-inside clowns.

I WOULD ask you to prove this assertion but since you're incapable of proving anything you type, I'll just laugh this off, like I do with all of your posts. :)

Got all the proof I need in all your posts. Try counting up the number of times you put down someone else to build yourself up. Or any variant thereof.

It's impressive. You're really oblivious to it.

I'm sure somewhere there's a circus that would be happy to have you.

Seriously, how can you rebut one "poll" with another "poll". Go find 100 polls and you will get 100 different results. No one can say " 59%" or whatever agree or disagree with something. All you can do is add them all up and then come to conclusions like "most people" or "majority of people" etc... The only results that are accurate are from the ones were people cast a ballet and their votes are tallied up, not opinion polls were the results and context of the questions are suspect at best depending on the poll givers personal views.

I rest my case. No wonder you're not taken seriously :)

Polls are only valid when the Democrats seem to have the upper hand. If it's the other way around, then the poll is inaccurate and a result of "fear mongering".

By whom, you? Like I'm worried about not getting respect from someone who hides behind a board nick. Clown.

Dude. Lies, damn lies and statistics. And any poll that's =/- >3% is statistically irrelevant anyway.

:::Yawn:::

The number one reason why we are in so much debt is because of oil/war in iraq.

Oil = old technology, dinosaur (literally lol)

We went to war with Iraq because of our dependency on OIL.

The terrorist are funded from oil money, money from ALL of us.

If it wasn't for oil, the richest people in the middle east would be living in a wooden shack opposed to a sand hunt. There would be 99% LESS money in the middle east if not for oil. That money makes it way back to terrorist and funds them to attack us.

Does it make sense to send money to our enemies so they can have weapons and means to fight us, so we can inturn then spend more money to defend ourselves from them?

A smarter solution is to attack them financially and take their means to hurt us away.

Make oil worthless and the most harm the terrorist can do is throw rocks out our embassy.

Make oil worthless by innovating and developing alternative sources of energy.

Produce alternative sources of energy and sell to the rest of the world = fix economy, trade deficit, and make the dollar a lot stronger.

A world with out oil = no middle east terrorist (save billions fighting and protecting ourselves from them) + make billions from new technology and alternative sources of energy we sell to the rest of the world.

So why did Bush, who's family made money in the oil business and was heavily connected with oil decide to go the route he did oppose to the common sense I listed above ? If Bush would have spent those trillions on iraq into pushing hard for us to develop alternative sources of energy, the war would be over with because the terrorist would have no money to fight us.

Bush fucked it up bad. But hey Clinton didn't exactly push hard for alternative sources of energy either.