Who won the debate?

[EasyEJL]

Your argument is so base, talk about useless rhetoric!

What have your posts in this thread been then?

[slow-mun]

I'm going to settle things once and for all by relating it to "Team America, World Police."

YouTube - World's greatest speech

[grila jujitsu]

I'm going to settle things once and for all by relating it to "Team America, World Police."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6rDeOojFXk

lol i love it slow-mun! **** yea!

[somewhatgifted]

Tell me why I watch the debate and I see McCain win the economy and Obama win the foreign policy. Then the analysts say exactly the opposite....

Whos signing the pay cheques of said analysts.

Im sure youve factored that big buisness (the people behind the people funding everything) own broadcast stations and some networks.
So finding conflicting info or similar info is a region or channel change away.
Its funny how sometimes people comment on the stupidest things , oh obama is younger, mccain had a nice suit, i didnt like his tone....... Is this real?
"I heard brittney lost her liscence again oh and i herd obama the cute kinda black one, yeah , he won the debate im votin fer him."
"Mclean just doesnt do it for me, hes red like my husband and yall know he aint running no country or takin control in the bedroom."

Then theres the fanatics who think politics are like sports matches ... "yeah fck yah hes the man, all the way!!!" "Mccain would go military style on obamas azz, beat down!!!"

This is very successful brain washing IMO where people feel so discouraged and distracted from the issues that they focus on easier things to like or disslike. As if it were someone elses job to find valid realiable information, and to stick to the obvious. I think any quality news station or publication would avoid such stories, dont get your political advice from beauty magazines, gossip columns, sports analysts or sources that wastes disscuss things not related to a mans ability to run a country.

I think the best way to make good decisions is by getting all the info and digesting it then making your own decisions. Others choose to ignore opposing views, make blanket statements, write off unkown content and disregaurd certain information depending on the source. Isnt this ignorance?

[somewhatgifted]

I'm going to settle things once and for all by relating it to "Team America, World Police."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6rDeOojFXk

South park writers use sarcasm, children and sometimes overblown stereotypes to expose the ignorance of people in the us.
They seem to make complex political statements so extreme or obsurd that its seems over the top, yet somehow paralell to actual events.
It takes a bit of imagination but the characters personas replicate differing sides of intelligence and imformed opinions against a starkly contrasting ignorant one.
Statements so "extreme" that it would not be allowed on t.v if it were not done with marionettes.

"actors use lies to tell the truth whereas politician use lies to cover it up"

Just thought id throw that out there.

[RobInKuwait]

Tell me why when Palin says she'd support Georgia if they were a member of NATO, she's seen as naive and everyone on TV makes a huge deal out of it...but when Obama says he'd attack insurgents in Pakistan without the consent of the Pakistani government (who already is second guessing working with us) nobody gives it a second thought.....

[Nabisco]

lol left field huh?

where do u get ur info! lol

I dont even know which point to start with.

Your argument is so base, talk about useless rhetoric!

You don't know which point to start with, because you can't prove any of them wrong.

Here, since you're too slow to follow along I'll list where I get this type of info for each point. Try to follow along, and be careful that you don't drool on your keyboard.

1. The 2008 US government budget. http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy...get/tables.pdf

Refer to table S-2. You'll notice that the total Discretionary budget is 929.8 BILLION dollars. Therefore your comment of owing 500 million to China is 0.05% of the 2008 Discretionary Budget. I don't see that as a lot of money, do you? No. Wait. Don't answer that question.

2. This doesn't even deserve a response. If you think the global economies survive without lending to one another, you're beyond my assistance. But here is a little article on US debt, so you can see how it works. Just who owns the U.S. national debt? - Answer desk - MSNBC.com

Notice that private investors own more of the US than China. I hope you're learning, I'll try to go slowly.

3. Do wage increases lead to inflation. NO. I hope that this is clear enough for you.
http://clevelandfed.org/Research/PolicyDis/pd1.PDF

I know its small print, and that your head might hurt trying to process this, but just read the opening summary and you'll get your answer. The summary...you know, that paragraph where they take all the big words you can't seem to grasp and make them smaller so you won't have to google what they mean.

4. This doesn't need a response. I still feel that you're an idiot, that hasn't changed.

5. So you don't think that the housing crisis is the overwhelming factor of our "economic" crisis do you.
Greenspan: Financial Crisis Likely Worst Since WWII
That right there is from your best friend Mr. Greenspan.

6. This is common freaking sense, you deserve nothing further on this one.

7. Refer to my above post by your "All knowing" friend Mr. Greenspan. Do a quick search on the economic crisis and not a single professional economist will tell you the Iraq war is the cause of this economic crisis. It doesn't help that we're spending extra money (that I'll admit), but it has nearly zero effect on the current crisis.

8. This still hasn't changed. Now that we've finished our lesson that my 8 year old cousin already understands I'll move to the rest of your post.

My argument is base? Do you even know the definition of the word you just used? You're saying that my argument is "a fundamental principle or groundwork; foundation; basis"? Right, because that makes sense. But if it makes you feel better to use words that don't fit in this context, ok. In fact my post was clearly outlined, and not "base" at all. I outlined my argument in number fashion so you could follow along. Kind of like paint by numbers for incredibly slow people.

Useless rhetoric? Congratulations, you can copy and paste comments from my post that sound intelligent and reuse them. And for my own morbid curiosity, if I'm spouting rhetoric, whose rhetoric is it? As I've posted government documents, links to Democratic leaning news outlets, and your very favorite economy guru, Mr. Greenspan.

You've provided absolutely nothing to this thread except asinine comments like the above. I almost feel like a special education teacher, trying to find different ways of explaining when you know that the handicapped child across from you isn't understanding what you're trying to get across. But patience is a virtue they say.

Now I know how Mullet feels.

[Mulletsoldier]

I think we should simply solve this in the most elegant, professional, and erudite manner possible: A fucking kick-ass game of Slapsies!!

[Dwight Schrute]

[slow-mun]

I think we should simply solve this in the most elegant, professional, and erudite manner possible: A fucking kick-ass game of Slapsies!!

As a kid, every time we played this.....

YouTube - Slapsies

....it evolved into this...

YouTube - Hand - Vagina

[bigrobbierob]

I've found the post-debate coverage quite...odd.

I was online the night of the debate. While most people said it was pretty even, McCain seemed to get a slight nod. It was that way on initial analysis I saw as well. Most talking heads called it a tie, but if pressed gave it slightly to McCain.

The next day, the MSM says Obama won overwhelmingly.

[somewhatgifted]

I've found the post-debate coverage quite...odd.

I was online the night of the debate. While most people said it was pretty even, McCain seemed to get a slight nod. It was that way on initial analysis I saw as well. Most talking heads called it a tie, but if pressed gave it slightly to McCain.

The next day, the MSM says Obama won overwhelmingly.

Well for those who arent paying attention and blindly believing the media its irrelevant to consider the truth. This is not accusational but a natural consequence of ignorance in not realising the conflict of interest when a body who stands to benefit, also owns a news publication or network, provides extremely biased perspectives likely untrue.