Dave’s prediction:More God talk, no Sarah Palin, McBush will bomb.Of course, my track record here isn’t so good…
Dave’s prediction:More God talk, no Sarah Palin, McBush will bomb.Of course, my track record here isn’t so good…
Since 1963, AMERICAN ATHEISTS has been the premier organization laboring for the civil liberties of Atheists, and the total, absolute separation of government and religion.
Copyright 2012. All materials contained on this site, whether written, audible or visual are the exclusive property of American Atheists.
DVan:
I can see someweak willed people doing this, but not the vast majority.
There are a lot of sexual politics at play here. What most people don’t recognize is that females play the game to increase their social status as well.
r4d:
I’ll concede all your points. Based on feminist propaganda, all women know they’re at a distinct earning advantage, why the fuck handicap yourself even more with children?
Sexual pressure is bullshit. Again, a very weak willed person would submit to unwanted sex just to keep the relationship going for appearance’s sake.
I know women who stay in shitty relationships b/c it increases her social status/income/purchasing power. I know women who have married for these reasons as well.
They married assholes for essentially money & the thrill, got fucked on the deal & now want my sympathy??? Fuck that. It’s the old “assholes/pricks get laid & nice guys finish last” deal.
mx,
Your sounding like the proverbial jilted lover who’s anger has devolved into an irrational misogyny. It’s a bit unbecoming.
Ha! Not only is Joe The Plumber not a licensed plumber he also has two liens against him (unpaid taxes and, get this, medical bills) but he has no reasonable expectation of making that 250K that he spoke with Obama about at that Toledo rally. He makes 40K and has no real plan or ability to buy that business that he spoke of which, btw, makes 100K/year not 250K. But on top of all this from ABC News comes the revelation:
Under Obama’s plan Joe, a single father of a 13 y.o. boy, would pay less taxes than under McSame’s plan but Joe can’t seem to stir up the intestinal fortitude needed to vote in his best interests. He says it’s just not right that Bill Gates should pay more taxes under Obama. Wow Joe! Stockholm Syndrome much?
See, that’s a good indication of how clueless the McCain campaign is. Even when they try to stage a false example they get it wrong. And that’s a pretty charitable statement considering how many times they’ve repeated statements they knew weren’t true. I used to think that at the very least, John McCain was a man of interity that would sooner lose than stoop to this level of bullshit. Either something changed or my take on people isn’t as good as it used to be.
Alright What, it’s time for a little fact checking on your half-reading problem:
That quote you posted was from the LA Times, not ABC, and it refered to a republican rally with Palin in Toledo that hasn’t happened yet.
So long as I’m cranky, I might as well raise another point:
Why is voting in one’s own interests a good argument to make?
Trig Palin
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEQdYdCfl60&feature=related
MX,
Ya, I clarified that in the post following my original comment.
R4D,
Nah, just a Tom Leykis listener. : )
Alex,
I not much of a conspiracy theorist, and even I’m not fully convinced Sarah Palin’s newest is hers and not her daughter’s baby.
Cynic
You have accused me of this previously and I showed you then that it was not true (The subject was NeoWolfe’s posts. After you accused me Neo clarified his ambiguous position and, low and behold, no half-read.) Now you make similar accusations. I think you should reread my post. The thing that I could possibly be guilty of was stating that Joe asked his question at a rally. It was a visit by Obama to his neighborhood.
Hmm. Well that changes everything doesn’t it. I might be of a mind to comb through your posts in the future looking for unfactual assertions that change nothing.
Cynic
A good argument for what? Do you mean the question: How can one be best represented by one’s government? That would make it a no-brainer. But maybe you mean something else. In that case why not say what that is?
So what was the “revelation” then? Why did you use that term and what did you think it revealed?
Joe Plumber implied that taxing people unequally was inherently unfair and that he didn’t approve of it, even if that made things harder on him. You implied that he was some kind of idiot of not voting for any rule that helped him, regardless of whether it violated a philosophical principle he held. Is that inaccurate?
As for your half-reading, you showed me once, but demonstrated that you do it dozens of times. You can go on feeling vindicated if you want, but I think anyone who’s followed your posts long enough knows what I’m talking about.
I believe that CEOs that make hundreds of times more money than their next highest paid hourly wage earner, is inherently unfair.
Why should people like Bill O’really? make $50 million per year for bloviating on TV, and then not be expected to pay his fair share of taxes? I say the government should take $48 million of it in taxes, and he would still be overcompensated for the services he provides. Nobody, and I mean nobody, is worth tens of millions of dollars a year, especially on the backs of their employees that cannot afford to put shoes on their children’s feet, or clothes on their backs, or food in their bellies, or roofs over their heads.
Ren
Ramen!
Karen,
Thank you, dear. Now for the inevitable labels of ‘Socia1ist’, which I will wear with pride.
Cheese be upon him.
Cynic
A full-read would have revealed that “the point” was that Joe was in contact with McCain campaign (Note that the word campaign) prior to the third debate.
And it isn’t inheremtly unfair so what’s your point.
He has two choices Obama or McSame. If he chooses McSame he will pay more taxes. If he chooses Obama he will pay less taxes. He approached Obama and asked him a question about HIS taxes. From the start he was declaring that HIS tax rate to be of primary importance to him. So yes, he is an idiot if he’s having trouble making his voting decision based on his stated concerns.
Then when he gets “exposed” he shifts to the bogus “inherently unfair” argument.
Feel vindicated? I am vindicated. But I will make a mental note to be more unforgiving of inconsequential assertions when reading your posts in the future.
OK, one thing at a time then.
If the revelation was that the GOP had been in contact with him prior to the 3rd debate, riddle me this…
It’s already been explained the quotes you out there, which were taken from their respective paragraphs, placed together, and then presented out of context, refered to the McCain campaign contacting him three days prior to the rally TO BE HELD in Toledo, OH on this UPCOMING Sunday, October 19th, 2008. Please note that this is a date in the FUTURE and that three days prior to this FUTURE date is Thursday, October 16th, 2008. That date, now in the PAST came one day AFTER the 3rd presidential debate.
Now. This is the second time I’ve had to say it. So explain:
Did you half read my previous explaination?
… or … (and this is and, really)
Did you half read the LA Times (not ABC news) article?
… or …
Did you not read the article at all and just post from someone else’s secondhand make up bullshit site?
… or …
Did you make it up yourself?
Why don’t you just make it easy on yourself and admit that you didn’t think (or read) this one through and be done with it.
As for Joe Plumber, it doesn’t matter whether he’s right to consider it unfair. It’s his opinion (even if that opinion was handed to him). The point is, there is nothing inherently superior to voting for the policy that helps you. That’s a very selfish philosophy of voting. That’s my opinion.
I apologize, What. I’m full of shit and having a bad week. Please forget I said anything about this.
http://www.latimes.com/wireless/avantgo/la-na-joe17-2008oct17,0,5877572.story
There’s the link for the article that show’s I’m full of shit. I just shouldn’t post stuff when I’m feeling like this. Sorry again.
Cynic
Odd. I have no idea what you are specifically apologizing for or whether you are apologizing at all.
If you are indeed having a bad week then I hope next week is a better one.
I am indeed apologizing. Somewhere between stress, lack of sleep, recent fight with my wife, my cold, medication, and excess caffine, I started having delusions in that article — ones that felt so real that I saw them again on double checking and would have testified under oath about. On a third check, I snapped to, and that’s why I’m apologizing. Besides being wrong, I’ve behaved poorly and you (all) deserve better.
Something about that still smells, however, but it’s not you. It’s the the way the LA Times (and the Associated Press before them) presented it combined with some poor logical association. I’m only half-logical when I have a cold and couldn’t put it all together until now.
Here’s the thing. Joe speaks to Obama at an Obama rally on the 12th. The McCain campaign contacts Joe “several days before the debate” and asks if he can attend the rally on the 19th. Joe tells the press that he told them I probably couldn’t attend because he’s going to be making some appearances on TV.
From that, we really can’t pull any kind of conclusion that the McCain campaign contacted him before the 12th, only that they saw him at the rally and then contacted him. I think what really muddied this was their decision to concatonate the ideas of “called to ask” and “told them I’d be on TV” because those must have been two separate calls — one before the debate, and one after the debate when he got suddenly popular.
But from that information, suggesting they sent him to Obama’s rally is pure and iffy speculation, unfounded and unnecessary to support what Joe has said. If there were any credible information to lead to that conclusion, it would have been the story lead — and not just at the LA Times.
But anyway, how I got from that gut reaction to deluded confabulation to support it, I dunno. Sorry.
OK, I hope this week is looking up for you. Best wishes.