Care to offer a response or are you just going to admit that you are incredibly uniformed and completely wrong on most of your assertions?

Whatever just went through your head after reading that post?
Yeah, that's how it feels.

God, this was incredibly tiring. Mainly because it's hard debating someone who is so dense and clueless.

Originally Posted by ►Rubio

I do believe I said excuse me if I'm ill-informed.

He's not a republican. ...Ok? And that qualifies him to be president how? How does that improve his thin resume or lack of substance? Lets see, considering that I consider myself a Democrat, and considering there's only one Democratic candidate that I would vote for, I guess that's how it might "qualify" him for being president (when in fact I never mentioned that it qualified him, quit rocketing to conclusions, my friend.)lThen what does qualify him? Give me something substantive.
I like his life story. Which part, his private school in Hawaii or his education at Harvard? Or perhaps his magnificent stint as a community organizer? Or maybe one of his few days spent in the U.S. Senate, when he was actually there voting on important issues. Oh wait, that didn't ever happen, my bad. Well sh.t, I guess that sums up his life, that went by pretty quick. All of it. Why do you assume that a life story must be a long in order for a person to appreciate it? It's not about length, it's about accomplishments that qualify him to be President. Of which he has none.
It's genuine for this generation plus he wasn't born into a political family. He's a man for the people. He has integrity and that's what this country needs. He's not the same old manipulative politician. McCain is. More meaningless bullsh.t Oh the ironyCould you please point the irony out here? Are you even acutely aware of what irony means?, proving clearly that you are falling victim to the Obama cult of personality without even knowing anything about him Oh well that's cool. I was just assumed upon to be a dumbass and a "victim of the Obama cult." You know nothing about me, or nothing of what I know. I know a lot about both candidates, thank you very much.You clear don't. Your arguments make your lack of knowledge blatantly obvious. I have debated quite a few people on Obama, and you are one of the weakest opponents I have gone up against.. Obama is clearly manipulating people under the veil of "Hope" and "Change," There's a difference between manipulating people, and having them follow a theme.Sure there is, and he is pushing a leftist message underneath an attractive slogan.I don't know where you have been Doing my research. You?. He is all about bumper stickers and inane slogansAnd McCain is all about, what? Old, archaic politics and airing negative ads and giving crowds full of people vague at best answers?I really don't want to defend McCain all that much since I don't support him, but this is not an area in which you want to delve in. Obama has run the same kind of campaign with nitpicking ads dispelling minute mistakes just like McCain. As far as vague policy, my friend it gets no more vague than Obama. McCain has clearly defined views, Obama has hope and change. , which people fall victim for while ultimately never grasping a fundamental understanding of his leftist policies And this has to do with . . . ?. Oh, and another thing- Obama wasn't born into a political family? You couldn't be more wrong, his father worked in the Kenyan government, and was a staunch advocate for socialistic policies. Oh wow, talk about an off-beat comment. Okay, let me straighten this out for you. Obama wasn't raised into a political family. Are you happy now?No, not really. His father's beliefs influenced him a good deal, hence Obama's socialistic tendencies.

I think the guy is the better candidate for the presidential office. Don't know about you, but having a president with a history of political corruption, one who was elected solely through politics Obama was basically elected to his senate seat by default, in one of the bluest of blue states, in one of the most liberal parts of the state. After defeating Peter Fitzgerald, yes, I know. Chicago politics are notorious for corruption as well. As well as all politics in general Yes, and political corruption is known as "Chicago Politics." It's become a term to describe such corruption. and it's inevitability to take advantage of the naiveIf anything, Obama is guilty of this with his "Hope and Change" nonsense theme, not manipulation. There's dictionaries all across the internet, look up the differenceThe point here is that Obama pulls in naive, bandwagon votes, not McCain, and having a First-Lady who was addicted to drugs doesn't flow well in my bookShe was addicted to prescription drugs, which is a rather common occurrence. true We shouldn't be too quick to judge, especially since this happened a long time ago after she underwent several painful surgeries. She is over it now, and this has been a thing of the past for quite some time now. Let's move on to something that matters...Obama has admitted to taking a variety of drugs a long time ago, I couldn't care less.
If you look past the simple definition of integrity and look at men who had integrity, you'll find a common theme; all those men had ideas and the confidence to stick with those ideas. Uhhh...what? Surely you can't be talking about Barack Obama, who has shifted his position countless times on numerous issues as compared to other politicians who switch positions like playing cardsAs compared to other politicians, he fits right in.. Special Interests, Public financing He refuses them. He is the first candidate to refuse public financing for his campaign in over thirty years when it first was put in tactYeh, after he changed his position. plus he only did this for political; expediency. , The Cuba embargoas new information about anything arises, any politician must be forced to make decisions, Illegal immigration citation?, Decriminalization of marijuana His before and after of decriminalization is a vague difference, at best, Single-Payer Healthcare politics, yes, NAFTA even Hilary Clinton switched viewpoints on how the World Trade Organization and the North Atlantic Free Trade Association has affected the US economy. The fact that NAFTA as well as WTO have had inconsistent workings on the US reflects little on the politicians viewpoints, especially when the context's of any accusations come from a distorted timeline, Jeremiah Wright He disassociated with the man after making what could be looked at as racist remarks. Wouldn't you?Actually, he said he wouldn't disown Wright after the initial racially charged statements came out. Then later on he changed his mind. How can Obama control what comes out of his sermons mouth, Jerusalem, Meeting with Foreign Leaders He's had a fairly consistent basis of sitting down and speaking with leaders, The War in Iraq, Iran, the PATRIOT Act, Illegal Immigrants and Driver's Licenses, and many more. He is a typical politician who has political expediency in mind before anything elsewho are you to say what's on who's mind?Judging by his actions, this is the only logical conclusion to come to. . Talk about more of the same.... Did you really just say that? Wow. Yes, yes I did. He brings nothing new to the table.[Terrible Analogy Omitted] While I don't want a leader who wants to imperialistically force-feed ourselves unto other nations, I want a president with integrity. What this nation needs isn't a never ending war. Obama has said there is a strong chance he would shift our military focus from Iraq to Afghanistan, so... So what? He would focus on a war that actually matters?Wars and fighting would continue... God forbid.What this country needs, even more than alternative energy executionWTF? This came out of nowhere, and makes no sense in context. Are you out of touch? Our country needs alternative energy. Almost urgently. And, yes, it makes great sense in context. Why don't you actually read my sentences all the way through if you're going to try cutting them apart?We have nothing even CLOSE to development as far as alternative energy goes. Meanwhile, we have to rely on foreign oil (Obama is against drilling in the US). We need energy independence (drilling here) AND alternative energy development. Also, can you explain to me how we are going to fuel airplanes without gas? I understand electrical cars and whatnot, but planes will have to use gas for some time. , is morale and confidence. Al-Qaeda isn't the sole enemy. Apathy is.
What this nation needs is a president like Franklin D Roosevelt or John F Kennedy. Not a president like Richard Nixon or George W Bush.Obama is more like Jimmy Carter than anything else, go do some research. Again, you're assuming I don't know what I'm talking about. No, he's not at all like Jimmy Carter. Why don't you go do some research. Jimmy Carter was a nuclear engineer, not a member of law review. *SIGH* go read Carter's policies. Seriously. I wasn't talking about what career he had before becoming president. Jesus.
Obama radiates integrityyeh, just like George Bush radiates intelligence matureWhat about sarcasm is immature?, but it may just be way beyond you to register that when people are in awe of a man, you shouldn't condescendingly accost those people simply for being in aweOn the contrary, they deserve to be challenged if they are in love with a persona, without the slightest hint of his ideals true., so I don't blame you for being oblivious. Obama's integrity is stemmed from this idea of "change."Of which he brings none. Really? More taxing, spending God forbid he tax and spend, because, you know, that's how countries actually -- get this -- work?Get a goddamn grip on his economic policy and then get back to me. You don't have a clue., and regulating in true Democratic fashion. Go look up Jimmy Carter and read about his presidency, and then tell me Obama is any different. Jimmy Carter inherited a recession. His policies had little to do with the inevitable. See how similar Obama and Carter are?
This political campaign is his test of integrity.Jesus, get a new argument there's an objective to what I've been trying to say, please, please, please, catch them., Obama fails miserably. Again with the overwhelming maturity. I guess it's up to republicans to be condescending.I am in now way a Republican. Conservative in many ways? Yes. Republican? No, not a chance. I don't even believe in a two party system.
McCain has had tests of integrity, and he failed them; numerous times might I add. Failed one after being taken as a prisoner of warWhat exactly do you mean by this? He told American secrets when he knew he shouldn't. The man himself even admits wrong doing., failed another after being a part of the Keating Five where's your argument?I don't really have a stance on the issue, I don't really care., and failed again during his campaign when he diminished hope of being a good president due to juggling tactics and consistent contradictions.Tripe. Your arguments bring up nothing about current politics. I don't know if I should even call them arguments.
You're saying he wasn't disadvantaged because he grew up without a father? Obama is a self-made man, even if you might argue that having grandparents for a source of college income doesn't entitle self-made. He didn't ride into success or to the Senate on the back of a heroic story of being a prisoner of war (for God's sake, it's the third sentence on John McCain's Wikipedia), which, even though it's kind of heart-warming, is completely irrelevant to whether or not a person is capable of making important decisions So if most of what you have said about Barack Obama what? (at least ones that don't involve whether or not his government should torture foreign alleged terrorists, because he would make that decision with great judgment). Obama grew up, went to College (graduated highest in class by the way, McCain finished fourth to last Who gives a damn people who want a working economyWhat does this have to do with economic policy? Obama's is guaranteed for failure, I can tell you specifically why if you want me to.), went into a small law firm, lost some local elections, won another to get into the US Senate, raised a family, and is running for President. Basically, Obama got successful the good ol' fashioned, apple pie and white picket fence American wayWho gives a damn? There are millions upon millions of people that have done the same thing. That doesn't qualify anyone to be president Where do I mention that those things qualifies him to be president? Good point, you haven't really mentioned anything? Coincidence?. McCain grew up, got into the military (his father being fairly high ranked by the way [just to draw a parallel to your statement about Obama and his rich grandparents]), got captured by Vietnamese (told them American secrets while imprisoned [that failure after being captured I was talking about]The fact that you have to resort to this really is sad. McCain was tortured all dayhe played chess all day with his fellow inmates. It's a PRISON, not a torture room , every day for five years...and part of that time he was suffering from dysentery as well. God knows anyone in that scenario might let a few things slip. What makes you think he would make good decisions if say another country descended upon us?What the f..k are you talking about? McCain was tortured every two hours. He can't even raise his hands over his head due to the amount of torture he recived. ), got released, got married, adopted a few children, got a seat in the Senate for Arizona, got convicted as a major player in a fraud casehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Rezko Lol, wikipedia. Some people have a lot more to there resumé than one thing, as you like to assert by even replying to my post to begin with. Congratulations, the man helped Obama buy a home. That has to do with . . . ?Corruption, shady deals, lack of character. The deal with Rezko was suspect regardless of whether you read it on wikipedia or not. , divorced, married again, and is running for President.Yep, ole' McCain had it easy- serving his country with military service, nearly getting killed in combat, suffering lifelong physical injuries due to torture, and paying his dues for nearly twenty years in the house/senate. His life has been one giant cakewalk. You like to ask this question, so I'll ask. What the hell does that have to do with my original point?You underestimate/minimalize McCain's hardships rather unfairly, I had to point that out.
I take my facts, I interpret them, and I make decisions. Something Republicans seem to have a really hard time doing. Maybe they're just drunk all the timeWhoa, what a profound observation. are you sure you haven't been drinking? I'm having a hard time believing this all wasn't written by a mildly retarded 12 year old. Condescending and conclusive. I like it. I wouldn't have said anything if you hadn't made that stupid drunk comment.

You covered a grand total of zero substantive issues and you covered how many?I was replying to you, so how could I bring up issues when you didn't? Answer: I couldn't., maliciously attacked a war hero and his service where?...really?, spewed clichéd Democrat talking points and overall made a fool of yourself in the process. This sh.t may fly with your obtuse myspace buddies, but it won't work here. I'm on the war path now motherfuckers, I'm tired of seeing sheer ignorance and stupidity being thrown around here like feces from a mental patient. What's with you and being so condescending?Whats with you and your inability to use a thesaurus. Seriously, you really seem to like "integrity" and "condescending."

Well I wasted a lot of time sifting through your replies. Let's talk issues instead of platitudes. Your case for Obama is as weak as it originally was. No issues, all bullsh.t. Either get a clear cut, concise argument put together, or don't bother trying to debate me at all. You made a thread supposedly for making the case for Obama, and you have not brought up his policies yet.

Originally Posted by Sl1cK_

God, this was incredibly tiring. Mainly because it's hard debating someone who is so dense and clueless.

I would totally step in and retort many of your dated arguments but for one thing Rubio is handling you like a champ, and also you guys are doing this weird color thing which after Rubio went all Red,White, and Blue on you it was pretty much over, you adding a another shade of red was lame and too much effort for such a glaring lack of insight in late Aug of 08. You guys are going 1v1 and you're losing.

little joe rogan for you

i mean you're gonna link us to Rezco...Obama sidestepped that jab back when he was fighting hiliary, come on dude catch up. ok i'm done

edit* ok one more. You were watching Obamas speech while you were playing with the crayons right? You did watch this man who you have such an informed opinion about right?

Here's a good reason to vote for Obama. He's not a close-minded, senile old man.

This is McCain's latest interview by TIME Magazine:

For years, John McCain's marathon bull sessions with reporters were more than a means of delivering a message; they were the message. McCain proudly, flagrantly refused direction from handlers, rarely dodged tough questions and considered those who did wimps and frauds. The style told voters that he was unafraid, that he had nothing to hide and that what you see is what you get. "Anything you want to talk about," he promised reporters aboard the Straight Talk Express in Iowa back in March 2007. "One of the fundamental principles of the bus is that there is no such thing as a dumb question." When asked if he would keep the straight talk coming, McCain replied, "You think I could survive if I didn't? We'd never be forgiven ... I'd have to hire a food taster, somebody to start my car in the morning." Even after he won the GOP nomination, he demanded that his new campaign plane be configured to include a sofa up front so he could re-create the Straight Talk Express at 30,000 ft.

Sticking to the old formula seemed like a good idea. But with the press focused on Obama, McCain got attention only when he slipped up during one of his patented freewheeling encounters with reporters. And so in July, the campaign decided to clamp down on the candidate. Open-ended question time was reduced to almost nothing, and the famously unscripted McCain began heeding his talking points, even as his aides maintained he missed the old informality.



And so when TIME's James Carney and Michael Scherer were invited to the front of McCain's plane recently for an interview, they were ushered forward, past the curtain that now separates reporters from the candidate, past the sofa that was designed for his gabfests with the press and taken straight to the candidate's seat. McCain at first seemed happy enough to do the interview. But his mood quickly soured. The McCain on display in the 24-minute interview was prickly, at times abrasive, and determined not to stray off message. An excerpt:



What do you want voters to know coming out of the Republican Convention — about you, about your candidacy?

I'm prepared to be President of the United States, and I'll put my country first.



There's a theme that recurs in your books and your speeches, both about putting country first but also about honor. I wonder if you could define honor for us?

Read it in my books.



I've read your books.

No, I'm not going to define it.



But honor in politics?

I defined it in five books. Read my books.


[Your] campaign today is more disciplined, more traditional, more aggressive. From your point of view, why the change?

I will do as much as we possibly can do to provide as much access to the press as possible.



But beyond the press, sir, just in terms of ...

I think we're running a fine campaign, and this is where we are.



Do you miss the old way of doing it?

I don't know what you're talking about.



Really? Come on, Senator.

I'll provide as much access as possible ...


In 2000, after the primaries, you went back to South Carolina to talk about what you felt was a mistake you had made on the Confederate flag. Is there anything so far about this campaign that you wish you could take back or you might revisit when it's over?

[Does not answer.]

Do I know you? [Says with a laugh.]

[Long pause.] I'm very happy with the way our campaign has been conducted, and I am very pleased and humbled to have the nomination of the Republican Party.



You do acknowledge there was a change in the campaign, in the way you had run the campaign?

[Shakes his head.]

You don't acknowledge that? O.K., when your aides came to you and you decided, having been attacked by Barack Obama, to run some of those ads, was there a debate?

The campaign responded as planned.



Jumping around a bit: in your books, you've talked about what it was like to go through the Keating Five experience, and you've been quoted as saying it was one of the worst experiences of your life. Someone else quoted you as saying it was even worse than being a POW ...

That's another one of those statements made 17 or 18 years ago which was out of the context of the conversation I was having. Of course the worst, the toughest experience of my life was being imprisoned, so people can pluck phrases from 17 or 18 years ago ...



I wasn't suggesting it as a negative thing. I was just saying that ...

I'm just suggesting it was taken out of context. I understand how comments are taken out of context from time to time. But obviously, the toughest time of my life, physically and [in] every other way, would be the time that I almost died in prison camp. And I think most Americans understand that.



How different are you from President Bush? Are you in step with your party? Are you independent from your party?

My record shows that I have put my country first and I follow the philosophy and traditions of Abraham Lincoln and Theodore Roosevelt and Ronald Reagan. Sometimes that is not in keeping with the present Administration or my colleagues, but I've always put my country first, whether it's saying I didn't support the decision to go to Lebanon or my fighting against the corruption in Washington or out-of-control pork-barrel spending, which has led to members of Congress residing in federal prison. So I've always stood up for a set of principles and a philosophy that I think have been pretty consistent over the years.



Your tougher line on Russia, which predated [the Russian invasion of Georgia], now to many looks prescient. Others say it's indicative of a belligerent approach to foreign policy that would perhaps further exacerbate the tensions being created with our allies and others around the world under the Bush Administration. How do you respond to that critique?

Well, it reminds me of some of the arguments we went through when Ronald Reagan became President of the United States. I think Russian behavior has been very clear, and I've pointed it out for quite a period of time, and the chronicle of their actions has been well known since President [Vladimir] Putin came to power, and I believe that it's very important that Russia behave in a manner befitting a very strong nation. They're not doing so at this time, so therefore I will criticize and in some cases — in the case of the aggression against Georgia — condemn them.



You were a very enthusiastic supporter of the invasion of Iraq and, in the early stages, of the Bush Administration's handling of the war. Are those judgments you'd like to revisit?

Well, my record is clear. I believe that the world is better off without Saddam Hussein. I believe it's clear that he had every intention to acquire and use weapons of mass destruction. I can only imagine what Saddam Hussein would be doing with the wealth he would acquire with oil at $110 and $120 a barrel. I was one of the first to point out the failure of strategy in Iraq under [former Defense Secretary Donald] Rumsfeld. I was criticized for being disloyal to the Republicans and the President. I was the first to say I would lose a campaign rather than lose a war. I supported the surge. No observer over the last two years would say the surge hasn't succeeded. I believe we did the right thing.



A lot of people know about your service from your books, but most people don't know that you have two sons currently in the military. Can you describe what it means to have Jack and Jimmy in uniform?

We don't discuss our sons.

Whoa, that was a dodgy interview. I wonder if this is how he'll be throughout his whole presidency...Straight Talk-Express my ass!

Originally Posted by CitizenZenSin

I would totally step in and retort many of your dated arguments but for one thing Rubio is handling you like a champ, and also you guys are doing this weird color thing which after Rubio went all Red,White, and Blue on you it was pretty much over, you adding a another shade of red was lame and too much effort for such a glaring lack of insight in late Aug of 08. You guys are going 1v1 and you're losing.

little joe rogan for you

i mean you're gonna link us to Rezco...Obama sidestepped that jab back when he was fighting hiliary, come on dude catch up. ok i'm done

edit* ok one more. You were watching Obamas speech while you were playing with the crayons right? You did watch this man who you have such an informed opinion about right?

Feel free to jump in, I will take on every single one of you libs. I added another shade of red to show to signify my second reply, so it could be identified as mine while also denoting that the comments were new.

As far as Rezco goes, I am well aware that happened a while ago. I only mentioned it due to the fact that Rubio was talking about shady activity involving McCain. Keep in mind I am strictly replying to what Rubio says, he is making the initial remarks for me to reply to.

And then to address your final point, most of the reply was quickly written during the first half of his speech...the hope and change extravaganza. I have literally seen countless Obama speeches in the course of his campaign, so I went ahead and typed my reply while he was giving his basic intro message.

People ask me everyday who I'm going to vote for; "I don't f..king care" is always my response.

And I really don't, the only thing that matters is who Obama puts on his ballet for VP, because that person is going to be the one who becomes president once Obama is assassinated.

Originally Posted by Its PJ Bia

Since when is a national healthcare system a bad thing?

O dear... I really dont feel like going into it just look into it more

Also Mccain offered to debate obama yes 10 TIMES and Obama declined.

O and NoK you have a great point lol.

Originally Posted by ManchesterUtd77

O dear... I really dont feel like going into it just look into it more

Also Mccain offered to debate obama yes 10 TIMES and Obama declined.

O and NoK you have a great point lol.

I already replied to your dumbass point on page 3. If you're not gonna explain your reasoning here, and just make make idiotic posts without any sort of supporting argument, then get the f..k out of here.

Originally Posted by Cold Synergy

Here's a good reason to vote for Obama. He's not a close-minded, senile old man.
!

Seeing how bad this interview is for John McCain would require it's readers to go beyond what McCain is saying, reading between the lines it's called, and the fact of the matter is that from what i can gather from this forum and from countless other sources most people that are for mccain are not what you would call deep thinkers. This is sooo not a pun...but imo they see the world as very black and white.

Originally Posted by Sl1cK_

Feel free to jump in, I will take on every single one of you libs. I added another shade of red to show to signify my second reply, so it could be identified as mine while also denoting that the comments were new.

yea i got that. thks. Thats also why i'm not going to get into it. I'll do it like this, but i'm not going to be the green or spend alot of time cut/pasting, which is what i'd have to do to rebut you.

Originally Posted by Sl1ck_

As far as Rezco goes, I am well aware that happened a while ago. I only mentioned it due to the fact that Rubio was talking about shady activity involving McCain. Keep in mind I am strictly replying to what Rubio says, he is making the initial remarks for me to reply to.

I wil keep that in mind. Rezco is a blemish, but it's not as bad as the right is making it out to be, when they were bring it up back in the day.

Originally Posted by Sl1ck_

And then to address your final point, most of the reply was quickly written during the first half of his speech...the hope and change extravaganza. I have literally seen countless Obama speeches in the course of his campaign, so I went ahead and typed my reply while he was giving his basic intro message.

Hope and Change Extravaganza is an accurate description of last night. Your phrasing makes me think that you don't think we need change or hope. Fine, but there are tons of people in this country who need some hope after the last 8yrs and need some change so the next 4 to 8 isn't more of the same. If you and yours are doing alright and don't think anything needs changing thats your business, but theres a whole lot of us who think things need to be done differently by those who make the policys and laws and represent our country.

Originally Posted by NoK

And I really don't, the only thing that matters is who Obama puts on his ballet for VP, because that person is going to be the one who becomes president once Obama is assassinated.

2 Things

1. What does yo