Put a little A-1 steak sauce on them and I hear they both taste great!

Nice conclusion, Chachi. You best brush up on your logic skills.  You basically just stated that one plus two equals five.

1. Exactly which argument fails? Be most specific, please. My argument, if I may articulate it for you, is simply the differences between the two political parties. In support of that argument, I have stated facts, all of which can be verified should you choose to actually read an academic journal. Now, using your keen logical mind, how does this argument fail based on a lack of knowledge of a PDF? Just for a moment, let's pretend that I am not actually a political scientist. Even if I was not a political scientist, how would that render my factual statements false?  Bad, bad, logic.  (Dare I say that your whole argument fails?) You will have to do better than that.

2. Exactly what argument are YOU trying to make? You have not even made an argument, but rather just stated inaccurate facts and opinions, which, after I have proven them to be inaccurate or irrelevant, you ignored the evidence and proclaimed yourself as being correct in all assertions. Seriously?

3. It would really depend on what that political scientist did for a living, wouldn't it?  Obviously not every political scientist knows what a PDF is, because I don't. I am guessing it is something that research fellows use in crunching numbers, if they happen to work in a think tank or elsewhere that requires academic research or data analysis. Sorry, but that is not what we all do. Some work as legislative aides, some in municipal administration, and others (surprise!) do not even work in the field of politics. You seem to have a narrow view of what people with a political science background are able to do with their degrees.  (By the way, I love how you stated that you did not read my mails, yet somehow you know of my political science background, even though I did not state it anywhere in this thread!)  I am also curious as to what you think a political scientist, or, in this case, what ALL political scientists, do for a living? Perhaps you should graduate high school before you become too sure of yourself as to what people in the labor force do with their degrees and their training?

Now then, please, tell me which relevant statement I have made is inaccurate.

Then, for the love of God, please tell me exactly what YOUR argument is, and why it is correct, since I have shown that each statement you have made is false or based on lack of knowledge. I have cited example after example of of your shortcomings, and you have resorted to saying I must do drugs because I am a Libertarian (nice conclusion!) and that I must be lying about my academic training because I did not know what PDF stood for?

Another thing, at least I admit when I do not know something. You should take some notes there. You have been ignorantly defiant even though I have repeatedly shown that your purported knowledge is inaccurate. This is not going to serve you well when you get out in the world.  I know what it is like to be a big fish in a small pond.  I am guessing that this is the state of mind you are in right now. You are probably pretty hot shit for a 15 year old in your high school. However, one day you are going to go to college, and after that maybe even to Grad School, and you will realize that you are not the chosen one.  I dare you to retain this cocky, self-assured disposition when you get in front of people who have earned their PhD in mathematics long ago. You will be figuratively bitch-slapped back into place, just as I have done to you here, but you are too ignorant to see.  As I stated, I know where you are coming from. I had the same cockiness when I was an undergraduate, thinking that I could never be wrong. However, one day after going to law school I came to realize that I was not always the smartest person in the room, and that perhaps I should occasionally listen to what other people had to say when they knew what they were talking about. Right now, I have peers from all different points in the political spectrum. I listen to each of them with an open mind, because they are all well educated and can make a clear point.  You, however, do not fall into this category.  Your comments have been, at best, opinions, and at worst, inaccurate facts or irrelevant vitriole. It would serve you well to humble yourself until you know what you are talking about. Until you do, you are denying yourself the opportunity to continue learning.

It is fun toying with you like a cat does with a mouse, but at some point you are going to have to make a clear, valid point, or I will become bored.

I was bored the moment you started typing.

Your argument was fully based on your "knowledge" of political parties, that you were a political scientist, and therefore, as you were most clearly stating, that due to your actual experience, your argument is actually creditable, but without it's main structure, it falls apart. But, since you were a fraud the entire time, you never had creditability.

And when have you proven me inaccurate, all I see is you making a bad excuse of you being a political scientist, and trying to state pointless facts, and now you try to insult me when I have already proven you have no credibility. You are just making a pointless attempt to insult me, but it's pathetic really! You aren't a political scientist, just admit it.

Oh, and yes, all political scientists use the PDF, but how would you know? You're just a fraud acting like you know something, while I have already shown you lack any shred of intellect! I doubt you actually have a education, since you are lying as to what your career is. No purpose to do that unless you don't have a good job at all.

Now, I shall ask you your question. Exactly what argument are YOU trying to make? You have not even made an
argument, but rather just stated inaccurate facts and opinions, which,
after I have proven them to be inaccurate or irrelevant, you ignored
the evidence and proclaimed yourself as being correct in all
assertions. Seriously? You truly are a fraud and an ass. This is ridiculous! 

I have proven that your argument falls apart, but since you can't seem to do anything right, you probably are going to continue to be an ass and be arrogant.

I'm sorry, are my words too big for you? You, my friend, no wait, scratch that, have no idea what you are babbling about. You really are just making a fool out of yourself.

You also realize you have destroyed the purpose of this forum, right? Or do you not care about other people?

Now, if you have an dignity, don't post anymore, this is getting boring. If you are a complete jackass, keep posting shit

Short term memory loss? Ok, let's summarize here:

You said: Republicans believe that the average citizens should have more rights
and that the government should not be where people don't believe it
should be.

I countered that this is an old stereotype that no longer applies. As evidence, I cite the Patriot Act which was passed in a Republican Congress and signed by a Republican president, and has legalized types of searches and seizures, warrantless phone taps, and produced a chilling effect on speech.

You did not address my retort.

You said: Republicans believe that a state of nature(No government) is better
than a social compact(Government is everything! No freedom, no rights).

I countered that these were extreme viewpoints that did not represent either party, and were more typical of extreme philosophies like Anarchy (no government), and communism (state control). As evidence I cited NAFTA and the Welfare Reform Act as evidence of a Democrat reducing state interference in commerce and entitlements.

You responding with an incorrect assumption that the Welfare Reform Act actually created a Welfare Program, rather than restrict the existing one. Wrong answer.

You said: Republicans were more moral, and stated as evidence that Lincoln abolished slavery, and Lincoln was a Republican. (Not a direct quote)

I responded that you were using a 150 year old example, and that any fool would know that the Party is not the same as it was 150 years ago. I pointed out the Republican opposition to civil rights legislation and affirmative action, that they supported segregation, and that 90% of African Americans who are registered with a political party are registered as Democrats. I could have also, but did not, point out that Lincoln abolished nothing. The 13th Amendment abolished slavery, not the Emancipation Proclamation (which I assume you were referring to). The Emancipation Proclamation abolished slavery only in the Confederate States, not in the Union.  Lincoln had no authority in the seceeded CSA, rendering his proclamation worthless. Result: Your statement was both irrelevant and inaccurate.

You did not respond to this debunking.

You said: Republicans have not been trying to limit our civil rights,

nor any rights, and believe we should have more. Republicans don't

believe in gun control...

I responded that you were citing ONE civil liberty out of the ten afforded, and showed through examples how Republican legislation disfavored free speech and privacy rights, favored establishment of religion, attempted to restrict due process and trial by jury, and recently supported cruel and unusual punishment via their pro enemy combatant torture policy. All clear evidence that Republican, on the whole, have a disfavorable platform against civil rights.

You did not respond to this evidence.

You said: Democrats can't do anything! They just want to ruin everything,
including the already screwed up economy. And where is Obama's promise
to end the war?

I responded to your suggestion that the poor economy was the fault of the Democrats, because they have not fixed in one year what it took almost a decade to screw up, by showing that Bush took office with a $300 billion dollar budget surplus and turned it into a $300 trillion dollar deficit, that the economy and housing market tanked on his watch, and that it was easier to start a war, which Bush did without much forethought or planning, than it is to get out of one. These are all accurate statements.

You responded with an incorrect statement that Congress was controlled by Democrats during Bush's two terms. I showed that your statement was incorrect, that Congress was controlled during only the last two years of Bush's second term. Yet another failing on your part.

You asked: And whatever happened to the Health Care Act or whatever, why has it taken an entire year and not even have been passed?

I responded by taking valuable time out of my day to explain to you exactly how a bill goes through committee in both chambers, and how differences are hammered out between the various versions in each chamber, all of which is a lengthy process that anyone which a rudimentary knowledge of the political process understands. I will not reprint the lengthy discussion here, but suffice to say I answered your question while you have not responded to any of my points.

You stated: ...why do we need it? So that people who are already on lots of welfare now get insurance paid by more sweat of Americans?

I responded that people who are on welfare already receive government funded health insurance in the form of Medicaid. This is another fact that anyone with rudimentary knowledge of the political process knows. You countered: did you even know that 86 percent of Americans agree that government spending on Welfare and Medicaid should either stay exactly the same or be lowered? Or did not concern yourself in the ideas of other people?  I am not sure what the point of that statement was, other than you wanted to show off that you were able to find some data. Unfortunately, the statistic is both not surprising and completely irrelevant to any pertinent point we were discussing. I pointed out the the Health Bill was for working Americans who could not afford health insurance or who were denied coverage, since welfare recipients already received Medicaid, thereby demonstrating your inaccurate statement and lack of knowledge.

You did not respond.

It was at this point, after I had thoroughly demonstrated that everything you stated was either false or irrelevant, that your comments went completely off the wall and you began hurling abuse. Just for fun, let's go over them, shall we? (lol)

...doesn't know shit (What a big surprise) and is in a pointless third party.

...you should stop insulting and actually talk, because I don't hear a thing coming from you.

...I haven't met a more idiotic bastard in my life.

...Now be a man, stop being a wimp, and actually talk (My favorite!)

...Listening to a Libertarian who is so high on drugs

You were obviously getting desperate, and throwing wild punches. Good show, though. At least it provided a little comic relief. But let's not forget the best one-liner, which practically had me rolling on the floor:

"If I'm ignorant, a person who was in AP calculus for freshman year, and
found an infinite series for the PDF that was not founded by any other
person!"

Bingo! Here you are implying that because you are a 15 year old with proficiency in Calculus, that therefore you are not ignorant in political science. Shortly after that, you claim to be proficient in logic. Can you see the irony??? On top of that, you feel adequate to condescend to someone well beyond your years and experience. Even though you do not have a high school diploma, you feel comfortable condescending to someone with advanced degrees in law and political science. All I can say, is "Wow!".

Anyhow, I hope my summary clears things up for you, since you seem confused as to where you were inaccurate (enjoy the list of them), and what argument I was making. It is ridiculous that I had to answer your question by reprinting everything that is already said here, but since you insist on remaining oblivious, there you go. Enjoy.

How, you don't know when to quit. You have no ability to comprehend how much of an asshole you are. You head is so far up your ass, I'm surprised you can even have the ability to read.

Know, stop being an ignorant bastard.

Also, you aren't a political scientist. The odds you are one is 0%. Know, would you like to take your head out of your ass and actually try to have dignity, because I see a worthless, pathetic, brain dead, drunk, bastard who doesn't know shit and has a fantasy world where he believes he is a political scientist. 

You don't have a degree, you aren't intelligent, and you are shit. Now please, stop ruining this forum for everyone. You are just being an ignorant ass on a website. I have had enough trying to reason with you, a bad excuse for a human. Now try to have dignity, and stop making a fool out of yourself.

Have a good day!

kk

Thank you for stopping! Finally.

You're welcome.

You are my new hero b10gangster. It is not often we see such prime examples of a pure blood Internet Tough Guy(™) in these forums. I don't think I have meet anyone here with such a large e-penis here ever.

I especially loves you you swiftly debunk BrutusTheBarber using clever arguments like "... and now you try to insult me when I have already proven you have no credibility. You are just making a pointless attempt to insult me, but it's pathetic really!" and not even seeing the irony in the fact that it is preceded and followed by arguments like:

"I haven't met a more idiotic bastard in my life."

"You are a fraud. You are just a lying son of a bitch."

"You're just a fraud acting like you know something, while I have already shown you lack any shred of intellect! I doubt you actually have a education, since you are lying as to what your career is. No purpose to do that unless you don't have a good job at all."

"I'm sorry, are my words too big for you? You, my friend, no wait, scratch that, have no idea what you are babbling about. You really are just making a fool out of yourself."

"You have no ability to comprehend how much of an asshole you are. You head is so far up your ass, I'm surprised you can even have the ability to read."

"... because I see a worthless, pathetic, brain dead, drunk, bastard who doesn't know shit and has a fantasy world where he believes he is a political scientist."

"You are just being an ignorant ass on a website. I have had enough trying to reason with you, a bad excuse for a human."

I am truly in awe. You obviously already have a fan club, can you pleas let me know where I should write to get more information about it and possibly join it?Also, if you give classes in how to be cool on the internet then I will surely attend. I might even be willing to pay to have such a master tutor me.


- kong

Not always the smartest thing to write when you have stayed up all night. I obviously meant "I especially loves how you swiftly debunk BrutusTheBarber using clever arguments like..."

A couple of more typos but meh, English is not my first language anyway.

- kong

Im not american but if I had to choose, I would pick the opposite of this guy http://lh5.ggpht.com/SergioAlex76/SO9ftqTvzfI/AAAAAAAAAJo/XaRS0eZLmfY/fail-bush[3].jpg

Simply put, Republicans are usually the smarter and consequently because of their intelligence they are usually the richer of the two parties

Democrats live in la la land

Both are corrupt

does it metters who is in power? it's only metter to do good things the for the people

Very simply put, Oracle. Perhaps a bit too simple. In other words, completely void of accuracy or insight.

You mean Republicans like George Bush are smarter? The guy who averaged a C- in college and frequently mispronounced "big words", made policy decisions without investigation, referred to the Constitution as "just a piece of paper", and admitted to never reading a newspaper? Don't get me started on Mrs. Palin, who put her "intelligence" on display last year.

Oh, and are you referring to "poor" Democrats, such as George Soros and Ted Turner?  Hmmm...dig a little deeper, my friend. Generalizations usually do not work, so you cannot "simply put" very much.

I will go back to my original statement, that there is very little difference in the political parties, as far as actions rather than words, other than those I have pointed out already.

sweet

They both suck. Create your own rules without getting caught and there you go, your happy