Obama vs McCain

[Partha]

Cry more, Embar. It pleases me.

Oh, wait. Who is the one who was going on about someone not having a defined policy? Or any policy to speak of?

Was that you, off crying in the corner? Why, yes it was!

Now that you get hit with a side by side comparison, you're all 'What do you need me for?'

Embar, I'll tell you what I need you for.

To mock.

Because you deserve mockery.

You don't like his positions on guns? Or judges? Or abortion? Fine, say so.

But don't pussy out with 'I dunno what he wants to do' when five minutes spent away from the lotion would do your education wonders. At least then you'd just look like a GOPbot like normal, instead of like Rsak with a book on gravity.

[Embar Angylwrath]

Still waitin' for your in-depth comparison and contrast....

(I think we'll all be waiting for a looooong time for that)

[Rsak]

Hey now.. that picture was taken before I figured out the Tigger book on gravity was upside down!

[Klast Brell]

Give me my book back!

[Partha]

Still waitin' for your in-depth comparison and contrast....

(I think we'll all be waiting for a looooong time for that)

Well, yes. I've already proven you a liar and a phony, no need to rub it in.

[Embar Angylwrath]

Still waitin' for your in-depth comparison and contrast....

(I think we'll all be waiting for a looooong time for that)

Well, yes. I've already proven myself a liar and a phony, no need to rub it in.

Fixed it for ya.

And we're still waiting for your in depth comparison and contrast of McCain's and Obama's policy issues.

[Partha]

OOooo

Ye olde 'I ken thee are, but what art I?'

So fracking original.

Come on, try harder. If you push it, I bet you can get past third grade stuff. Really. I have faith in you.

[Harlowe]

All playground shenanigans aside, he kind of answered you Embar it seems like you are avoiding giving an actual response. He just didn't give a indepth comparison. But you started out making claims about Obama that you aren't backing up.

So he gave you something, then you asked for more rather than respond to what he did give you. Sort of like constantly raising the bar on what an acceptable response from him would be.

[Partha]

Yep. That's how he rolls.

[Embar Angylwrath]

I don't see it that way Harlowe.

What I saw was Partha claiming he wanted to do an in-depth comparison and contrast of McCain and Obama. When I responded that I thought Obama didn't really have a well thought out policy stance on much of anything, Partha asked for what I thought of McCain's policy, regardless of what Obama had or didn't have.

Then I gave Partha three issues I thought McCain had a some depth in.

His response? A cut-and-paste from both websites (and they weren't even complete cut-and-pastes), on one issue where Obama and McCain have similar stances (he didn't really address the others), and then some tripe about me. He was never really interested in the subject matter, as he had plenty of opportunity without me even being involved to share with this board his thoughts on his "comparison and contrast" of the two candidates. I mean, I find his obsession with me flattering, but lets call this for what it is... Partha's obsession with me, not his interest in the issues he says he's interested in.

I mean, does he REALLY need me to do his "comparison and contrast" of the candidates? I may be wrong, but I think Partha can try to address the issue without me patting him on the ass and telling him what a good boy he is.

[Harlowe]

But it started out with a pretty bold generalization on your part - that Obama doesn't have a clear stand on any issues. The copy and paste seemed an appropriate response to me. Though I didn't really see any indepth side by side analysis and it all deteriorated from there, but initially it just seemed like a silly generalization about Obama. More of a Fox News sort of comment.

[Embar Angylwrath]

Well...

It was just my opinion on what Obama had flushed out on policy issues, based upon what I had gleaned from his campaign and speeches. It seemed to me Partha was more interested in telling me that my experience with Obama's campaign wasn't valid, or perhaps I should come away with a different conclusion about the depth of Obama's policy issues. And in reality, he showed he was never concerned with actually dissecting what he thought were the similarities and differences between the two candidates. He only wanted angle for a "neener neener". Again, I'm flattered by his obsession, but he really needs to take a step back and ask himself why he's so infatuated with me.

Answer me this Harlowe.. does Partha need me to explore what he thinks is the differences between the two candidate's policy issues? If he was an honest man, wouldn't he have just done his comparion and contrast without my participation?

[Arkaron]

But hey, what do I know. We don't even have political commercials in Oregon yet. Our primary actually matters about three times a century.

Yes we do, we have a shitload. You don't see them because you're not in Washington/Clackamas/Multnomah counties, where the vast majority of Oregon's population reside.

Rual Oregon's vote has never mattered and because how Clinton has campaigned here, Obama will probably win Oregon--and by at least 5 percentage points.

[Partha]

It was just my opinion on what Obama had flushed out on policy issues, based upon what I had gleaned from his campaign and speeches. It seemed to me Partha was more interested in telling me that my experience with Obama's campaign wasn't valid, or perhaps I should come away with a different conclusion about the depth of Obama's policy issues. And in reality, he showed he was never concerned with actually dissecting what he thought were the similarities and differences between the two candidates. He only wanted angle for a "neener neener". Again, I'm flattered by his obsession, but he really needs to take a step back and ask himself why he's so infatuated with me.

You know why, Embar? Because you're still lying.

You're a college educated man who knows how to do basic research. Unfortunately, you've chosen to use none of it and have simply followed a lazy stereotype without even TRYING. Then when someone says 'no, wait, you're wrong there' you simply keep arguing differently. Most of the members on this board have shown some movement in at least a few positions as we've debated on these boards or some willingness to consider data that doesn't fit their worldview - but you.

We've seen it with climate change twice in the last year. And now we're seeing it again in that 'Obama doesn't have policy'. So nice to see that Hillary's money bought one yokel's belief system. Too bad it wasn't true from the beginning. Hell, if you go to his campaign website, he has fracking PDF files on all the crap he wants to do as President. Kulaf read it; Kulaf doesn't agree with it. That makes Kulaf a googolplex more honest than you, who doesn't like it but won't admit the real reason why.

[Ddrak]

[Embar Angylwrath]

It was just my opinion on what Obama had flushed out on policy issues, based upon what I had gleaned from his campaign and speeches. It seemed to me Partha was more interested in telling me that my experience with Obama's campaign wasn't valid, or perhaps I should come away with a different conclusion about the depth of Obama's policy issues. And in reality, he showed he was never concerned with actually dissecting what he thought were the similarities and differences between the two candidates. He only wanted angle for a "neener neener". Again, I'm flattered by his obsession, but he really needs to take a step back and ask himself why he's so infatuated with me.

You know why, Embar? Because you're still lying.

You're a college educated man who knows how to do basic research. Unfortunately, you've chosen to use none of it and have simply followed a lazy stereotype without even TRYING. Then when someone says 'no, wait, you're wrong there' you simply keep arguing differently. Most of the members on this board have shown some movement in at least a few positions as we've debated on these boards or some willingness to consider data that doesn't fit their worldview - but you.

We've seen it with climate change twice in the last year. And now we're seeing it again in that 'Obama doesn't have policy'. So nice to see that Hillary's money bought one yokel's belief system. Too bad it wasn't true from the beginning. Hell, if you go to his campaign website, he has fracking PDF files on all the crap he wants to do as President. Kulaf read it; Kulaf doesn't agree with it. That makes Kulaf a googolplex more honest than you, who doesn't like it but won't admit the real reason why.

So what I'm taking from this is you weren't really interested in the issue, you were interested in trying to define me, but hiding behind some pretense that you wanted to really dissect the issues. (By the way, I'm still in the climate debate... no one has bothered to address the data that show a steady decline in atmospheric temps over the last 10 years)

So who was lying again?

[Kulaf]

You mean the graphs from the weatherman?

See this is what makes you.......you, Embar. You sit there and say we can't look at what is going on now as a determiner of anything.....then try to use a 10 year span of time as a determiner of something. Look at the overall trend of the data and you will see there are peaks and valleys but the overall trend is up. There is no denying it.

[Rsak]

Sometimes the student becomes the master.. and other times the master was hiding as the student.

For all the accusations on my behavior on this board, Embar has proven them all true with his posts in the last week.

*steps off the podium so Embar can take his rightful place*

[Embar Angylwrath]

You mean the graphs from the weatherman?

See this is what makes you.......you, Embar. You sit there and say we can't look at what is going on now as a determiner of anything.....then try to use a 10 year span of time as a determiner of something. Look at the overall trend of the data and you will see there are peaks and valleys but the overall trend is up. There is no denying it.

We should probably move this to the other thread, but yeah, those graphs.

A one or two year down turn I can see as a blip. But a decade is a significant time frame, don't you think? If you're looking at trends, you have to see the last 10 years a change in the trend. I'll go llook at the data again, but I don't recall there ever being a continula drop in temperatures for such a long period of time, nor a drop of this magnitude.

Also, don't you find it interesting the temps peaked at the smae time we had a strong El Nino, and dropped significantly in the year we had a strong La Nina? And doesn't that show that ocean currents may drive global temps much more significantly, and much more rapidly, than CO2?