mnealtx 0 #101 November 9, 2007 QuoteQuote YOU PRINTED NEWS I didnt. See attachment. 1. Isn't "Fox and Friends" the editorial portion of the broadcast - sort of like Olberman or O'Reilly? 2. Did Castro actually say that?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lefty 0 #102 November 9, 2007 Fox and Friends is editorial. Castro didn't say "dream team", but he speculated that a team-up between Clinton and Obama would be "invincible". The graphic is where the editorial aspect of the show comes in.Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #103 November 9, 2007 Ok...so it doesn't really rebut the claim, then.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #104 November 9, 2007 Quote Ok...so it doesn't really rebut the claim, then. "America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
idrankwhat 0 #105 November 9, 2007 QuoteQuote See attachment. 1. Isn't "Fox and Friends" the editorial portion of the broadcast - sort of like Olberman or O'Reilly? Yea, it's their morning circle jerk session. And this is helping to make my point as well. When the vast majority of the programming on FOX NEWS is "editorial" (Fox and Friends, Hannity, O'Reilly, Hume, Gibson, Cavuto....etc) news content, when do they provide just "news"? And for the record, the "Obama makes a girl cry" bit was on "America's Newsroom". Quote 2. Did Castro actually say that? No. He didn't endorse the team. This is what he said. "Today, talk is about the seemingly invincible ticket that might be created with Hillary for President and Obama for Vice President. Both of them feel the sacred duty of demanding "a democratic government in Cuba". They are not making politics: they are playing a game of cards on a Sunday afternoon. The media declares that this would be essential, unless Gore decides to run. I don't think he will do so; better than anyone, he knows about the kind of catastrophe that awaits humanity if it continues along its current course. When he was a candidate, he of course committed the error of yearning for "a democratic Cuba". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
idrankwhat 0 #106 November 9, 2007 Quote Quote Ok...so it doesn't really rebut the claim, then. That was your cue to find out for yourself what Castro said, not wait for someone to give you a reply that you like and can erroneously quote later. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #107 November 9, 2007 Quote Quote Quote Ok...so it doesn't really rebut the claim, then. That was your cue to find out for yourself what Castro said, not wait for someone to give you a reply that you like and can erroneously quote later. "America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #108 November 9, 2007 QuoteI believe they call that an affirmative defense. No, it's simply a defense of "not true." An affirmative defense is the same thing as saying, "Even if everything they say is true, I win because xxxx." For example, the statute of limitations for a breach of an oral contract is two years in California. If a plaintiff alleges a breach of an oral agreement, and the defendant proves that the breach occurred in 2004 (hence the "affirmative" part) then he wins. You are mixing terminology. Please make sure you are correct when making corrections. It increases your credibility. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #109 November 9, 2007 Ouch - *that's* gonna leave a mark!Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #110 November 9, 2007 No. It just shows again how I defend the rich and seek to leave the homeless and the children to die. Just another example of my persistent defense of Bush - the same Bush I described as taking power in a government that was already fucked up and fucking it up even more. You'd think that he'd agree with me, but that constitutes my vigorous defense of MY president. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #111 November 9, 2007 Well, you don't support every little thing that he does, so you OBVIOUSLY are a rabid Bush supporter! I think that's how the (il)logic goes, anyway - at least as practiced by some of the more, um.... enthusiastic individuals here in SC.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #112 November 10, 2007 Quote Your very signature labels people as stupid. I am sorry my sig line hits so close to homeIn any event, I am not surprised you do not understand why I use itSure, it hits home by virtue of the part about you looking in the mirror Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #113 November 10, 2007 Another worthless one-liner from you, care to address this? ------What if they honestly fuck the country into the ground, does that make then noble? Even if the Repukes never lied, they have fucked the country into the ground as of the last 2 years or so, care to debate that? (HINT: provide examples) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #114 November 10, 2007 Quote Quote Your very signature labels people as stupid. I am sorry my sig line hits so close to homeIn any event, I am not surprised you do not understand why I use it Sure, it hits home by virtue of the part about you looking in the mirror Now you are getting itI have to remind myself more often than I should need to, NOT to take myself too seriously. I do not want you, or anybody else to either. (But I doubt that is a problem for some) "America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #115 November 10, 2007 >>>>>>>>Lucky to call someone on this forum a Nazi is disingenous, callous, shitty and deserving of a slap down. If you bothered to read anything but one post at a time you would have understood that lawrocket was referring to Republicans as Nazis, I was agreeing. I didn't call, nor did Lawrocket call anyone here a Nazi. Perhaps a little help with reading and interpretation would be nice for you. Do I need to go back and post the origin of the statements, or will you concede that you fucked up again? >>>>>>>>>>>>Maybe you might want to retract that statement. Why, I agreed tha the Repuke Party has been Nazis for 3 decades. So what, not directed at any peopole here, just your loyal captain, Bush and Co. >>>>>>>>>That is one of the most vile things you could say about someone. Who did I write it to? The Repub Party? >>>>>>>>I may say it about the hildebeast, but she has really earned it, the woman believes she is the most fair minded and liberal thinking person who ever lived, so fair in fact that she can decide which of us should be able to keep our god given, constitutionally gauranteed rights. From the party that wiretaps and then tries to immunize telecom co's for helping. Perhaps tell us how she has tried to cut away at your rights? Exampls, not hysterical emotion based upon incorret facts as you posted above. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
warpedskydiver 0 #116 November 10, 2007 Obviously you have not paid any attention to anything she has said or done since 1992. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #117 November 10, 2007 Quote Quote Lucky to call someone on this forum a Nazi is disingenous, callous, sitty and deserving of a slap down Maybe you might want to retract that statement. That is one of the most vile things yuo could say about someone. I may say it about the heldebeast, but she has really earned it, the woman believes she is the most fair minded and liberal thinking person who ever lived, so fair in fact that she can decide which of us should be able to keep our god given, constitutionally gauranteed rights. I swear, your timing is perfect Yea, esp since I called the party a bunch of Nazis, not any one person. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #118 November 10, 2007 Quote Quote Quote Lucky to call someone on this forum a Nazi is disingenous, callous, sitty and deserving of a slap down Maybe you might want to retract that statement. That is one of the most vile things yuo could say about someone. I may say it about the heldebeast, but she has really earned it, the woman believes she is the most fair minded and liberal thinking person who ever lived, so fair in fact that she can decide which of us should be able to keep our god given, constitutionally gauranteed rights. I swear, your timing is perfect Yea, esp since I called the party a bunch of Nazis, not any one person. Fun to watch"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #119 November 10, 2007 QuoteQuoteI believe they call that an affirmative defense. No, it's simply a defense of "not true." An affirmative defense is the same thing as saying, "Even if everything they say is true, I win because xxxx." For example, the statute of limitations for a breach of an oral contract is two years in California. If a plaintiff alleges a breach of an oral agreement, and the defendant proves that the breach occurred in 2004 (hence the "affirmative" part) then he wins. You are mixing terminology. Please make sure you are correct when making corrections. It increases your credibility. Hardly, an Affirmative Defense is simply a defense where the defendant bears the burden of proof, that 's how I was using it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #120 November 10, 2007 QuoteOuch - *that's* gonna leave a mark! Take off your cheerleading uniform, his point is invalid. Read how I used Affirmative Defense, then put your cheerleading uniform back on as if you understand a thing about the law. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #121 November 10, 2007 Quote Quote Ouch - *that's* gonna leave a mark! Take off your cheerleading uniform, his point is invalid. Read how I used Affirmative Defense, then put your cheerleading uniform back on as if you understand a thing about the law. More More fun"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #122 November 10, 2007 >>>>>>>>No. It just shows again how I defend the rich and seek to leave the homeless and the children to die. Well, you do disavow any tax increases to help poor people, yes? You can't do that and still pretend to be compassionate. Oh, I get it, you want low taxes so when those impoverished and homeless become millionaires their tax code will be set to help them, I see. >>>>>>>>>>Just another example of my persistent defense of Bush - the same Bush I described as taking power in a government that was already fucked up and fucking it up even more. Forget Bush, you defend most things Republican.....proof / pudding. >>>>>>>>>>You'd think that he'd agree with me, but that constitutes my vigorous defense of MY president. Doesn't matter if I agree or not, all I read is about those GD taxes and employers looking for a free ride. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #123 November 10, 2007 QuoteWell, you don't support every little thing that he does, so you OBVIOUSLY are a rabid Bush supporter! I think that's how the (il)logic goes, anyway - at least as practiced by some of the more, um.... enthusiastic individuals here in SC. Actually that statement disagreeswith his, he said he merely analyzed my assertions, not supported his own. To be a good cheerleader you must follow the thread more closely. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #124 November 10, 2007 Quote Obviously you have not paid any attention to anything she has said or done since 1992. I'm still waiting, just waiting to read your supporting assertions. I asked you to provide examples and I get this? WTF, post em with explanations as to why she is so bad. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
warpedskydiver 0 #125 November 10, 2007 Go worship your new master. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites