Presidential debate - October 7th

Funkmasterr · Post by **Funkmasterr** » October 8, 2008, 12:00 pm

Jice Virago wrote:
Nick wrote:
Still, I want to know why people feel the need to defend Obama when he is obviously being arrogant
Because, back in reality, he isn't?
Arrogant in this case is Neocon code for "uppity".

Cut the bullshit, I've made a solid, clear case for what I'm saying. Prove me wrong or shut the fuck up.

Aslanna · Post by **Aslanna** » October 8, 2008, 12:09 pm

Once again Funk is right and everyone else here is wrong. Whoa who didn't see that coming?

miir · Post by **miir** » October 8, 2008, 12:10 pm

CASE CLOSED!!

Funkmasterr · Post by **Funkmasterr** » October 8, 2008, 12:14 pm

Aslanna wrote:Once again Funk is right and everyone else here is wrong. Whoa who didn't see that coming?

It's just not a matter of opinion. Did you watch the debate? He spoke after he had his turn, was reminded he agreed not to do so, and said something to the effect of "I know but I think this is important". NOBODY CARES, FOLLOW THE TERMS YOU AGREED TO.

Seriously, it's amazing the shit you fucking ignorant tools will argue just because you don't like someone. Fucking grow up.

Fash · Post by **Fash** » October 8, 2008, 12:14 pm

I saw it coming a mile away, because he IS right... I'd probably choose 'IGNORANT' instead of 'ARROGANT' but they're both valid terms for someone who agreed to the rules and then blatantly abused the shit out of them.

Aslanna, have you ever stepped back to realize that you contribute absolutely nothing to this forum, while at the same time criticizing others for their contributions or lack thereof?

--

Both candidates suck, but at least McCain is an old white man who spent many years serving his country honorably.

Xatrei · Post by **Xatrei** » October 8, 2008, 12:15 pm

Funkmasterr wrote:By the way, I'm still waiting for someone to show me where McCain was trying to talk out of turn (again, before he called Obama on it for doing it half a dozen times or more).

Why don't the rules apply to him? Why is he so important? Is this some kind of reparation that he gets?

Funkmasterr wrote:Ok, rules were made, one of them was that they each got 1 minute to speak, then on to the next question. He continuously started talking again after him and McCain both had their minute (and probably more) to talk, even though it was spelled out to him clearly and he was reminded multiple times that he wasn't supposed to do that.

Funkmasterr wrote:Cut the bullshit, I've made a solid, clear case for what I'm saying. Prove me wrong or shut the fuck up.

I've watched the debate a couple of times now, and I made some notes the second time. I defy you to back up your claims. Obama never interrupted McCain while he was speaking. McCain did interrupt both Brokaw and Obama a couple of times to interject, however. Obama never picked up a topic to continue it after his allotted time (and then some, but that's an issue both candidates were very guilty of). He did, however, ask on TWO occasions (not the half dozen times you claim) if he could respond to blatantly false accusations leveled by McCain when McCain had the final answer segment for the question at hand.

The first time occurred after McCain made an obnoxious and demonstrably false claim about Obama's tax plan near the the end of the 4th question and nearly 25 minutes into the debate. Obama asked simply to respond to the lies. Brokaw said the next question will address the matter of taxes, and they moved on with no response from Obama. The second occurrence came midway through the 9th question, roughly 70 minutes into the debate after McCain grossly misrepresented Obama's position on taking military action inside of Pakistan's borders. Obama asked to respond directly to the lie, and McCain, Obama and Brokaw all agreed to allow a response (read that last part again).

Other than these two cases where Obama asked for an opportunity to set the record straight following McCain's lies and distortions, Obama never deviated from the agreed upon format of the town hall meeting. When denied the first time, he did not press the issue and deferred to the moderator. The second time, all parties involved agreed to allow a response, so I don't see how this is a particularly big deal. Overall, I think the format of this meeting was flawed, and it didn't allow enough time to adequately respond to issues raised, and it didn't allow for the moderator or the opposing candidate to sufficiently respond to bullshit when it arose.

Funkmasterr · Post by **Funkmasterr** » October 8, 2008, 12:18 pm

Xatrei wrote:
Funkmasterr wrote:By the way, I'm still waiting for someone to show me where McCain was trying to talk out of turn (again, before he called Obama on it for doing it half a dozen times or more).

Why don't the rules apply to him? Why is he so important? Is this some kind of reparation that he gets?

Funkmasterr wrote:Ok, rules were made, one of them was that they each got 1 minute to speak, then on to the next question. He continuously started talking again after him and McCain both had their minute (and probably more) to talk, even though it was spelled out to him clearly and he was reminded multiple times that he wasn't supposed to do that.
I've watched the debate a couple of times now, and I made some notes the second time. I defy you to back up your claims. Obama never interrupted McCain while he was speaking. McCain did interrupt both Brokaw and Obama a couple of times to interject, however. Obama never picked up a topic to continue it after his allotted time (and then some, but that's an issue both candidates were very guilty of). He did, however, ask on TWO occasions (not the half dozen times you claim) if he could respond to blatantly false accusations leveled by McCain when McCain had the final answer segment for the question at hand.

The first time McCain made an obnoxious and demonstrably false claim about Obama's tax plan, and at the end of the 4th question and nearly 25 minutes into the debate, Obama asked simply to respond to the lies. Brokaw said the next question will address the matter of taxes, and they moved on with no response from Obama. The second occurrence came midway through the 9th question, roughly 70 minutes into the debate after McCain grossly misrepresented Obama's position on taking military action inside of Pakistan's borders. Obama asked to respond directly to the lie, and McCain, Obama and Brokaw all agreed to allow a response (read that last part again).

Other than these two cases where Obama asked for an opportunity to set the record straight following McCain's lies and distortions, Obama never deviated from the agreed upon format of the town hall meeting. When denied the first time, he did not press the issue and deferred to the moderator. The second time, all parties involved agreed to allow a response, so I don't see how this is a particularly big deal. Overall, I think the format of this meeting was flawed, and it didn't allow enough time to adequately respond to issues raised, and it didn't allow for the moderator or the opposing candidate to sufficiently respond to bullshit when it arose.

I never said he did.

Then you go on to admit what I said was right. There are no excuses needed. I don't care how mad he was or how false he thought claims McCain made were. He agreed to NOT do that. He was then REMINDED he agreed not to do that and did a second time anyhow.

Again, no excuses. It's a shining example of his attitude and what we can expect him to act like when he no longer has to impress us.

cadalano · Post by **cadalano** » October 8, 2008, 12:19 pm

It's just not a matter of opinion. Did you watch the debate? He spoke after he had his turn, was reminded he agreed not to do so, and said something to the effect of "I know but I think this is important". NOBODY CARES, FOLLOW THE TERMS YOU AGREED TO.

Seriously, it's amazing the shit you fucking ignorant tools will argue just because you don't like someone. Fucking grow up.

Xatrei · Post by **Xatrei** » October 8, 2008, 12:19 pm

He was never reminded specifically not to do that. Both candidates were admonished a few times regarding the rules of the debate, specifically time limits. Again, you're spewing bullshit and changing your position constantly to avoid taking responsibility for your own horseshit lies. Just shut the fuck up already and admit that you're wrong.

Nick · Post by **Nick** » October 8, 2008, 12:32 pm

What Funk doesn't want to admit is that both candidates were doing it. And also, that no one overly gives a shit except him.

Then he cries like a child when no one takes him seriously.

What's new?

Spang · Post by **Spang** » October 8, 2008, 12:33 pm

Funkmasterr is right. I have now shifted my support to Flavor Flav.

Funkmasterr · Post by **Funkmasterr** » October 8, 2008, 12:34 pm

Xatrei wrote:He was never reminded specifically not to do that. Both candidates were admonished a few times regarding the rules of the debate, specifically time limits. Again, you're spewing bullshit and changing your position constantly to avoid taking responsibility for your own horseshit lies. Just shut the fuck up already and admit that you're wrong.

I haven't changed my mind or what I'm saying at all. The entire time I have been talking about him talking out of turn (which you've now admitted he did.) If you misunderstood me, that's your problem, not mine, but I've been talking about the same goddamn thing for two pages now.

I'm watching the debate again as much as I can right now so I can point out to you where he was reminded.

You people fucking amaze me, seriously.

Funkmasterr · Post by **Funkmasterr** » October 8, 2008, 12:35 pm

Nick wrote:What Funk doesn't want to admit is that both candidates were doing it. And also, that no one overly gives a shit except him.

Then he cries like a child when no one takes him seriously.

What's new?

You show me where McCain spoke out of turn BEFORE Obama had done it twice and he got fed up and finally said something.

If you can't prove me wrong, again, SHUT THE FUCK UP.

Spang · Post by **Spang** » October 8, 2008, 12:35 pm

You're right! You win! Now shut the fuck up!

Nick · Post by **Nick** » October 8, 2008, 12:37 pm

Funk wants to deal with the debate with a hatchet when a scalpel is needed.

laneela · Post by **laneela** » October 8, 2008, 12:40 pm

Funk - in layman's terms:

Obama did not follow the rules that they had previously agreed to - though the rule broken is not the one you're referring to.

McCain did not follow the rules either.

If you're going to call Obama arrogant for rule-breaking, then McCain would also have to fall into that category.

What I don't get is this: with so many *real reasons* to like or dislike either candidate, why do people have to make shit up?

Funkmasterr · Post by **Funkmasterr** » October 8, 2008, 12:44 pm

laneela wrote:Funk - in layman's terms:

Obama did not follow the rules that they had previously agreed to - though the rule broken is not the one you're referring to.

McCain did not follow the rules either.

If you're going to call Obama arrogant for rule-breaking, then McCain would also have to fall into that category.

What I don't get is this: with so many *real reasons* to like or dislike either candidate, why do people have to make shit up?

Them both going over their allotted time to finish the point they are making doesn't bother me. What does bother me is that Obama obviously thinks he is important enough to get a chance to respond (which then makes it unfair). It is a display of character to me, and I don't like that character.

There are plenty of other reasons I don't like him, and there are plenty of reasons why I don't like McCain much either, but this happened during the debate, which is what this thread that I started is about.

Chidoro · Post by **Chidoro** » October 8, 2008, 12:54 pm

I am going to stick to the content of the debate and my opinion of it. I could care less about the time issues as they both were constantly running over. And it's hard to not address a point when McCain flat out lies.

Regarding the economy, McCain really lost that. Never really had a chance to since he is more closely realted to the shitstorm. He tried. He marched around the stands in odd ways and reiterated trickle down solutions. He also never explains where all of his bailout spending monies are coming from, can't address why the spending and deficit is ridiculously important, and keeps repeating a lie about the 94 tax increase item that has already been bashed apart. He lied about the 50% of small businesses that would be taxed more. Obama's plan makes more sense to me, he was able to state that spending would be less than taxes even though most people would be taxed less.

Healthcare was a slam dunk for Obama. People would still have their choice but assist those w/out. He crushed him on the issue of state shopping and what the consequenses of that would be.

I guess McCain doesn't seem to give a shit about education. Why would he, I assume a lot of the people voting for him are the dumb uneducated rubes that are easy to manipulate. Why bother trying to make them smarter.

McCain's energy policy is antiquated. His statement of putting nuclear plants everywhere is ridiculous and the notion that drilling all over the place would be able to even come close to catching up to our 4% world production, 25% world usage. He never really addressed pollution, barely mentioned new tech which could then be sold to overseas nations pumping out way more pollution than us.

McCain really came off as "more of the same" regarding foreign policy. Fuck the EU, fuck diplomacy and Iraq was a good idea because after a war longer than vietman and costing a ton of money, there's progress. Saying that we would have lost if we listened to Obama was ridiculous because if we listened to him, we wouldn't have been in iraq, we'd have had a much larger force targetted at the place where the real terrorists came from. And to even suggest that going after bin laden behind pakistan borders would be like we're attacking pakistan would just a stupid and ridiculous comment.

I used to have more respect for McCain. It stinks that I'm not in a swing state to make more of a difference but at least I don't get pounded by attack ads which blatantly lie.

Post by **Sylvus** » October 8, 2008, 12:58 pm

Funkmasterr wrote:It's just not a matter of opinion. Did you watch the debate? He spoke after he had his turn, was reminded he agreed not to do so, and said something to the effect of "I know but I think this is important". NOBODY CARES, FOLLOW THE TERMS YOU AGREED TO.

He sounds like a bit of a maverick to me!

Nick · Post by **Nick** » October 8, 2008, 1:08 pm

oh snap!

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » October 8, 2008, 1:18 pm

Funk:

So Obama twice asked if he could speak out of turn. Once he was told "no" and he then dropped the issue, and the other time he was told "yes" by Brokaw and McCain and he did.

This is what you've gone on your crusade in this thread about? This is the subject most worthy of your attention from the entirety of the debate?

Holy shit.

Fash · Post by **Fash** » October 8, 2008, 1:22 pm

Sueven wrote:Funk:

So Obama twice asked if he could speak out of turn. Once he was told "no" and he then dropped the issue, and the other time he was told "yes" by Brokaw and McCain and he did.

This is what you've gone on your crusade in this thread about? This is the subject most worthy of your attention from the entirety of the debate?

Holy shit.

Pretty funny how impossible it is to get a simple point acknowledged around here, isn't it? It turned into 2 pages because no matter what he says, xatrei/nick/etc will go to the ends of the earth to argue against it.

Pretty soon, this place is going to be lame as hell.

Aslanna · Post by **Aslanna** » October 8, 2008, 1:34 pm

Fash wrote:Aslanna, have you ever stepped back to realize that you contribute absolutely nothing to this forum, while at the same time criticizing others for their contributions or lack thereof?

I'll give you the same hint I gave Funk: I don't give a fuck what you think. While the retard brigade (this includes you) is still around what you see is what you get. Don't like it? Too bad. Use ignore you emo crybaby.

Canelek · Post by **Canelek** » October 8, 2008, 1:48 pm

Jice Virago wrote:
Nick wrote:
Still, I want to know why people feel the need to defend Obama when he is obviously being arrogant
Because, back in reality, he isn't?
Arrogant in this case is Neocon code for "uppity".

Dang Jice, was wondering where you been at!

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » October 8, 2008, 4:59 pm

Fash wrote:
Sueven wrote:Funk:

So Obama twice asked if he could speak out of turn. Once he was told "no" and he then dropped the issue, and the other time he was told "yes" by Brokaw and McCain and he did.

This is what you've gone on your crusade in this thread about? This is the subject most worthy of your attention from the entirety of the debate?

Holy shit.
Pretty funny how impossible it is to get a simple point acknowledged around here, isn't it? It turned into 2 pages because no matter what he says, xatrei/nick/etc will go to the ends of the earth to argue against it.

Pretty soon, this place is going to be lame as hell.

The raging liberals outnumber moderates and conservative on here by about 10 to 1.....so any kind of "discussion" on politics is an exercise in futility if you are not in that majority.

miir · Post by **miir** » October 8, 2008, 5:01 pm

Your definition of raging liberals is probably a lot closer to moderate than you realize.

cid · Post by **cid** » October 8, 2008, 6:26 pm

So whats the fine?

Gzette · Post by **Gzette** » October 8, 2008, 6:27 pm

this thread made me even more glad i did not watch the debates.

For the two minutes that I did see I noticed the CNN instant punditry barometers. That really disappointed me. I don't understand how that is relevant at all. It's as if I feel a candidate is doing well I need my feelings to be justified by they're stupid scorecards. And the undecided voters thing was just as stupid. I found myself paying more attention to the slope of the reaction lines instead of the content of the actual answers. Vastly disappointed, I walked out of the room.

As far as Funk's whole wacky spiel goes ... no one gives a shit. I think the problem is no one had any idea what you were talking about because it was something so small that you blew so far out of proportion it left a lot of people saying "WTF?" It appears the best attack you can muster on Obama's performance is 0% content based.

Xatrei · Post by **Xatrei** » October 8, 2008, 7:03 pm

cid wrote:So whats the fine?

Nonexistent.

Chmee · Post by **Chmee** » October 8, 2008, 9:00 pm

Sueven wrote:I don't know who they voted for, but I know that Chmee is a strong libertarian type, and while I could be wrong I believe Aab and Canoe lean in that direction also (correct me if I'm wrong, guys).

You are right about me, I am a libertarian (philosophically, not a member of the formal party). Last time around I didn't vote for anybody. I wasn't going to vote for Kerry or Bush, and the Libertarians nominated Badnarik who was kind of a kook and I saw no reason to encourage that so I didn't vote.

No surprise that libertarian-leaning folks are turned off by Barack Obama and a national-greatness style Republican.

Pretty much. I might vote for Barr (I need to read up a bit more on him). Or I will sit it out again.

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » October 8, 2008, 9:40 pm

miir wrote:Your definition of raging liberals is probably a lot closer to moderate than you realize.

Oh I do not think so. We have an admitted Marxist sa my benchmark for the obscenely retardo liberal....and going from there I place my marker with Xyun being just left of moderate and quite frankly I am about the same to the right of moderate as he is left. Of course with most people on this board being foreign, young, drug using, or gay, it should not be a shock to have such a large discrepancy. Gratz Miir on hitting 3 out of 4!

Xyun · Post by **Xyun** » October 8, 2008, 10:43 pm

My left nut is moderately larger than my right one. Or is that a lump?

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » October 8, 2008, 11:49 pm

Kilmoll wrote:Of course with most people on this board being foreign, young, drug using, or gay

Name one gay person who still posts here. I can think of three, none of whom have been active in a long time. This is one of the whitest, straightest, most male discussion spaces you will find.

Fairweather Pure · Post by **Fairweather Pure** » October 9, 2008, 12:04 am

Sueven wrote:Name one gay person who still posts here.

Sueven.

Leonaerd · Post by **Leonaerd** » October 9, 2008, 12:17 am

It's nice to see teh VV hasn't changed a bit.

For both parties, the debate was an exercise in avoidance and hammering talking points. What interests me is McCain's condescending "that guy" references to Obama, spoken with pointed finger, and Obama's willingness to stoop to the level of McCain's admittedly aggressive attacks. Obama had won some points for not returning fire throughout the campaign. Perhaps his new aggression is a defensive response. Is he scared that his supporters are wavering? He's been doing so much better than McCain that I can't imagine this is the case. As for McCain... what a delusional, pasty fuck. It would cement my hatred for bipartisan politics if the shitstorm that this election will be somehow lands him in the white house.

I want Obama to win, but I won't vote in an election until I feel the candidate I'd be choosing has the peoples' best interest in mind.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » October 9, 2008, 12:47 am

Sueven wrote:
Kilmoll wrote:Of course with most people on this board being foreign, young, drug using, or gay
Name one gay person who still posts here. I can think of three, none of whom have been active in a long time. This is one of the whitest, straightest, most male discussion spaces you will find.

Please let this devolve into a discussion about bi and lesbian women on this board!

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » October 9, 2008, 12:48 am

Fairweather wrote:Sueven.

Wanna fuck?

Fairweather Pure · Post by **Fairweather Pure** » October 9, 2008, 12:52 am

Sueven wrote:
Fairweather wrote:Sueven.
Wanna fuck?

What would make you think I am a homosexual? Do I look like a Republican Senator to you?

Bagar- · Post by **Bagar-** » October 9, 2008, 4:37 am

Funkmasterr wrote:
laneela wrote:Funk - in layman's terms:

Obama did not follow the rules that they had previously agreed to - though the rule broken is not the one you're referring to.

McCain did not follow the rules either.

If you're going to call Obama arrogant for rule-breaking, then McCain would also have to fall into that category.

What I don't get is this: with so many *real reasons* to like or dislike either candidate, why do people have to make shit up?
Them both going over their allotted time to finish the point they are making doesn't bother me. What does bother me is that Obama obviously thinks he is important enough to get a chance to respond (which then makes it unfair). It is a display of character to me, and I don't like that character.

There are plenty of other reasons I don't like him, and there are plenty of reasons why I don't like McCain much either, but this happened during the debate, which is what this thread that I started is about.

You're such an angry little child.

Do you think it's cool? Entertaining? Macho? Do you picture yourself like Rocky, playing The Eye of the Tiger in your head before every post? Is it really that serious, that intense, and that important?

Because in reality, you're spazzing out on an internet forum about something totally miniscule and irrelevant, on a topic in which your opinion is so unimaginably irrelevant, that to look at you whine and cry almost makes me pity you. How vacant your life must be, to get so worked up over something so utterly stupid and pointless. To have so much hatred and so much angst for random people that you don't even know because their ideals don't match your own. So much hatred and disdain, it's really pathetic.

You know, I don't agree with Fash on most topics, but i'm pretty sure we could have a beer and a civil conversation if we ever met. Coversely, I (used to) loathe Xatrei, but I agree with him fully on nearly every point he makes here. You, on the other hand, are a frothing, overzealous lunatic, and either this is a big act to get attention, or you've completely lost touch with reality.

You should seek help, Funk. You're a truly pathetic and sad person, if I can even call you that.

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » October 9, 2008, 8:53 am

Fairweather wrote:What would make you think I am a homosexual?

Your icon is Link putting cock in his mouth.

Aabidano · Post by **Aabidano** » October 9, 2008, 9:18 am

Sueven wrote:I don't know who they voted for, but I know that Chmee is a strong libertarian type, and while I could be wrong I believe Aab and Canoe lean in that direction also (correct me if I'm wrong, guys).

No surprise that libertarian-leaning folks are turned off by Barack Obama and a national-greatness style Republican.

Pretty much.

I'm registered republican and generally vote that way, mainly due to no better choices being available. I'd have loved being given an alternative to Bush in the last election for instance. Or McCain in this one. Not voting isn't a solution. If the legislative branch wasn't controlled by democrats I'd have no problem at all voting against McCain though I'd feel dirty afterwards.

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » October 9, 2008, 2:03 pm

If Obama ends up winning we are looking at the Carter administration all over again. Do we have a Reagan waiting this time to fix that mess?

Xatrei · Post by **Xatrei** » October 9, 2008, 2:32 pm

Here's a nifty example of actual arrogance

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and- ... issed-off/

Xyun · Post by **Xyun** » October 9, 2008, 7:55 pm

Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:If Obama ends up winning we are looking at the Carter administration all over again. Do we have a Reagan waiting this time to fix that mess?

Really dude? Obama = Carter?

Obama is the Reagan that fixed that shit. Bush is Carter.

Xyun · Post by **Xyun** » October 9, 2008, 7:56 pm

After re-reading my last post, I would like to profusely apologize to president Carter.

Xatrei · Post by **Xatrei** » October 9, 2008, 10:24 pm

You should be apologizing to Obama for drawing a comparison between him and that criminally evil pile of senile shit!

Aslanna · Post by **Aslanna** » October 9, 2008, 11:20 pm

Kilmoll played the Carter Card. The Red team is getting desperate.

Xyun · Post by **Xyun** » October 9, 2008, 11:23 pm

Xatrei wrote:You should be apologizing to Obama for drawing a comparison between him and that criminally evil pile of senile shit!

Reagan had some shitty policies but I wouldn't call him evil. Bush is too fucking ignorant to be evil even if he wanted to. I reserve the evil label for fundamentalists and neocons.

Xatrei · Post by **Xatrei** » October 9, 2008, 11:25 pm

Xyun wrote:Reagan had some shitty policies but I wouldn't call him evil. Bush is too fucking ignorant to be evil even if he wanted to. I reserve the evil label for fundamentalists and neocons.

The ghosts of many thousands of Central and South Americans would beg to differ.

Nick · Post by **Nick** » October 9, 2008, 11:27 pm

It's fundamentally obvious to anyone with a brain that both Reagan and Bush are evil cunts by even the basic standards of morality.