President GEORGE W. BUSH Katrina Recovery Speach Best Ever

[raVeneyes]

"DEE DEE DEE"

I love how your best argument is that it "may well be valid" even though there is no evidence presented by either her or you to support that. You just made it up!

Just admit it...you don't have a leg to stand on here.

"DEE DEE DEE"

Althout the article mocks the broadcast, the entire broadcast part of the transcript is word for word, not an editorial. You're in denial. It's obvious to everyone else what happened. Oh, btw, I actually listened to the broadcast, did YOU? If you did, you would hear the incredulity and slant in Reynolds' tone.

Don't speculate. Investigate.

All I was trying to say is there's no evidence either way. And my argument wasn't that it may well be valid my argument was that if it was such an effort to make Bush look bad, then why didn't the reporter keep going when he had a good lead on it?

 

[fossten]

All I was trying to say is there's no evidence either way. And my argument wasn't that it may well be valid my argument was that if it was such an effort to make Bush look bad, then why didn't the reporter keep going when he had a good lead on it?

"DEE DEE DEE"

There you go again.

1. There IS evidence: Everyone talked to by Reynolds either praised Bush or found no fault with him.

2. He didn't have a good lead on it after 6 people in a row, so he gave up because he was out of show time. Geez. Even a ten-year-old could have figured that out.

Your posts are a waste of time and space.

 

[raVeneyes]

"DEE DEE DEE"

There you go again.

1. There IS evidence: Everyone talked to by Reynolds either praised Bush or found no fault with him.

Reynolds: “Do you think this is a little too late, or do you think he's got a handle on the situation?”

Cecilia: “To me it was a little too late. It was too late, but he should have did something more about it.”

2. He didn't have a good lead on it after 6 people in a row, so he gave up because he was out of show time. Geez. Even a ten-year-old could have figured that out.

Reynolds: “Do you think this is a little too late, or do you think he's got a handle on the situation?”

Cecilia: “To me it was a little too late. It was too late, but he should have did something more about it.”

and just in case you missed it:

Reynolds: “Do you think this is a little too late, or do you think he's got a handle on the situation?”

Cecilia: “To me it was a little too late. It was too late, but he should have did something more about it.”

Why didn't he follow up with Cecilia if this was such a Bush witch hunt???

now That is *DEE DEE DEE*

Your posts are a waste of time and space.

And that is just mean and nasty...I've never said your posts were a waste even though I disagree with them most of the time. I didn't even chime in to the other thread agreeing with people saying your posts weren't worth reading! How rude! I'm hurt! OUTRAGE! *Shakes fist*

lol

 

[JohnnyBz00LS]

*owned* seems appropriate here. :N

 

[fossten]

And that is just mean and nasty...I've never said your posts were a waste even though I disagree with them most of the time. I didn't even chime in to the other thread agreeing with people saying your posts weren't worth reading! How rude! I'm hurt! OUTRAGE! *Shakes fist*

lol

That's laughable and hypocritical. You only posted an entire thread crying about how you couldn't handle debating me and you were taking your toys and going home. Pathetic. You might as well cut the pretense. You can't debate on the merits, so you attack personally. If you can't take it then don't dish it out.

RE: fossten
When I first started posting on this board a lot was said about the fact that many liberals don't post that often. The reason why is simple. Though there are some great debaters and reasonable arguers on this board, ...[edit~snip]


I don't know if you all didn't notice, but I am giving notice now that I will not respond to that person's remarks or accusations as they refuse to discuss all the points brought up and insist on arguing a point even when it's been conceded. I hope the rest of you will forgive me.

[sniffle sniffle sob]

 

[raVeneyes]

That's laughable and hypocritical. You only posted an entire thread crying about how you couldn't handle debating me and you were taking your toys and going home. Pathetic. You might as well cut the pretense. You can't debate on the merits, so you attack personally. If you can't take it then don't dish it out.


[sniffle sniffle sob]

I'm sorry...Let me officially retract the part where I said I wouldn't respond to your posts anymore.

I still find you a pathetic debater.

 

[fossten]

I'm sorry...Let me officially retract the part where I said I wouldn't respond to your posts anymore.

I still find you a pathetic debater.

Too late - you're doing nothing but hating. There you go again calling names. Definitely discredits your apology - if it was even a real one. Sounds like veiled sarcasm to me. In any case, it makes you sound mealy-mouthed. If I'm so pathetic, why do you get so ANGRY all the time when I leave your arguments in tatters?

 

[raVeneyes]

Too late - you're doing nothing but hating. There you go again calling names. Definitely discredits your apology - if it was even a real one. Sounds like veiled sarcasm to me. In any case, it makes you sound mealy-mouthed. If I'm so pathetic, why do you get so ANGRY all the time when I leave your arguments in tatters?

Again, I'm not calling names. I'm simply stating that your debating technique is pathetic. You would have failed my high school debate class. Also, I don't get angry, and you've never left a single one of my arguments in anything that resembles tatters. I'm sure *you* are not pathetic by any means, but your debating style is horribly so and your arguments are flaccid.

As far as my apology goes, I meant it. I can recognize when I'm being childish and by saying in essence "I'm not talking to you" I was being childish. I'm retracting that part of my statement and trying to be grown up about it. I'm sorry you don't feel up to accepting.