More problems with Kerry's military record?Follow

What's amusing (and typical for Smash) is that he'll take the time to link to a dictionary in a meaningless argument over the semantic use of a single word, but can't seem to come up with a single counter argument for anything I've said.

Yup. Fall back on nitpicking the words people use while ignoring what they're actually saying. Normal Smash tactic when he realizes he's getting his butt handed to him.

And hey! How's those 1000 papers written by PhDs that support your whole Gaddafi theory coming Smash? Made any progress yet?

Gbaji:
Yup. Fall back on nitpicking the words people use while ignoring what they're actually saying. Normal Smash tactic when he realizes he's getting his butt handed to him.


Gbaji previously:
No. Fabricated means completely made up Smash. Whole cloth. Social Security exists. Every analisis I've seen has come to the same conclusion: If nothing is done to change the program, it will run out of money sometime between the next 9 to 15 years.

No fabrication Smash. Just my opinions and assessments. I find it amusing that you are so uncomfortable with any honest criticism of your party and your candidate. I would think someone so sure of his ideals and position would welcome honest debate instead of avoiding it by just declaring the other guys arguments to all be "fabrications".


Yes, I see your point. If someone argues over the meaning of a single word it's pretty clear they've lost the argument.

Clearer still when it's pointed out their semantic arguemnt over a single word isn't even accurate.

Poor *******. It's like watching a boxer punch himself in the balls for me, I take no joy in it when you make it this pathetically easy.

Face it. You tried the dictionary gambit and got your butt handed to you *again*. How about you stick to the actual issues?


I didn't make any such gambit.

You did.

Go back and have a look.

[/b]
Yup. Standard Smasharoo tactic. Sidetrack the discussion when he's losing.
[/b]

Huh? Loosing what? I allready gave you examples of how you fabricated things.

What are you actually arguing about? I'm lost.

Are you saying that you didn't fabricate things for effect, and that you think that Kerry is, for example, in favor of the Patriot Act?

I know you have to preform some sort of bizarre rationalization to vote against the guy who supports your position on most every issue, but I fail to see how that evolves in your fantasy world to me arguing with you about it.

Let me know which of the fabrications you consider to be accurate, I guess, and I'll just point how Kerry stating his position in simple unequivocal terms.

Whenever you're ready.

Actually to avoid your whole ad hominym dance of "Oh sure you couldn't point out any fabrications!!" Here you go:


Like the Patriot Act. Vote Kerry. He voted for it and is in favor of it as well


Kerry isn't in favor of it. The opposite is true. The statement that he's in favor of it is completely inaccurate.


Like a candidate who belives religion is important to geverning? Vote Bush.

Like a candidate who believes the same thing, but will only say that on even years? Vote Kerry.


Kerry has said the exact opposite, most recently in his nomination acceptance speech. This one isn't only fabricated, but patently rediculous.

QED me. End of whatever it is you thought we were "arguing" about. I win, you fabricated things, as well as just randomly attributing postions to Kerry for no apparent reason.

Game over.