• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

O'Donnell wins Delaware

Hold on a second Zyph....It was Winston that posted the hit site with no trackable or verifiable way of seeing who is behind the attack, and posted it as gospel right?

j-mac

With what I was talking about, people giving the Democrats with tax issues a pass or making excuses for them or saying it sa non-issue, Winston would not be one of those people. He was doing similar things to what he's doing now, so he wasn't the type I was speaking to in the statement you quoted
 
Good luck. She'll be lucky to get the 35% that voted for her the first time around.

Well, you clearly and skillfully countered my points with amazing facts, undefeatable logical statements, and an obviously informed and backed up opinion as to why my statements were wrong.

:roll:
 
With what I was talking about, people giving the Democrats with tax issues a pass or making excuses for them or saying it sa non-issue, Winston would not be one of those people. He was doing similar things to what he's doing now, so he wasn't the type I was speaking to in the statement you quoted


Oh ok....No problem...But on this particular issue I would like to see a non bias run down of the match up. So far winston is not providing that, he is relying on skewed information. One claim has already been debunked.


j-mac
 
No one is pushing Marxist policy, and that is where your logic falls flat.

Actually Coons was, 10 to 15 years ago. You know, which was roughly the last time there was any evidence of O'Donnell pushing teaching genesis in schools or that kids should be taught not to masturbate.

However, I can't find many clear positions from O'Donell other than simplist ones like defunding health care refrom and not having any tax dollars go to the UN.

Hey, 2 for 2.

My god, I see why you must think she's a lunatic. She's for fiscal responsability and small government. SHE'S CRAZY!

However, she does seem to be a creationist

Oh God! She has personal views! The HORRORS! I'm sure if someone said "They do seem to be a Muslim" you've perfectly fine with that being used as a reason to suggest they shouldn't be elected.

and we do get a sense about her feeling on welfare and drugs.

Yes, and obviously crazy from that little bit of a sense. Doesn't like spending huge amounts of money on never ending welfare when we're trillions in debt and thinks drugs are bad. INSANE! SHE'S A PSYCHO!
 
Oh ok....No problem...But on this particular issue I would like to see a non bias run down of the match up. So far winston is not providing that, he is relying on skewed information. One claim has already been debunked.


j-mac

I haven't seen it any claim debunked in the links I posted. If I missed that post please point it out.
 
I haven't seen it any claim debunked in the links I posted. If I missed that post please point it out.


It was the one that was talking about her tax problem with the IRS for some $11K....It was pointed out to be an error, and already removed from IRS scrutiny....But no surprise your unattributable hit site goes on with the attack as if that doesn't matter.


See ya Friday.

j-mac
 
It was the one that was talking about her tax problem with the IRS for some $11K....It was pointed out to be an error, and already removed from IRS scrutiny....But no surprise your unattributable hit site goes on with the attack as if that doesn't matter.


See ya Friday.

j-mac


I'm supposed to take your word as gospel? Please link it.
 
Not that it matters...but isnt Obama a creationist too???
 
Actually Coons was, 10 to 15 years ago. You know, which was roughly the last time there was any evidence of O'Donnell pushing teaching genesis in schools or that kids should be taught not to masturbate.



Hey, 2 for 2.

My god, I see why you must think she's a lunatic. She's for fiscal responsability and small government. SHE'S CRAZY!



Oh God! She has personal views! The HORRORS! I'm sure if someone said "They do seem to be a Muslim" you've perfectly fine with that being used as a reason to suggest they shouldn't be elected.



Yes, and obviously crazy from that little bit of a sense. Doesn't like spending huge amounts of money on never ending welfare when we're trillions in debt and thinks drugs are bad. INSANE! SHE'S A PSYCHO!

Yes, personal views that are a bit on the wacky side matter. They do. Sorry. And while I accept some of what we have is a few years old, it is all we have. She has been silent on them recently. Do you think that is because she's changed her views, are instructed to stay silent.

And having those actual views a while ago is different than demonstrated misrepresentation of views, such as your Marxist nonsense, or where a candidate clearly states a change, that we can follow and demonstrate. Silence, leaves it open.
 
It was the one that was talking about her tax problem with the IRS for some $11K....It was pointed out to be an error, and already removed from IRS scrutiny....But no surprise your unattributable hit site goes on with the attack as if that doesn't matter.

See ya Friday.

j-mac

I believe he wanted some kind of link or proof. No offense but you just stating it as a decry isn't going to "Debunk" something with someone you have zero credibility with.
 
I believe he wanted some kind of link or proof. No offense but you just stating it as a decry isn't going to "Debunk" something with someone you have zero credibility with.

Oh he some cred with me. It is just I have not found anything to contradict what I have linked to so far and I've been looking.
 
Im sure her quotes from 1996 on sexuality were extreme. Sounds a lit like Jimmy Carters Playboy interview. What a total nutbag. Yes...it sounds extreme and puritanical. What was she in 1996...20? 22? What was Obama in 1996? 30 and a crack fiend? Good stuff there baby. Gooooood stuff.
Who is her opponent? What are her current political beliefs? What are her opponents current political beliefs?
 
Im sure her quotes from 1996 on sexuality were extreme. Sounds a lit like Jimmy Carters Playboy interview. What a total nutbag. Yes...it sounds extreme and puritanical. What was she in 1996...20? 22? What was Obama in 1996? 30 and a crack fiend? Good stuff there baby. Gooooood stuff.
Who is her opponent? What are her current political beliefs? What are her opponents current political beliefs?

If you link her current bliefs, I was stuck by how many she doesn't have a position on yet. Not only that, I found it odd that she wants government funding of education. Now that's a conservative view if ever I saw one.

But, again, 96 is what we have, with no evidence of change at all. None. Do you advocate assuming change, or proving evidence of change?
 
Not that it matters...but isnt Obama a creationist too???

Not that it matters much, but no, not in the same way. It recognizes evolution for what it. O'Donell doesn't. She's on fringe "jsut a theory" side that completely misses what scientific theory actually is. It is not her belief in God that is problematic, but her more radical over the top dismissing of logical conclsions based on sound science.
 
Not that it matters much, but no, not in the same way. It recognizes evolution for what it. O'Donell doesn't. She's on fringe "jsut a theory" side that completely misses what scientific theory actually is. It is not her belief in God that is problematic, but her more radical over the top dismissing of logical conclsions based on sound science.

I'm not disputing you, but I would love to see quotes from her that led you to believe this.

Got any ?
 
Moderator's Warning:
This is not a "measuring" contest to see which side is worse... or better. Stick to the topic.
 
fiscalini-purple-moon.jpg
 
I'm not disputing you, but I would love to see quotes from her that led you to believe this.

Got any ?

Sure:

Not only was O'Donnell in favor of teaching creationism alongside evolution, but she wasn't even sure evolution was real. According to a transcript, via Nexis:

CHRISTINE O'DONNELL, Concerned Women for America: Well, as the senator from Tennessee mentioned, evolution is a theory and it's exactly that. There is not enough evidence, consistent evidence to make it as fact, and I say that because for theory to become a fact, it needs to consistently have the same results after it goes through a series of tests. The tests that they put — that they use to support evolution do not have consistent results. Now too many people are blindly accepting evolution as fact. But when you get down to the hard evidence, it's merely a theory. But creation —

Whoops. Technically, evolution is a theory in the scientific-nomenclature sense, but it's so widely accepted by every legitimate scientist in the world that it is considered fact.

(snip)

CHRISTINE O'DONNELL: Now, he said that it's based on fact. I just want to point out a couple things. First of all, they use carbon dating, as an example, to prove that something was millions of years old. Well, we have the eruption of Mt. Saint Helens and the carbon dating test that they used then would have to then prove that these were hundreds of millions of years younger, when what happened was they had the exact same results on the fossils and canyons that they did the tests on that were supposedly 100 millions of years old. And it's the kind of inconsistent tests like this that they're basing their 'facts' on.

We Googled this and apparently it refers to some tests run by a guy at the Institute for Creation Research. Definitely the kind of stuff on which you want to pin your refutation of evolution. Well, at least O'Donnell didn't claim that there is just as much or more evidence for creationism as there is for evolution, right?

CHRISTINE O'DONNELL: Well, creationism, in essence, is believing that the world began as the Bible in Genesis says, that God created the Earth in six days, six 24-hour periods. And there is just as much, if not more, evidence supporting that.

GOP’s Delaware Senate Nominee Christine O'Donnell Not a Big Fan of Evolution -- Daily Intel
 
I was watching the news when Scott Brown won, and some pro life group got really excited and dropped a gift basket off for him at the office... lol.. They thought he was pro life, just because he was on the Republican ticket.
Brown didn't win because of Conservative values. He won because he was the last hope we had of stopping the health care bill.
 
Brown didn't win because of Conservative values. He won because he was the last hope we had of stopping the health care bill.

Instead of working to stop it, I wish your side would have worked to improve it.
 
Too bad. Stopping it lets the same problems continue.

And (again, from a right-wing perspective) letting it pass makes the problems worse.
 
Back
Top Bottom