• 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!

Sarah Palin: Paul Revere's Ride to Protect the Second Amendment

SheWolf said:
That's like asking for proof that Fox has ever came to Obama's defense... They spend most of their time attacking him, not praising him. Obama defended Palin, and said her kids were off limits. Has Palin ever defended Obama?
Click to expand...

Obama said that because he also wanted his kids off limits. That means nothing and most people would say a politicians kids should be off limits.
 
ptif219 said:
Obama said that because he also wanted his kids off limits. That means nothing and most people would say a politicians kids should be off limits.
Click to expand...

He didn't have to say anything. He could have attacked her kids, and of course he wants his kids left alone. You can't call him a hypocrite on the issue when it comes to Palin.
 
SheWolf said:
He didn't have to say anything. He could have attacked her kids, and of course he wants his kids left alone. You can't call him a hypocrite on the issue when it comes to Palin.
Click to expand...

I can say the reason he did it was to protect his own kids. If he did not defend Palin how could he claim his kids off limits. It is just common sense for most of us that a politicians kids are off limits it is liberals that must be told.
 
ptif219 said:
You are the one being dishonest. I also said liberal media.
Click to expand...

Allow me to introduce you to the word "or", since you seem to have no clue as to what it means, despite your use of said word.

It is a conjunction. (Click link for second grade grammar lesson if you are unfamiliar with conjunctions). It's definition, according to Webster's dictionary, is

used as a function word to indicate an alternative <coffee or tea> <sink or swim>, the equivalent or substitutive character of two words or phrases <lessen or abate>, or approximation or uncertainty <in five or six days>

Or - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary
Click to expand...

In the context of your question, it takes on the meaning of indicating an alternative. since liberal and liberal media do not NOT equivilant or substitutive character, nor did it indicate an approximation.

You'll also note that the defintiion itself uses "or" twice in the "equivalent or substitutive character of two words or phrases" fashion since "equivilant" and "substitutive" have an equivalent or substitutive character, as do "approximation" and "uncertainty". This can be used to assist your in comprehending what it was that you actually asked, since there is no comprehension of your own question evident from your responses.

But here's the kicker, regardless of which definition you seek to plug in, neither allows you to weasle your way out of the fact that the question was adequately answered as asked.

So I retract the intellectually dishonest question, seeing as you clearly did not understand what the word "or" means.

Intellectual incompetence is not the same thing as intellectual dishonesty.

You show why you make a good liberal
Click to expand...

Not nearly as well as you show why you make a piss poor judge of what is conservative and what is liberal.
 
Tucker Case said:
Allow me to introduce you to the word "or", since you seem to have no clue as to what it means, despite your use of said word.

It is a conjunction. (Click link for second grade grammar lesson if you are unfamiliar with conjunctions). It's definition, according to Webster's dictionary, is



In the context of your question, it takes on the meaning of indicating an alternative. since liberal and liberal media do not NOT equivilant or substitutive character, nor did it indicate an approximation.

You'll also note that the defintiion itself uses "or" twice in the "equivalent or substitutive character of two words or phrases" fashion since "equivilant" and "substitutive" have an equivalent or substitutive character, as do "approximation" and "uncertainty". This can be used to assist your in comprehending what it was that you actually asked, since there is no comprehension of your own question evident from your responses.

But here's the kicker, regardless of which definition you seek to plug in, neither allows you to weasle your way out of the fact that the question was adequately answered as asked.

So I retract the intellectually dishonest question, seeing as you clearly did not understand what the word "or" means.

Intellectual incompetence is not the same thing as intellectual dishonesty.



Not nearly as well as you show why you make a piss poor judge of what is conservative and what is liberal.
Click to expand...

The truth is you knew what I meant and tried to pull a fast one.I would expect nothing more from you
 
ptif219 said:
I can say the reason he did it was to protect his own kids. If he did not defend Palin how could he claim his kids off limits. It is just common sense for most of us that a politicians kids are off limits it is liberals that must be told.
Click to expand...

I already answered your question. He would have attacked her kids, if he were a hypocrite... Hypocrisy isn't uncommon in politics.

"Liberals must be told."

Short term memory loss, or hypocrisy? Rush Limbaugh and McCain are pretty damn well know for attacking Chelsea Clinton. And Conservatives like Dr. Laura have even attacked Palin and her kids... wtf, Ptif, seriously, wtf
 
ptif219 said:
The truth is you knew what I meant and tried to pull a fast one.I would expect nothing more from you
Click to expand...

The truth is that you asked for something, and when you were provided with it, you moved the goalposts.

Now this wasn't unexpected, but it does bring up the question: was it deliberate dishonesty or pure incompetence?
 
zimmer said:
Nothing is going to change the fact she got the history right (ask the historians*) and the press in their Moment thinking Palin was wrong attempted yet another journ-O-listic gang-bang (without checking or knowing history), found themselves desperately prodding each other and ejaculating all over each others faces.

Meanwhile Palin was in the bus watching all this... surely laughing her ass off as the journ-O-lists did it to themselves... yet again.

*One historian quoted said she had her history correct, while another historian called it "lucky"... ROTFLOL...

.
Click to expand...

She's laughing at the people who keep giving her money and support even when she mangles the English language and American history.
 
SheWolf said:
I already answered your question. He would have attacked her kids, if he were a hypocrite... Hypocrisy isn't uncommon in politics.

"Liberals must be told."

Short term memory loss, or hypocrisy? Rush Limbaugh and McCain are pretty damn well know for attacking Chelsea Clinton. And Conservatives like Dr. Laura have even attacked Palin and her kids... wtf, Ptif, seriously, wtf
Click to expand...

No you justified what Obama did when he had selfish motives it was not about Palin
 
Tucker Case said:
The truth is that you asked for something, and when you were provided with it, you moved the goalposts.

Now this wasn't unexpected, but it does bring up the question: was it deliberate dishonesty or pure incompetence?
Click to expand...


I was talking of public figures and the media that all hear b not private citizens on a small forum. You knew that and pulled a fast one because you know the liberal politicians and the liberal media are always negative towards Palin
 
FilmFestGuy said:
She's laughing at the people who keep giving her money and support even when she mangles the English language and American history.
Click to expand...


So are Biden and Obama with their gaffs. Obama doesn't even know what year it is or how many states their are in the country he is president of.
 
ptif219 said:
So are Biden and Obama with their gaffs. Obama doesn't even know what year it is or how many states their are in the country he is president of.
Click to expand...
Everybody makes gaffes, it's human nature. At first, it appeared she had simply made a gaffe; but since she doubled down on stupid and came out insisting she was right, we've learned it wasn't a gaffe -- she really does believe that part of Paul Revere's ride was to warn the British.
 
ptif219 said:
So are Biden and Obama with their gaffs. Obama doesn'teven know what year it is or how many states their are in the country he is president of.
Click to expand...

President Obama and Vice President Biden have nothing to do with the ignorance of Sarah Palin. They are in the White House, her goal is to become president and I have seen nothing to believe that she will ever get there. They have reached their goals. What exactly is Sarah Palin getting at? She is a pretty woman with no brain.
 
ptif219 said:
I was talking of public figures and the media that all hear b not private citizens on a small forum.
Click to expand...

So when you said "liberals" you meant something different?

You knew that and pulled a fast one
Click to expand...

Yeah, I "pulled a fast one" by actually taking your words and responding as though you meant what you were saying.
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
Everybody makes gaffes, it's human nature. At first, it appeared she had simply made a gaffe; but since she doubled down on stupid and came out insisting she was right, we've learned it wasn't a gaffe -- she really does believe that part of Paul Revere's ride was to warn the British.
Click to expand...


Another words if a democrat does it it is a gaffe if a GOP does it it is stupid. No blind partisanship on your part lol
 
PoliticalMama said:
President Obama and Vice President Biden have nothing to do with the ignorance of Sarah Palin. They are in the White House, her goal is to become president and I have seen nothing to believe that she will ever get there. They have reached their goals. What exactly is Sarah Palin getting at? She is a pretty woman with no brain.
Click to expand...



Wrong Biden and Obama make stupid statements but it is overlooked if Palin says anything it is news for weeks.

The bias here is out of control.

Show proof she is running I have not heard she has announced running for president
 
Tucker Case said:
So when you said "liberals" you meant something different?



Yeah, I "pulled a fast one" by actually taking your words and responding as though you meant what you were saying.
Click to expand...



You show why liberals have no credibility
 
ptif219 said:
Prove it is her thought and not what the museum said
Click to expand...
Don't have to. It would be your job to prove that museum is as unfamiliar with history as Sarah "The Quitter" Palin is and prove they taught her the idiotic notion that part of Paul Revere's ride was to warn the British. Until you prove that (which you can't), she owns the words she said.

So tell me, are you really Sarah "The Quitter" Palin? I can't imagine why anyone would go to such crazy lengths to defend her idiocy as you have unless you're really her?
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
Everybody makes gaffes, it's human nature. At first, it appeared she had simply made a gaffe; but since she doubled down on stupid and came out insisting she was right, we've learned it wasn't a gaffe -- she really does believe that part of Paul Revere's ride was to warn the British.

ptif219 said:
Another words if a democrat does it it is a gaffe if a GOP does it it is stupid. No blind partisanship on your part lol
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
But of course, that's not at all what I said. What a pity you're not capable of debating what people say but instead, ascribe made up nonsense to others that you can attack since you can't attack their actual positions.
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
Don't have to. It would be your job to prove that museum is as unfamiliar with history as Sarah "The Quitter" Palin is and prove they taught her the idiotic notion that part of Paul Revere's ride was to warn the British. Until you prove that (which you can't), she owns the words she said.

So tell me, are you really Sarah "The Quitter" Palin? I can't imagine why anyone would go to such crazy lengths to defend her idiocy as you have unless you're really her?
Click to expand...

You made the claim so prove it
 
danarhea said:
Just when you think Sarah Palin could not get any stupider, she surprises yet again. But don't take my word for it. Watch Palin confuse herself on Paul Revere.



This one is precious, and is one for those blooper reels of the future. LOL.

BTW, there was no such thing as the Second Amendment at that time, as the Constitution had not yet been written. And, needless to say, Revere didn't ride to warn the British. LOL.
Click to expand...


Even more stupid is thinking that there are 57 states, or referring to Navy Corpsman as "Navy corpse-men". Boy, that Palin sure is stu---
Oh wait. That was Obama!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom