Youre funny.
Printable View
Youre funny.
Gratifying.Quote:
Originally posted by Almaci
Youre funny.
Seriously dude, you should do standup.
I don't know why you haven't figured out that you're talking about yourself here.Quote:
Originally posted by Andrew
Actually, you clearly do not and have proven you would rather condone talking out of your ass without researching the subject through.
I just thught I'd pop in to say that Stone vs Andrew is about the funniest damned thing I've seen in ages.
Adrew: If you don't know how to make pancakes, I suggest referencing a cookbook before trying to whip some up. As such, if you don't know a thing about politics, might I suggest paying a bit of attention before jumping into the fire? You should, you know. This isn't hearsay concerning a land none of us have ever been to; it's front page, American news.
You look worse than Almaci, and he can't even spell.
Boy, this thread got derailed pretty fast. I like how any criticism of democrats immediately turns into one of republicans or of politicians in 'general'. Suddenly, they're not left-wing anymore, ok... Anyway Andrew, seriously dude, pleaaaase stop. I don't mean to diss you (I'm no fan of Almaci), but for one, you gave him an easy pwn... Think about that! I was still enjoying Teenwolf's pwn on his last source with the oil argument. Sadly, to my dismay, that satisfaction is all but gone :(... Look, now you got Stone defending him. STONE DEFENDING ALMACI.. Oh Lord, the horror; make it stop...
Nah man, it should go on and on and on and on and on and on...
Andrew, you are a fucking idiot
It is rather funny, though. I mean, think of all the big scandals we've had with our Presidents over the past, say, fifty years. Most people are aware that Richard Nixon was involved in the Watergate fiasco. They may not know the details, but they know that he did something really wrong and as a result he stepped down before he could be impeached. It's common knowledge. If I'm arguing with someone about Bill Clinton or something, maybe the Whitewater scandal, I might bring up Nixon and the Watergate incident, "Well, Nixon was behind the cover-up of those illegal break-ins of the Dems' headquarters at the Watergate hotel." I don't think that anyone is going to dispute that it happened, and if anyone is unsure, telling them to go to Google and type in "nixon watergate scandal" is perfectly legit. Because it's something everyone should know. Nobody should have to look up facts for JFK being assassinated, Ronald Reagan barely scraping through an attempt, George H.W. Bush's Gulf War, or the Monica Lewinsky thing. Nor should someone who hasn't lived in a cave for the past four years be unaware that Al Gore won the popular vote.
I mean, nobody was trying to get on your case here, Andrew, but what you're saying on one hand is: "Asking for a reference for a point you bring across (such as Gore > Bush in pop vote) is COMMON." We've all demonstrated that Gore > Bush in the popular vote is as common, if not more common, than knowledge of the details of Watergate. Do YOU know all the details of Watergate? If not, you can go to Google and become an expert on it real quick. Now, on the other hand, you're saying, "Something like Who the President is, or what a president is, IS common place. That's something everybody who could participate in a political debate would know." And we're reiterating that Gore > Bush in the popular vote is common knowledge, something that everybody who could participate in a political debate would (and should) know.
If you didn't know that Gore won the popular vote, that's fine, but you could have just said that after sixteen million TNL users responded with the info.
Almaci must be in rapture over this defense. Hehe. ;)
Mweh